Is Gambling Bad?
The government has said in the past that it is bad to gamble. Immoral, illegal in all states except one or two. Then they need money and they legalize it in just about every square mile of the US. Now it is not illigal or immoral? I guess the lottery isnt gambling since it generates hundreds of millions of dollars for the states. The churches all preach that it is a sin to gamble, yet they have bingo to generate revenue... but thats ok. They are all hypocrites! Online gambling has been illegal and baaddd.. but they will soon legalize it to bring in revenue. Was it ever really bad?
Agreed, people for the most part, have lack of control when it comes to gambling, but that is their choice to do so. Agreed, there is nothing good about what casinos are doing other than employing some people and offering a fair way for people to wager their hard earned money. That is their choice.
Lets not even start to talk about the bs on wall street. That is the greatest casino on earth. I gues weekly options , which have recently been implemented by the SEC, are not gambling tools. It is 100 % gambling. Hypocrites!
So , my question to all... Is gambling inherently / innately bad for humans to do? Do we need the laws to state one way or another for the notion of gambling to be honorable and good for humans? Obviously, we all desire to do so as the numbers worldwide are undeniable and growing every day. Its all about the money!
Quote: WatchMeWinSo , my question to all... Is gambling inherently / innately bad for humans to do? Do we need the laws to state one way or another for the notion of gambling to be honorable and good for humans? Obviously, we all desire to do so as the numbers worldwide are undeniable and growing every day. Its all about the money!
As for the above point, I think gambling is simply the name we have now for what has always been a part of human nature. We put ourselves (financially, nowadays) at risk for the chance at great reward. In the way-back, our skins wearing ancestors probably did the same. They could eek out a living on squirrels and groundhogs, but bear and buffalo meat gave much greater rewards, be it bone, skin or flesh. Killing one was a gamble, as they can can kill you back. The numerous berries found in my parts would have been a good source of carbs needed for caveman energy, but bee honey was a far better source and had much more use. Of course, there was the risk of being poisoned to death and/or risking infection by getting it, so I would define procuring it as a gamble.
So inherently bad? Not in the slightest. It's human nature, no different than eating or having sex. It just, like anything else, can be abused.
When did the government ever say that gambling was bad? They might have said it was illegal (only because they weren't getting a cut of every bet that was being made) but illegal doesn't necessarily mean it's bad for you. Smoking is "bad for humans to do" but it's not illegal, nor is it immoral. Driving at excessive speeds is illegal but I don't think you can classify it as either good or bad.
The government never changed their feelings about gambling, if they had any to begin with; they just recognized that they could make money from it because people were going to do it regardless. Making something legal that used to be illegal doesn't change the morality of an activity. Legalizing murder, i.e., making it non-punishable by the justice system, wouldn't make it any less immoral.
As for churches, I have yet to have one show me a passage in the Bible where it says "Thou shalt not gamble." Churches make up their own rules on so many things. There's a religion, I think it's Church of Christ, that does not allow any musical instruments in their churches other than the ones mentioned in the Bible, like trumpets and drums. The fact that the piano wasn't even invented until about 1,500 years after the Bible was written makes no difference; you can't have a piano in church because it ain't in the Bible. Gimme a break.
#2413 - Games of chance (card games, etc.) or wagers are not in themselves contrary to justice. They become morally unacceptable when they deprive someone of what is necessary to provide for his needs and those of others. The passion for gambling risks becoming an enslavement. Unfair wagers and cheating at games constitute grave matter, unless the damage inflicted is so slight that the one who suffers it cannot reasonably consider it significant.
Quote: FrGamble#2413 - Games of chance (card games, etc.) or wagers are not in themselves contrary to justice. They become morally unacceptable when they deprive someone of what is necessary to provide for his needs and those of others. The passion for gambling risks becoming an enslavement. Unfair wagers and cheating at games constitute grave matter, unless the damage inflicted is so slight that the one who suffers it cannot reasonably consider it significant.
Wow, thats actually a very enlightened attitude, coming from the
Catholic's. You won't find any such tolerance in the modern Bible
belting churches. My wife's church abhors drinking, smoking and
gambling. They can't point to anywhere in the Bible where these
things are condemned, but they just know they're pure evil.
Quote: WatchMeWinWell put Face.
Indeed, he made his point very well. I don't think there is an easy answer. Gambling at terrible odds, with money you can't really afford to lose, and not being able to not do so is bad. Going to Vegas and playing 100+ games, having practiced your ass off for many hours, is not bad in the least. Throwing $3 at a chance to win $12 mil megabucks is actually sort of fun, or $21 mil even funner, and I do it myself on a regular basis. When the casino gives me free room and food, I give a little back on slots and BJ. I'm not really gambling, as professional VP players will also say. Just helping the casino pay some bills. They seem to appreciate it, so far. If I break even that's OK. So, gambling is bad, good and everything in between.
Quote: tsmithI've been gambling since I was 7 and old enough for my father to teach me that three-of-a-kind beats two pairs. I don't think it's a bad thing, any more than I think drinking a glass of wine is a bad thing, but both can become bad when taken to extremes and the practice of them causes a person to neglect everything and everyone else.
When did the government ever say that gambling was bad? They might have said it was illegal (only because they weren't getting a cut of every bet that was being made) but illegal doesn't necessarily mean it's bad for you. Smoking is "bad for humans to do" but it's not illegal, nor is it immoral. Driving at excessive speeds is illegal but I don't think you can classify it as either good or bad.
The government never changed their feelings about gambling, if they had any to begin with; they just recognized that they could make money from it because people were going to do it regardless. Making something legal that used to be illegal doesn't change the morality of an activity. Legalizing murder, i.e., making it non-punishable by the justice system, wouldn't make it any less immoral.
As for churches, I have yet to have one show me a passage in the Bible where it says "Thou shalt not gamble." Churches make up their own rules on so many things. There's a religion, I think it's Church of Christ, that does not allow any musical instruments in their churches other than the ones mentioned in the Bible, like trumpets and drums. The fact that the piano wasn't even invented until about 1,500 years after the Bible was written makes no difference; you can't have a piano in church because it ain't in the Bible. Gimme a break.
The silly thing is the bible says EVERYTHING.
That said, is gambling bad? Not in my opinion. Governments should view gambling as a bad thing, however. The socioeconomic costs outweigh the revenues. The only reasons, I think, that states embarks on casinos is because they are cash-strapped, don't want the money leaving their state, and want to create jobs. But the socio-economic costs are 3 to 5 million pathological gamblers and another 8 - 15 million problem gamblers. The social-economic consequences are:
- Addiction
- Bankruptcies
- Crime and Corruption
Regarding bankruptcy, about 18-20% of pathological gamblers (which represent about 1% of the US population (3.5 million) declare bankruptcy with average debt of 42 - 53K link.
If you do the multiplication, conservatively that's 3.5 million x 18% x 42,000 is 26.5 billion dollars. And that doesn't include statistics from problem gamblers.
Crime and corruption go hand in hand too with gambling, with crimes being committed similar to those commited by drug addicts. Crime rates around casinos are higher and a significant portion of revenue goes into extra policing. And there are the victims of crime that are never compensated.
Quote: boymimboIf you do the multiplication, conservatively that's 3.5 million x 18% x 42,000 is 26.5 billion dollars. And that doesn't include statistics from problem gamblers.
Yadda yadda, this is the same bleeding heart stuff
we heard before prohibition. The entire society should
be punished because a few people can't handle drinking.
Remember haw that worked out?
The vast VAST majority of gamblers don't have gambling
problems. They're just fine with it. Casinos are here to
stay, they will increase in number and not decrease, and
will never go away. The people who can't handle it will
just have to get along as best they can.
And why not? if people are going to be pathological gamblers anyway, why should they drive an hour to Atlantic City and spend there money there? Open a casino in Philadelphia... at least we'll get their money. Heck, we'll refund the property taxes to the people of Pennsylvania too and they can spend it on more Powerball tickets!!!
Quote: boymimboEvenbob, I don't disagree with you. The costs of gambling are burdened by all of us. !
Everything has a downside. Shoplifting in this
country is out of control, should we close all
the stores? European immigrants brought
tremendous drinking problems with them to
this country in the late 1800's, which brought
about prohibition in 1920. Now we have an
explosion of casinos thats bringing much needed
revenues to state govt's. They're also bringing
problems. We'll deal with it, we always do.
In answer to the OP's original question... I believe, for the most part, that what is considered "right" or "wrong" is an individual thing. So, in other words, does gambling feel wrong to you? And even if your immediate response to that is yes, maybe take it a little further. WHY do you think it's wrong? When do you first remember thinking that thought? Did you inherit that thought from your father? Was he super-religious and therefore believed that and therefore passed that thought on to you kids? And if so, have you been living with that thought, that belief, that "gambling could actually be wrong", because you as an adult never questioned that thought, and therefore never found out for yourself why you YOUR SELF actually believes about it?
I do belive in personal responsibility. Even if you are to suggest that casinos make money off of these unethical or "bad" gamblers, where does personal responsibility fall into play? I don't think there's anything wrong with gambling, personally. I feel that I gamble responsibly, and for those who don't, my current belief is that they have no one to blame but themselves if they go overboard.
Quote: EvenBobThe entire society should
be punished because a few people can't handle drinking.
Remember haw that worked out?
I think it probably is. It's just on the roadways, and other ways it's punished instead of prohibition.
Quote: HotBlondeI do belive in personal responsibility. Even if you are to suggest that casinos make money off of these unethical or "bad" gamblers, where does personal responsibility fall into play? I don't think there's anything wrong with gambling, personally. I feel that I gamble responsibly, and for those who don't, my current belief is that they have no one to blame but themselves if they go overboard.
Great point. All kinds of businesses sell goods to people who probably cannot afford them. If I offer to buy a supercar for $100,000 in cash from an inheretence when I will likely have trouble keeping the lights on in a year is it wrong for the seller to accept the money? Why does any business have a responsibility to make sure their patrons can afford to spend what they are spending?
If there wasn't a problem, then why does every state have a problem gambling hotline? Why does every government spend a small part of its revenue to attempt to combat the addiction problem?
Call it personal responsibility all you want, but higher crime rates, higher divorce rates, higher suicide rates, higher bankrupties are not personal at all. It affects your community. And pathological gambling causes all of those. It might be 1 in a 100 people with that problem, but given that a study shows that 54% of those in gamblers anonymous have committed a crime, that's an extra million or so crimes that are occurring due to gambling.
But gambling isn't bad. Just be aware that there are social costs which in my opinion outweigh the benefits.
Quote: boymimboJust be aware that there are social costs which in my opinion outweigh the benefits.
You must be joking. You want to change gaming because
97% have no problem with it. You know that sounds insane,
right?
Quote: bigfoot66Great point. All kinds of businesses sell goods to people who probably cannot afford them. If I offer to buy a supercar for $100,000 in cash from an inheretence when I will likely have trouble keeping the lights on in a year is it wrong for the seller to accept the money? Why does any business have a responsibility to make sure their patrons can afford to spend what they are spending?
You are hereby awarded POTM with your greater point.
Quote: boymimboBusinesses don't have a responsibility. But addiction is different than buying a car. Addiction exists -- it effects 3 - 4 million Americans. Each person is responsible for their own addiction. Governments allow casinos to exist and ignore or pay lip service to the social costs.
If there wasn't a problem, then why does every state have a problem gambling hotline? Why does every government spend a small part of its revenue to attempt to combat the addiction problem?
Call it personal responsibility all you want, but higher crime rates, higher divorce rates, higher suicide rates, higher bankrupties are not personal at all. It affects your community. And pathological gambling causes all of those. It might be 1 in a 100 people with that problem, but given that a study shows that 54% of those in gamblers anonymous have committed a crime, that's an extra million or so crimes that are occurring due to gambling.
But gambling isn't bad. Just be aware that there are social costs which in my opinion outweigh the benefits.
Buying that car is most likely very much an addiction - to spend, to gratify, to feel better. Eating is a far more harmful addiction than gambling. If you've been fortunate enough to have been spared from true depression, you will not understand this at all.
And yeah, if a drug was bad for 3% of the population, you'd bet it would be banned. Just look at peanut allergies and schools. If one of 33 people were experiencing terrible side effects of say, Tylenol, do you think the drug would be on the market.
Of course people are free willed, so I don't have a problem with the existence of gambling. I don't think it's a bad thing. GET IT?
Quote: boymimboEven though states are receiving more money and there are more employees, far more is lost to fraud, crime enforcement, loss of productivity, losses due to bankruptcy, property value losses, etc.
This is what we heard for 10 years from the anti-casino
lobbyists. When it went to court, they could prove none
of it. Seriously, none of it. In fact the pro casino people
proved casinos are more beneficial than harmful. The
anti crowd poured 10's of millions of dollars into their
campaigns, went back to court dozens of times. Do
you know who was behind them? Who funded them?
Other Indian casinos in the area. Guess why.
I don't know if there is any comprehensive list anywhere. Take practically any area and compare it against the other states. Health, domestic abuse, child welfare, education, etc, There's a been a number of local reports over the years on this.
I found one for this year, but it's far from the only report. It's kind of a joke almost. A bad one maybe.
Maybe it’s the nickname “Sin City” or because Las Vegas is a city known for indulgent behavior. Whatever the case may be, it has been a rough year for Southern Nevada when it comes to lists, rankings and not-so-pretty adjectives. Rankings are subjective, but no matter the process or criteria, Las Vegas will usually land at the top of worst lists and at the bottom of best lists. From “America’s Dirtiest Cities” to “Worst Economy in the World,” here’s a look at Las Vegas’ rankings on some bizarre lists:
Quote: rxwineIf there is any correlation between gambling and Nevada being at or near the top of all the bad lists, and near the bottom of good ones, then it must be bad.
I don't know if there is any comprehensive list anywhere. Take practically any area and compare it against the other states. Health, domestic abuse, child welfare, education, etc, There's a been a number of local reports over the years on this.
I found one for this year, but it's far from the only report. It's kind of a joke almost. A bad one maybe.
Maybe it’s the nickname “Sin City” or because Las Vegas is a city known for indulgent behavior. Whatever the case may be, it has been a rough year for Southern Nevada when it comes to lists, rankings and not-so-pretty adjectives. Rankings are subjective, but no matter the process or criteria, Las Vegas will usually land at the top of worst lists and at the bottom of best lists. From “America’s Dirtiest Cities” to “Worst Economy in the World,” here’s a look at Las Vegas’ rankings on some bizarre lists:
Maybe it's just that LV draws such a high percentage of the universe's gambling trash, whereas most types of trash are more evenly scattered.
For one example out of thousands, the whole thing is very similar to the beaten-wife psychology, in which the abused person robotically characteristically spouts off somewhat-clever rationalizations to stay on. That "courageous pursuit" becomes their comfort-zone in lieu of something really-meaningful, albeit mediocre.
To the point of "the greater good", lol, the military-installation-like status accredited to most casinos.
Governments are entitled to do whatever it wants. They do receive more benefits than they pay out in social costs, because the social costs are externalized and are attributed to personal responsibility (which it is). I guess that if you want to have communities full of temptations that marginalizes a small part of society, that's fine. Let's legalize (and tax) prostitution and legalize (and tax) drugs too. It'd be a great way to clear out urban areas. Oh wait, illegal drugs and prostitution already accomplishes that. But government coffers would be full. But republicans would just complain that government is too big.
Not that drugs and prostitution are bad!
Quote: boymimbo. Let's legalize (and tax) prostitution and legalize (and tax) drugs too.
Yes lets. By your argument we should have hovels of pennyless (as opposed to penisless) sex addicts near the brothels in Nevada. Maybe the Nevada residents can confirm.
If we want to look at the total cost to society of drugs I am sure the 50 year war on drugs and the 10% of the population in jail has cost much more than legalizing, regulating and taxing drugs. Of course we would have thousands of homeless drug addicts. Whoops we already have that.
threw out the moronic lawsuits, was the guy coming in at
6am from the casino and telling his wife he lost the house.
Yup, he went to the cashier window, gave them the deed,
and they gave him slot credits. Happens all the time.
The sad thing is, people believe that crap.
Quote: WatchMeWinSo , my question to all... Is gambling inherently / innately bad for humans to do?
Quite the opposite, gambling is inherently / innately natural for humans to do. When you evaluate "gambling" in a broader sense than "putting $5 on a roulette spin", you quickly come to the realization that we all gamble, basically all the time. Staking something of value on an uncertain event is an unavoidable consequence of the human condition: we rarely have complete information about the future. Spending $10 to see a movie that might be terrible is a gamble. Spending 48 hours huddled under a blanket outside a Best Buy because you might have the opportunity to buy a 40" TV for $200 is a gamble. And as anyone with a mortgage can attest, buying a house in the early to mid-2000s was a gamble that proved to be a huge loser. The question should not be "should we gamble", for we should, and we must. Rather, we should ask "given that we must gamble, how can we have the best of it more often?"
"All the world's a casino,
and all the men and women merely players."
-- William Shakespeare, "As You Like It", slightly revised
Quote: EvenBobMy favorite TV ad they played over and over before the courts
threw out the moronic lawsuits, was the guy coming in at
6am from the casino and telling his wife he lost the house.
Yup, he went to the cashier window, gave them the deed,
and they gave him slot credits. Happens all the time.
The sad thing is, people believe that crap.
My wife and I did see one deed being turned in at the cage. It was late 70's and I was at the cage at Caesars cashing in chips and the guy next to me was passing the deed to his house to the cashier. About 3 or 4 suits were also watching the transaction. I don't know if had already lost it or was just going out onto the floor to lose it.
Quote: kenarmanMy wife and I did see one deed being turned in at the cage.
Sure you did.. Have you ever sold a house? Do you have
any idea how long it takes to get a clear deed on your house
so you can legally sell it? Weeks, or longer. You have to jump
thru hoop after hoop. You have to hire a title company to
conduct a title search on the property. You can't just walk up
to casino the cashier and hand them a deed, its meaningless. And
if something like that happened, it would be behind closed
doors with lawyers, not at the cashiers cage with people like
you peering over your shoulder.
Quote: EvenBobSure you did.. Have you ever sold a house? Do you have
any idea how long it takes to get a clear deed on your house
so you can legally sell it? Weeks, or longer. You have to jump
thru hoop after hoop. You have to hire a title company to
conduct a title search on the property. You can't just walk up
to casino the cashier and hand them a deed, its meaningless. And
if something like that happened, it would be behind closed
doors with lawyers, not at the cashiers cage with people like
you peering over your shoulder.
Continue living in your little world where anything you don't understand or haven't seen is untrue. If I actually had any respect for you I might resent you calling me a liar.
Quote: kenarmanContinue living in your little world where anything you don't understand or haven't seen is untrue. If I actually had any respect for you I might resent you calling me a liar.
I'm just saying you didn't see what you thought you
saw. Think about it, the deed to a house isn't like
the title to your motorcycle, just sign it and hand it over.
Its got to be investigated by a title company, you don't do
that at the cashiers cage of a casino. The guy coming
home at 6am and telling his wife he lost the house to
the casino is just baloney. Try taking off your Rolex at
the BJ table and exchange it for chips. That would be ridiculous,
just as ridiculous as throwing the deed to your house on
the table. You may have to sell your house to pay gambling
debts, but thats a far cry from handing the deed over.
Maybe you saw something and somebody was pulling your leg as to what it was about.
Quote: odiousgambitThis time I have to agree with Bob.
Maybe you saw something and somebody was pulling your leg as to what it was about.
I saw the document that said 'deed' and saw him signing a very legal multicopy document that had typed in information as well as the printed part. I assumed at the time that it was the transfer papers for the deed and that the suits watching were lawyers. It was obvious that some interaction had gone on earlier or they wouldn't have the second document already prepared.
Quote: kenarmanI saw the document that said 'deed' and saw him signing a very legal multicopy document
You have no idea who anybody was, what the deed was to, what
was going on. You're just assuming somebody was signing over
their house to the casino, when any number of things could have been going
on. My guess is a casino employee was making some kind of
property transfer at the cage because they were a notary public.
