The deluge of gambling ads on TV during Friday night footy is absolutely appalling. There’s a very robust conduit for normalising sports gambling through advertisements around the broadcasts and it’s clearly influencing young adults. I’ve noticed a dramatic uptick in how common it is compared to when I was that age.
It sounds kind of similar to the legalization of certain recreational drugs. For example, alcohol prohibition resulted in a massive black market with organized criminal gangs, and many places realized it's better to regulate it rather than prohibit it.
I think for gambling, we need better regulations, and the Australian government seems to think so too.
without gambling though, pat mahomes would be making less money that I am making…
As a case study look at the impact sites like CSGOLounge had on the popularity of competitive CSGO.
Some companies now make advertisements of news websites that it is clear are also part of betting companies. For example, https://www.admiralbet.news/ has as other Google result the betting website. However, I do have to say it is still less than before and it's much better
Gambling ruins lives.
We have already learned our lesson. Prohibition doesn’t work. But advertising does work. Banning advertising also works. We should allow people the freedom to participate in vice, but ban all advertising for it. Anything harmful to society should not be advertised. No ads for cars, guns, recreational drugs including alcohol, unhealthy food, fossil fuels, or gambling.
Who knows what comes next Kai? Hopefully everything.
btw. what followed is worse: <<He accused the government of blindsiding a sector that supports 30,000 jobs and "provides critical funding to sport, racing and broadcast industries".>>
Gambling business is not a positive force. It's not even zero sum. It's a negative sum game. I hope no one is nodding along to these kind of arguments, they are nonsensical.
Actually, it did work [1]:
> Courtwright’s The Age of Addiction has the statistics: “Per capita consumption initially fell to 30 percent of pre-Prohibition levels, before gradually increasing to 60 or 70 percent by 1933.” That suggests a 30 percent reduction, at a minimum, in consumption — although that was less than the initial effect, as people figured some ways around the law.
> We should allow people the freedom to participate in vice.
There is literally no individual upside to gambling and don't say "winning". For sites like FanDuel and DraftKings, you get banned or your bet sizes severelyl restricted if you consistently win [2]. Why? Because it discourages the marks if they don't win occasionally.
Suicide rate is highest among gambling addicts than any other form of addiction [3]. Gambling measurably increases credit score drops, debts and bankruptcies [4]. The entire business is predatory.
At least back in the day when you had to go to a casino there was some barrier to gambling. Now? Just pull out your phone.
[1]: https://archive.ph/l8m4E#selection-885.0-889.319
[2]: https://www.elitepickz.com/blog/do-sportsbooks-ban-winners-a...
[3]: https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/problem-gambl...
[4]: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/online-sports-gamb...
Listing a bunch of things a lot of people don’t like isn’t a winning argument.
-----------
And thus, the ten minute Australian gambling ad was born.
I don't think people understand just how ingrained in the culture gambling is in Australia. One of the primary 3rd spaces for people in Australia are RSLs, which are technically clubs for veterans to get co-op like services, but have evolved into a 3rd space for everyone that offer food, alcohol, entertainment, and of course, sports gambling and "pokies" (poker/slot machines).
https://www.rslaustralia.org/rsl-sub-branches-and-rsl-clubs-...
The "RSL sub-branch" is a not-for-profit welfare organisation, that looks after veterans. For the most part they are small and if they are lucky they get the use of a meeting room in the RSL club.
The "RSL Club" is a multimillion dollar commercial enterprise that looks after its own interests, conducts political lobbying, makes millions of dollars off gambling addicts and hands out token grants in the community to give the impression that they are there to benefit the community. Typically nothing to do with the RSL sub-branch.
In every other state, you can walk into many pubs and RSLs ("Retired Servicemen's Leagues", veteran's clubs, basically) and sit there and lose your house. Pokies can be the only thing keeping many businesses in business. They licenses are so valuable that some businesses are bought simply so the licenses can be transferred. Some state governments realize this so reduce the number of licenses on transfer (eg you buy a business wih 20 pokies and you get to transfer 16 and lose 4). This had the predictable outcome of having pokie licenses skyrocket in value.
AFAIK sportsbetting (eg DraftKings) is illegal in Australia because the government has realized how damaging it is yet pokies remain legal.
Oh it's worth adding that Stake, which is headquartered in a shack in Curacao for legal reasons, was started and run by Australians who have absolutely raked in the cash to the point of now being billionaires.
Another problematic part of all this is how gambling has been effectively used for money laundering. The casinos already got hit for allowing this to happen. Pokiies and smaller establishments remain a loophole.
Consider the case of Troy Stolz [1], who leaked documents about ClubsNSW not complying with anti-money laundering and compliance. ClubsNSW was able to bring a private criminal prosecution about this. Youtuber Jordan Shanks-Markovina had his house firebombed (allegedly over this) [2].
Youtuber Boy Boy showed how ridiculously lax AML is with gambling [3].
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/07/clubs...
[2]: https://independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/friendlyj...
babaliauskas•4h ago
angry_octet•2h ago
As a consequence there is a quiet crisis in young people, 18-30, deeply in debt, working second and third jobs so that they have a bit more money to gamble.
suprjami•2h ago
Set the purchase birth year to the current age 18. So DOB 2008 if done today, if you're born 2009 or later you can't buy smokes at all ever.
Within two generations we'd largely eliminate smoking. Within three cigarettes would be amongst impossible to get. Great public health initiative.
mrguyorama•2h ago
asdff•1h ago
andrewstuart•1h ago
All government overreach, eh?
asdff•1h ago
sanswork•57m ago
amarcheschi•1h ago
asdff•1h ago
sanswork•58m ago
awesome_dude•50m ago
How ludicrous is this argument going to get?
wredcoll•1h ago
grebc•1h ago
nkrisc•57m ago
InvertedRhodium•29m ago
toast0•1h ago
Maybe split the difference and raise the purchasing age for cigarettes 6 months every year. Takes longer to get to nobody can smoke, but you'll get there eventually.
awesome_dude•52m ago
InvertedRhodium•31m ago
denkmoon•1h ago
smelendez•44m ago
People generally start smoking by their teens or not at all. Making it hard for kids to get exposed to nicotine will stop a lot of addiction.
Also way fewer parents have cigarettes in the house so it’s harder for kids to grab them at home. And there are pretty strong taboos nowadays about giving random kids stuff they’re not supposed to have.
squigz•43m ago