Roast It's time to ditch the pokies

[HawkintheTuarts]

I hope all those with moral issues with our stake in poker machines don't shop at Woolies.

Like most who bleat on and on about ethical investing - it doesn't take long to find some utter hypocrisy in your standpoint.

I don't hold it against you if you want to be ethical, it's an admirable stand to take. Just don't expect me to take you seriously when you say you don't want to invest in companies that invest in coal, then happily use electricity - or say you don't want to invest in companies that use slave labour while you type away in your iPhone.

Profitability keeps us relevant and succesful. If we don't invest in gaming, someone else will. I also think we'd invest far more heavily in our football department than North Melbourne.

You're being disingenuous trying to spin this into something it's not, especially using coal! as a defence. Unless people are going to be hermits, they all use electricity. You don't have the ability to change what the power station fueling your home is using. Trying to say that is hypocritical is absurd.

And slave labour/cheap labour - are you literally defending it and saying it's ok? Or is it that it's not ok, but it's somehow worse to speak against it?

It's all deflection onto other issues anyway. None of it has anything to do with pokies and the issue at hand. Not all of us think ignorance of an issue, or ignoring it completely because of some mythical hypocrisy monster, is a valid way to look at things, or life in general.

The club is one of the biggest in the AFL at the moment, with plenty of success. If it can't continue to be relevant and "successful" without having to prey on the vulnerable then it's has far more problems than ever imagined.

 

[HawkintheTuarts]

WTF?

You state that Pokies could simply be banned then proceed to give us reasons why it'll never happen. Tax, tax, tax.
Same goes for alcohol & tobacco.
Drugs are banned, yet every day some meth head has murdered innocents on a whim.

For the record, we are better off with pokies being the size of ATMs and being housed inside age restricted venues than we would be with having online slots readily accessible from the privacy of home and on every smart phone. Which incidentally 50% of 14 year olds have virtually unrestricted access to. Sports betting has already paved the way to this glorious utopia.

I'm expecting ABS stats to back up this 'fact'. Don't worry about using anything from Aug-Sept if you don't want. Also the link to how it's relevant to pokies never being banned

 

[Flukey!]

Umm... Stop at the pokies? Don't let a slippery slope get in the way of the issue at hand now!

We heavily regulate and tax a lot of other vices. There are a lot of laws now about the advertisement and marketing of some of these. Gambling, in all it's forms get's a way with a heck of a lot.

My point is that it is hypocritical to say that we should ban pokies but turn a blind eye to the club selling cigarettes and alcohol.
Where do you stop?

 

[Gold Member]

I'm expecting ABS stats to back up this 'fact'. Don't worry about using anything from Aug-Sept if you don't want. Also the link to how it's relevant to pokies never being banned

"Fact" by statement or implied?

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/i...er-of-nightclub-promoter-20141027-11cey5.html

Meth addict got sentenced 21 years today = socially relevant as of 2 1/2 hours ago
Meth amphatamines are illegal. Tell me how this bloke got high if it's illegal.

Then tell me how banning pokies is going to stop problem gambling.

 

[eldorado]

A very valid debate, but can we please keep it respectful?

Take on the argument, not the man, please...

Abusive posts will just be removed from here on...

 

[Crankyhawk]

If not pokies, they will find some other way to gamble.

When I was a kid, there was no TAB, Pokies or Sunday drinking. Did that stop peolpe from feeding their vices? NO!

There was a SP bookie in nearly every bar in Melbourne, you would often find an illegal game of two up in the back lane, and on Sundays everyone who wanted a drink could go to the local 'sly grog' shop for their needs.

To me, gambling is in the same category as drinking, it's a disease, and con only be treated by the individual. Believe me, I know from experience.

I think though (correct me if wrong) that in the old days you had to go to a lot more effort to indulge a gambling habit. And there was a big risk of not getting paid out if you did win, and limb injury if you lost beyond your means. Which kept losses "reasonable" because people would stop taking your money knowing you wouldn't pay. Nowadays with easy credit people can put themselves further into debt with a machine that doens't keep track of whether you can really pay or not.

I'd love for them to get rid of the pokies through the whole state. But until they do it doesn't make a difference for one sporting club to not be involved as the money will just be spent on other pokies nearby.

 

[TazHawk15]

I dislike pokies.

However I like the Hawks being number 1 at yet another thing.

 

[Pessimistic]

Ive said a few times the leadership from the oakley era started us on a path where the main business of afl in front of crowds is not structured correctly. Theyrfore the AFL become beholden to TV to make ends meet, and the clubs need such as pokies.

Particualarly in melbourne, until we structure correctly, and im looking at etihad stadium and the balkanised stands at the mcg, itll always be hopelessly compromised

 

[Ned Ryerson]

You're being disingenuous trying to spin this into something it's not, especially using coal! as a defence. Unless people are going to be hermits, they all use electricity. You don't have the ability to change what the power station fueling your home is using. Trying to say that is hypocritical is absurd.

And slave labour/cheap labour - are you literally defending it and saying it's ok? Or is it that it's not ok, but it's somehow worse to speak against it?

It's all deflection onto other issues anyway. None of it has anything to do with pokies and the issue at hand. Not all of us think ignorance of an issue, or ignoring it completely because of some mythical hypocrisy monster, is a valid way to look at things, or life in general.

The club is one of the biggest in the AFL at the moment, with plenty of success. If it can't continue to be relevant and "successful" without having to prey on the vulnerable then it's has far more problems than ever imagined.

Not defending slave labour - but it's a reality. And I am amused at people who try and wash away their middle-class guilt by saying 'oh I only invest ethically'. That's wonderful, but when the majority of your possessions and disposable goods that you consume likely have an element of slave labour, or at least lower-paid workers in the supply-chain somewhere - then it kind of washes the feel-good factor away. It's admirable you want to try something, but I'd prefer you not get on your soapbox about it when your moral high ground is mostly non-existent.

And my point stands - if you feel so strongly about poker machines, I hope you never shop at Woolworths or any of their brands.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Would rather not be broke but whatever. If you want Hawthorn to go back to pre 2004 levels, then well. You're an idiot. Let's ban betting as a whole while we're at it. Stop selling alcohol because that can cause harm. Hell, let's just all live in bubbles for the rest of our lives. Then we can be 100% sure that our own idiocy won't get us in trouble.

How come whenever someone opposes gambling profiteering the retort is always so extreme.

There's a middle ground, and I would be very happy for the club to gradually ease itself off pokies revenue.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

My point is that it is hypocritical to say that we should ban pokies but turn a blind eye to the club selling cigarettes and alcohol.
Where do you stop?

"Where do you stop?" Isn't an argument, it's just an admission that it's hard to draw a line. So for someone o draw the line at poker machines it shows they've found something that is a clear way to improve a situation. It's commendable, not hypocritical.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

"a fool and his money are soon parted"

Keep on pumpin those dollars in folks.

 

[threesixpio]

I have to disagree, I see no reason why AFL clubs shouldn't be involved in gambling when you can't watch a sporting event without sportsbet or tomwaterhouse plastered all over the place. There's many vices in this world and people need to take blame from their action and learn self control rather than pointing the finger else where.

Yep - and a good thing people don't have much self control otherwise the gambling trade wouldn't make much doe. Yippee and thank god there are poor dumb gambling addicts.

 

[mess]

Not defending slave labour - but it's a reality. And I am amused at people who try and wash away their middle-class guilt by saying 'oh I only invest ethically'. That's wonderful, but when the majority of your possessions and disposable goods that you consume likely have an element of slave labour, or at least lower-paid workers in the supply-chain somewhere - then it kind of washes the feel-good factor away. It's admirable you want to try something, but I'd prefer you not get on your soapbox about it when your moral high ground is mostly non-existent.

And my point stands - if you feel so strongly about poker machines, I hope you never shop at Woolworths or any of their brands.

If you're saying that because you haven't succeeded in totally avoiding the consumption of any ultimately exploitative products then you have no business attempting to advocate for your sense of morality, then I have a deep philosophical problem with that.
But that's not what you've saying is it?

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Not sure why everyone assumes people putting money into the pokies are poor. I've known plenty of comfortable middle-class and well-off folk who gift the pokies their money, as well as other forms of gambling.

 

[Furn2]

Sure, as soon as we stop selling alcohol and fast food at our games and functions and drinking gatorade after the game.

Pokies are legal, if we get rid of them, someone else will snap them up, mostlilely some millionairre, there wont be a single pokie less.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

If you're saying that because you haven't succeeded in totally avoiding the consumption of any ultimately exploitative products then you have no business attempting to advocate for your sense of morality, then I have a deep philosophical problem with that.
But that's not what you've saying is it?

I'm saying, don't act like a smug prat and pretend you're the second coming of Bono because your super is invested in an ethical fund when you have an iPhone and wear clothing that was likely manufactured in a sweat shop. I'm all for boycotts - go nuts - I do it myself. Not for a second though do I think that makes me morally better than anyone.

 

[mess]

I'm saying, don't act like a smug prat and pretend you're the second coming of Bono because your super is invested in an ethical fund when you have an iPhone and wear clothing that was likely manufactured in a sweat shop. I'm all for boycotts - go nuts - I do it myself. Not for a second though so I think that makes me morally better than anyone.

Don't act like someone's being a smug pratt Bono campaigner for advocating for their sense of morality over a specific issue. This is a democracy. It's their job.
Especially don't write them off just because they're not necessarily militant about boycotting everything. Wouldn't that make them more Bono-ish?

 

[DESTRUKTOR]

Great point

Reminds me of all the protesters up in arms when a new McDonalds opens up

Just hope and pray these protesters never need to use the fabulous facilities at Ronald McDonald House!

Fluck Maccas. Good on anyone who fights them. Ronald McDonald house is like BP sponsoring Clean Up Australia Day or something. I hope I don't need to use it, and as no one significant, I can boycott Maccas all I want, and use Ronald McDonald house if I unfortunately need to.

This could turn into a 10,000 word thesis, so I should stop. We are all guilty somewhere, somehow, and we'll burn in hell for it!!! Think of it this way, we may not be murderers, druggies, thiefs, rip-offs, but I reckon we have all pirated a song, show, game or movie. We are all criminal somehow or another!

Blah, blah, blah.

 

[Randy Campbell]

Not sure why everyone assumes people putting money into the pokies are poor. I've known plenty of comfortable middle-class and well-off folk who gift the pokies their money, as well as other forms of gambling.

Only poor people have gambling problems.
If you can afford it you have no problem if you lose all your money, you are no longer rich.

 

[Max Force]

Morally, I do agree with the OP but where do you stop?
They are licensed venues so of course they sell alcohol. Alcohol can be just as damaging as gambling.

Ahhh the truth or there part of. Alcohol kills more people & destroys more families & lives than all of the other addictions combined. Probably won't hear anyone here say that, just after the blokes won the GF, shouldn't be drinking in front of kids or the cameras. Drink responsibly, gamble responsibly the choice is an individual one. Idiots will always be idiots, let them be who they are & not who others want them to be.

The view from the moral high ground must be good though.

Let's not forget junk food.

Another truth sayer.

Yeah by encouraging sitting in front of a machine watching your team play whilst having another machine nearby to gamble on. No wonder Crowns' foot is so far up the government's arse. Irony.

Walk away, the choice is yours (individuals).

The inundation of betting advertisement is another thing entirely that has gone over the top and the problem isn't just getting that douchebag's smug face off our tv screens at this time of year

The choice is yours.

Just imagine a world where you're adding those two numbers together, not subtracting from one another and claiming a positive integer as a good thing. 2 good deeds don't mean the 1 bad deed didn't happen or shouldn't have consequences.

The positive would be we win next years GF against the Syds & also we make an equal amount to their COLA, in our pokies from their dopey supporters (who as individuals have the legal right to play pokies)

Umm... Stop at the pokies? Don't let a slippery slope get in the way of the issue at hand now!

Why not? Some want a nanny state. I for one DO NOT!

We heavily regulate and tax a lot of other vices. There are a lot of laws now about the advertisement and marketing of some of these. Gambling, in all it's eforms get's a way with a heck of a lot.

Hows the view from up there?

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Nup, keep them. Don't throw away good solid revenue streams just for the sake of it, unless you have something of equal or higher value to replace it with.

Otherwise it's just a stupid move

 

[threesixpio]

Not sure why everyone assumes people putting money into the pokies are poor. I've known plenty of comfortable middle-class and well-off folk who gift the pokies their money, as well as other forms of gambling.

Yep. And intelligent professional types can run themselves into the ground financially through pokies too. Seen it. It's f&cked.

Anyone can become an addict (that wasn't your point but I thought I'd add onto your point anyways...)

 

[threesixpio]

Ahhh the truth or there part of. Alcohol kills more people & destroys more families & lives than all of the other addictions combined. Probably won't hear anyone here say that, just after the blokes won the GF, shouldn't be drinking in front of kids or the cameras. Drink responsibly, gamble responsibly the choice is an individual one. Idiots will always be idiots, let them be who they are & not who others want them to be.

The view from the moral high ground must be good though.



Another truth sayer.



Hows the view from up there?

Except there are rules for the responsible service of alcohol. Whenever similar laws are proposed for pokies the neo-Libs come out and cry nanny state. It's boring, naive and facile.

 

[Thaihawk]

Wow! We have an energetic, albeit chaotic debate going here. Glad I'm not the adjudicator.