Vic Clubs take $77m in Pokies revenue

[Gralin]

People often accuse me of copy paste efforts.
I don't need to do that, I'm an old fashioned user of a keyboard and can touch type. I type very quickly. Never need to do any copy and paste.
Ever.
The thing that gets me is the support for Hawthorn, who hail from the leafy Eastern suburbs, to run mega pokie facilities in the poorest part of town, miles and miles away from their main constituency.
People come out in big numbers supporting them. Not actual Hawthorn supporters mind you, but supporters of other clubs.
Supporters of other clubs come out supporting Hawthorn's inalienable right to establish a pokie emporium in one of the poorest parts of Melbourne, where they can fleece money from people least capable of losing money.
Now the residents of Hawthorn East have double, maybe triple the disposable income of the residents of Deer Park.
Why isn't Hawthorn taking pokie money from the residents of Hawthorn East?
1. Because they would not be allowed to establish such a pokie emporium in the leafy Eastern suburbs, and
2. Even if they did establish such a facility, would it mean they would take double or triple the takings that they get in Deer Park? Of course not!
Why not?
Because people of that education and income level do NOT put 5% to 25% of their disposable income into pokies.
A quirk of pokies is that the people most able to lose money on pokies do not spend a cent on them.
Those least able to lose money on them, blow it all.
And that is why we find Hawthorn far, far away from their main constituency, in Deer Park, far, far away from the leafy Eastern suburbs.
Now someone like you may wish to applaud Hawthorn's efforts in ruining the lives of many people in far away Deer Park, but I prefer to stick to what's right and call it out.

You do realise that the way you post doesn't come across as intelligent right?

 

[Gralin]

1. The Age G. Baum 21.8.17

Baum said, re respected & experienced finance journalist A. Kohler

"Kohler said he hated pokies.'Yeah, so do I' said Goyder".

"The context is that Victorians lost about $94m last year on pokies owned by football clubs (Vic. AFL clubs- my words) at 17 venues around Melbourne".

Pull plug on pokies: AFL commission chairman Richard Goyder

AFL commision chairman Richard Goyder says he "hates" pokies, and will seek to wean clubs off them.

www.theage.com.au

2. Poker machines are vile, & create enormous levels of human misery/family breakups/devestation etc.

Their nos. are vastly & cynically overrepresented in cities, & regions in the countryside, where persons on much lower socio-economic backgrounds reside.

The lower income demographics, by a very wide margin, are the major victims of the vile machines- which are psychologically designed to be addictive for many vulnerable people.

Fortunately, their future is very doubtful now (at least generating the revenues they have traditionally attracted).
All people who want to play in NSW will need to first apply for a govt. supplied Pre-Commitment Card (The legislation is certain to be introduced in NSW, as the NSWLNP govt. has obtained majority support in the Upper House). Pokie dens will become totally cashless, ID will be required to play, & losses will be limited to the loss that the player previously nominated for themselves. Relatives etc. can apply to have problem gamblers banned from all dens.

Don't get me wrong I don't like pokies and I don't like my club having pokies.
I'd rather we didn't, it's not the only thing I'd change about how my club is run given the choice.

My issue is with GG and their obsession with one club

 

[jatz14]

If you are a junkie or a gambling addict, who's choice is it to blast up or drop a weeks wages into a machine? Get help and stop being a selfish irresponsible child.

The point of an addiction, is that it is very hard to do that. That's why it's an addiction. Otherwise, it would just be called a behavior.

On moto g(6) plus using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Gigantor]

You do realise that the way you post doesn't come across as intelligent right?

Nor do the responses.
So we are even on that score.
I simply add that it is not I supporting Hawthorn's inalienable right to fleece the most impoverished people of Melbourne.
Others are trying to do that.
Is that a question of intellect?
Or is it a question of morals, ethics, concern for those less fortunate than ourselves?
The Trumpian response would be to reverse that and express concern for a very wealthy football club.

 

[Gralin]

Nor do the responses.
So we are even on that score.
I simply add that it is not I supporting Hawthorn's inalienable right to fleece the most impoverished people of Melbourne.
Others are trying to do that.
Is that a question of intellect?
Or is it a question of morals, ethics, concern for those less fortunate than ourselves?
The Trumpian response would be to reverse that and express concern for a very wealthy football club.

Why Hawthorn though, why not all clubs that profit off pokies?
Why not all pokies?
Why not the governments that allow them?
Why don't you bitch about Woolworths who own more pokies than anyone.

But I know why. You've got an issue with Hawthorn and don't actually care about pokies

 

[Johnny Bananas]

If it's part of a bigger problem like some sort of significant social demography disadvantage, life changing abuse or trauma in earlier life then an addict deserves help. If it's by selfish choice then they are idiots.

Are you aware that several doctors specialising in addiction believe it to be a genetic predisposition? If people have different brain chemistry around a substance or behaviour due to genetics, is it fair to judge them for not having the thought processes and resistance levels that others do?

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Why Hawthorn though, why not all clubs that profit off pokies?

Hawthorn do make the most out of any club. Although they're really not far ahead of my own club, who should also exit pokies. It's a harder proposition for poorer clubs to do that though, especially those carrying ongoing debt. That's why North's stance on pokies is particularly admirable.

Why not the governments that allow them?
Why don't you b*tch about Woolworths who own more pokies than anyone.

I mean, we are in The Footy Industry rather than SRP. Also, as I said on the previous page, we should expect better from not-for-profit organisations that claim to benefit the community than we do from corporate hucksters.

 

[Gralin]

Hawthorn do make the most out of any club. Although they're really not far ahead of my own club, who should also exit pokies. It's a harder proposition for poorer clubs to do that though, especially those carrying ongoing debt. That's why North's stance on pokies is particularly admirable.


I mean, we are in The Footy Industry rather than SRP. Also, as I said on the previous page, we should expect better from not-for-profit organisations that claim to benefit the community than we do from corporate hucksters.

All fine arguments and not a di for leafy constituent among them

 

[Gigantor]

I have taken out my ire on Woolies by shopping Coles.

 

[Chubberson]

Are you aware that several doctors specialising in addiction believe it to be a genetic predisposition? If people have different brain chemistry around a substance or behaviour due to genetics, is it fair to judge them for not having the thought processes and resistance levels that others do?

How many excuses does someone need? be better.

 

[Gralin]

How many excuses does someone need? be better.

just stop being poor right?

 

[Johnny Bananas]

How many excuses does someone need? be better.

So a genetic issue is an excuse now? Do you say the same thing to people with Down's Syndrome?

 

[Chubberson]

So a genetic issue is an excuse now? Do you say the same thing to people with Down's Syndrome?

Where is your unequivocal proof that a singular choice repeated is due to genetics? Good luck finding that.
Comparing an addict to child with a disability is false equivalence mr know it all. One of my kids who I've stayed home with to bring up (because wife and I had to) is severely autistic and to compare the two is doing the disabled child a massive disservice. At least they try their best every day. Addiction at it's core is selfishness, not genetics.

 

[Chubberson]

just stop being poor right?

Is this a question or a statement, you might want to be a bit clearer if you are going to continue super modding Gralin. Whoever you are.

 

[Gralin]

Is this a question or a statement, you might want to be a bit clearer if you are going to continue super modding Gralin. Whoever you are.

about as useful a comment as your just be better one was in regards to addiction

 

[Chubberson]

I'm suppose to be working, these riddles are too much. I'm sure you guys have got this.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Where is your unequivocal proof that a singular choice repeated is due to genetics? Good luck finding that.
Comparing an addict to child with a disability is false equivalence mr know it all. One of my kids who I've stayed home with to bring up (because wife and I had to) is severely autistic and to compare the two is doing the disabled child a massive disservice. At least they try their best every day. Addiction at it's core is selfishness, not genetics.

And where did you get your medical degree from?

Here's your proof, happy reading.

The Genetic Basis of Addictive Disorders

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Ned_Flanders]

People often accuse me of copy paste efforts.
I don't need to do that, I'm an old fashioned user of a keyboard and can touch type. I type very quickly. Never need to do any copy and paste.
Ever.
The thing that gets me is the support for Hawthorn, who hail from the leafy Eastern suburbs, to run mega pokie facilities in the poorest part of town, miles and miles away from their main constituency.
People come out in big numbers supporting them. Not actual Hawthorn supporters mind you, but supporters of other clubs.
Supporters of other clubs come out supporting Hawthorn's inalienable right to establish a pokie emporium in one of the poorest parts of Melbourne, where they can fleece money from people least capable of losing money.
Now the residents of Hawthorn East have double, maybe triple the disposable income of the residents of Deer Park.
Why isn't Hawthorn taking pokie money from the residents of Hawthorn East?
1. Because they would not be allowed to establish such a pokie emporium in the leafy Eastern suburbs, and
2. Even if they did establish such a facility, would it mean they would take double or triple the takings that they get in Deer Park? Of course not!
Why not?
Because people of that education and income level do NOT put 5% to 25% of their disposable income into pokies.
A quirk of pokies is that the people most able to lose money on pokies do not spend a cent on them.
Those least able to lose money on them, blow it all.
And that is why we find Hawthorn far, far away from their main constituency, in Deer Park, far, far away from the leafy Eastern suburbs.
Now someone like you may wish to applaud Hawthorn's efforts in ruining the lives of many people in far away Deer Park, but I prefer to stick to what's right and call it out.

your question 1) shows you how stupid you are

pokies go in pubs.

look at a map and see how many pubs are in hawthorn/camberwell, and you will have your answer

 

[Chubberson]

And where did you get your medical degree from?

Here's your proof, happy reading.

The Genetic Basis of Addictive Disorders

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Good for you, it's never individual choice is it?

 

[Gralin]

Good for you, it's never individual choice is it?

Pokies are specifically designed to target people who have issues
Majority of their revenue comes from problem gamblers

It's not a fair fight and it's not a business model that works without those people who are willing to bankrupt themselves and their families for their next win

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Good for you, it's never individual choice is it?

You're given proof and you still find a way to sook.

 

[telsor]

Good for you, it's never individual choice is it?

Sure it's a choice, most things are a choice, but that doesn't mean the scales aren't heavily weighted in favor of one choice over another.

An alcoholic has a choice about drinking, but it's widely acknowledged that that choice is a tougher one than it is for most.

I suffer depression. I have a choice not to kill myself, but I can tell you some days it's a tougher fight than most will ever face (I'm glad for them, but at the same time know they will never understand how someone can stand at a busy intersection waiting to cross, see a truck approaching and consider it as an opportunity to take a step forward and only stop yourself due to knowing how much trauma that would case the driver).

You don't know the path others are taking, and how their lives are being pushed one way or another. Try to show some compassion and understanding sometime and accept that just because you can do something, others necessarily in the same position.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

In all honesty. If someone said to me "You can sell meth or own these 10 pokies" id just sell meth. Feels more morally acceptable to me

 

[Atomboy]

In all honesty. If someone said to me "You can sell meth or own these 10 pokies" id just sell meth. Feels more morally acceptable to me

They are insidious but on a par with horse racing, casinos, on-line sports betting. There’s always another avenue for addicts to get their fix.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

They are insidious but on a par with horse racing, casinos, on-line sports betting. There’s always another avenue for addicts to get their fix.

Disagree a bit in that pokies target the elderly (do in W.A atleast) which I think makes it much more morally repulsive then the others