Politics Pokies reform

Remove this Banner Ad

H

hamohawk1

Premiership Player
Veteran
Feb 18, 2011
4,325
4,482
AFL Club
Hawthorn
How can anyone be against this sort of reform is beyond me?

It is still being debated by parliament and the general public, but it seems so obvious that something so damaging to the community can be reduced.

These machines can cause massive effects to the individual. This includes house, car and other asset losses, breaking down of relationships (both family and friends) and even loss of life due to incurred debt

The clubs are promoting the benefits to the community i.e sporting grants, but i perceive the proclaimed benefits of some should not be at the expense of others

the idea of self interest has to be stopped: it isn't the clubs fault the person is a gaming addict, they chose to play the pokies thus it is their fault for their continued playing of the machines. we all make mistakes and need guidance at times to help resolve our issues

i am not against gambling myself. i love to have the occasional bet (horses, sport) but the only time i have ever touched the pokies was when i had a couple of bucks of gold coins to throw away for a laugh. i would not feel inconvenienced if i required a card to play on the pokies, why? because i rarely play on them and it wouldn't kill me if i never touched one of those machines again in my life.

This issue has got to stop being slowly debated politically as right or wrong because at the end of the day urgent action is needed to stop these machines causing more problems
 
Anti pokie reform is like anti semitisim, IMO.

Thats the simplest way of putting it.

It also represents everything the "we the 99% " doesn't represent.

IMO you also don't deserve your right to vote if you think that the explotation of the unfortunate is exceptable.

But hey i am according to the system completly incapable of anything...ask DEWRS, LOL.
 
hamohawk1 said:
How can anyone be against this sort of reform is beyond me?

It is still being debated by parliament and the general public, but it seems so obvious that something so damaging to the community can be reduced.

These machines can cause massive effects to the individual. This includes house, car and other asset losses, breaking down of relationships (both family and friends) and even loss of life due to incurred debt

The clubs are promoting the benefits to the community i.e sporting grants, but i perceive the proclaimed benefits of some should not be at the expense of others

the idea of self interest has to be stopped: it isn't the clubs fault the person is a gaming addict, they chose to play the pokies thus it is their fault for their continued playing of the machines. we all make mistakes and need guidance at times to help resolve our issues

i am not against gambling myself. i love to have the occasional bet (horses, sport) but the only time i have ever touched the pokies was when i had a couple of bucks of gold coins to throw away for a laugh. i would not feel inconvenienced if i required a card to play on the pokies, why? because i rarely play on them and it wouldn't kill me if i never touched one of those machines again in my life.

This issue has got to stop being slowly debated politically as right or wrong because at the end of the day urgent action is needed to stop these machines causing more problems
Click to expand...

Unfortunatley our leaders have already capitulated to our mechanical overlords.
And people thought the rise of the machines would be a terminator type overthrow?
Ban them all and throw anyone who profers BS as support in the clink.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

AndSmithMustScore said:
Screw any **** who tells me when, where and how I can spend MY money.
Click to expand...

would you have that kind of thought when dealing with a gambling addict. there is potential for the individual to have incurred social & economic consequences for this. surely the government or other assistance groups must intervene and stop any further detriment occuring?

sometimes individuals need help no matter how much they deny it
 
Gambling isn't a problem.
Losing is the problem.

If the clubs and government cut out the ridiculous take out rate and brought it back to something reasonable, then people would not lose as much money.

Of course, neither party will ever do that as they are too in love with the income.
 
Daytripper said:
Gambling isn't a problem.
Losing is the problem.
If the clubs and government cut out the ridiculous take out rate and brought it back to something reasonable, then people would not lose as much money.
Of course, neither party will ever do that as they are too in love with the income.
Click to expand...
I can't see that reducing the take out rate will reduce losses. Surely it would further feed the addiction by making the gamble seem more worthwhile.
Gambling preys on the vulnerable and desperate.
 
Monniehawk said:
I can't see that reducing the take out rate will reduce losses. Surely it would further feed the addiction by making the gamble seem more worthwhile.
Gambling preys on the vulnerable and desperate.
Click to expand...

Of course it will reduce losses.

Somebody spends 5 hours at the pokies, putting in $400 an hour with a take out rate of 25%.

Losses = $100 per hour or $500 in total.

Now reduce the take out to say 8%.

Losses = $32 an hour or $160 in total.

By reducing the take out you are mitigating the risk that losses will become a problem for the user. I reject the idea that people will spend more time playing or that you will get users.

In the above example, a person would have to play for 15 hours to equal losses sustained under the present model where it only takes 5 hours. Simply not possible for most users.

Secondly, in my opinion you either are a pokies player or you aren't. A lot of people simply are not interested in pokie machines. I like a punt but hate the pokies and will never, ever play one. I don't believe you are going to get a huge influx of new players by reducing the take out rate.
 
hamohawk1 said:
would you have that kind of thought when dealing with a gambling addict. there is potential for the individual to have incurred social & economic consequences for this. surely the government or other assistance groups must intervene and stop any further detriment occuring?

sometimes individuals need help no matter how much they deny it
Click to expand...

You seem to think that by brigning in these measures it's going to stop them gambling everything away.

Won't make one bit of difference to them.

More over governing and nanny stating for no change.

Online gambling is more of a danger than the local pokies. Gambling from the comfort of your own couch or having to go out somewhere to do it.
 
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about ASMS.

The myth that if people were prohibited from losing on pokies they would just dump it sports-betting, playing poker or punting on the horses is just that.

Pokies is clearly a more pressing issue than online poker/sports betting.

Parasitic things, should be removed altogether. Australia's reliance on these things is utterly ridiculous, sports/community benefits included.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

checkraiseulite said:
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about ASMS.

The myth that if people were prohibited from losing on pokies they would just dump it sports-betting, playing poker or punting on the horses is just that.

Pokies is clearly a more pressing issue than online poker/sports betting.

Parasitic things, should be removed altogether. Australia's reliance on these things is utterly ridiculous, sports/community benefits included.
Click to expand...

What a completely ****ed up theory.

Alcohol affects society FAR, FAR, FAR more negatively than pokies do.

Yet I see not any of these douches who are whining about pokies looking to limit people to 2 drinks an hour in pubs/clubs.

Let's ban everything that in someway effects people in a negaitve way. That's how people like you think it seems.
 
Seems like vague, irrelevant analogies are your forte.

Perhaps it's overly idealistic of me to want a total ban (I can't see any value to these things and I don't know anyone who enjoys playing them casually. I know one person personally who lost $300k playing pokies within 12 months and have dealt with multiple people in the legal aid system, whether criminal or family law related, who are there solely because of pokies addictions).

I'd suggest though, that they be confined to casinos or at the very least pokies-specific venues where alcohol is not served. Suburban pubs, RSLs and sports clubs are now dependent on being gambling dens just to survive? Community support for pokies is just lolworthy in my opinion. They are way too entrenched in everyday life.

FWIW I have no problem with casinos, horse-racing etc, sports-betting (though the sports-betting advertising is excessive at the moment). But glazed-eyed zombies continually feeding money into an electronic machine in complete isolation in a suburban pub in some crappy outer Melbourne suburb does not do it for me.

I'd probably disagree with your point that alcohol causes more damage than pokies addictions, or contend that the difference is a lot less than you believe it to be. Just out of interest, what would you estimate the ratio of social pokies players : problem gamblers? Now social drinkers : problem drinkers? You are aware that Australians are the biggest gambling losers in the world, right?
 
AndSmithMustScore said:
You seem to think that by brigning in these measures it's going to stop them gambling everything away.

Won't make one bit of difference to them.

More over governing and nanny stating for no change.

Online gambling is more of a danger than the local pokies. Gambling from the comfort of your own couch or having to go out somewhere to do it.
Click to expand...

So you are an advocate for the abolition of all gambling?
 
Daytripper said:
By reducing the take out you are mitigating the risk that losses will become a problem for the user. I reject the idea that people will spend more time playing or that you will get users.

In the above example, a person would have to play for 15 hours to equal losses sustained under the present model where it only takes 5 hours. Simply not possible for most users.
Click to expand...

Are you taking into account the person putting money back in? That they might bring more money to begin with, knowing the return can be much larger?

I just don't think you can completely accept a scenario like the one you've put forward until you test it out.
 
AndSmithMustScore said:
Online gambling is more of a danger than the local pokies.
Click to expand...

It quite simply is not. Please check the facts.

These are a decade old but I don't think the figures are hugely changed though sports gambling has increased. Let me know if you have something newer.

http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/99d3b5096368c2e9ca2569de002842b7?OpenDocument

97-98
Gambling on pokies in clubs, pubs and casinos: $6.4 b
Gambling on racing and sports through off-course TAB and bookies: $1.55 b.

EDIT - found something from 2011, though it is from some lefty-pinko-lezzo university:

http://www.monash.vic.gov.au/community/gambling-statistics1.htm

Gambling losses are much higher on pokies than any other form of gambling.

40% of total spending on pokies is from problem gamblers (P.C. Report, 2010). Therefore the government tax received from pokie revenue is a disproportionate burden on people who cannot afford it.
Click to expand...

Hmm...
 
Chief said:
Are you taking into account the person putting money back in? That they might bring more money to begin with, knowing the return can be much larger?

I just don't think you can completely accept a scenario like the one you've put forward until you test it out.
Click to expand...

There is one way to test it out.

Betfair came into play in Australia almost a decade ago and operate at around a 3%-4% take out rate.
The TAB (on horse racing) generally operates at around the 15%-16% take out rate.

Could some sort of analysis be done comparing the users of both over the past ten years - looking at the percentage of problem losers on each.

I accept what you're saying by the way. The simplest answer is I don't know. But if you left the same sort of cash restrictions in place at the ATM's (maximum $200), then maybe that could be used to reduce that risk (if there is indeed any risk).

Note: I always use the term 'problem losers' not 'problem gamblers'. Its the losing that causes 99% of the problems - not the gambling.
 
Chief said:
It quite simply is not. Please check the facts.

These are a decade old but I don't think the figures are hugely changed though sports gambling has increased. Let me know if you have something newer.

http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/99d3b5096368c2e9ca2569de002842b7?OpenDocument

97-98
Gambling on pokies in clubs, pubs and casinos: $6.4 b
Gambling on racing and sports through off-course TAB and bookies: $1.55 b.

EDIT - found something from 2011, though it is from some lefty-pinko-lezzo university:

http://www.monash.vic.gov.au/community/gambling-statistics1.htm



Hmm...
Click to expand...

Have to disagree on point there Chief - Online wagering has exploded in the past 10 years.
Pokie losses would still well and truly outnumber other forms of gambling though.
 
Daytripper said:
Have to disagree on point there Chief - Online wagering has exploded in the past 10 years.
Pokie losses would still well and truly outnumber other forms of gambling though.
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree that sports-betting online has exploded in the last decade, I'd say that pokies turnover would have significantly expanded too though perhsap not quite at the same rate since 97-98.

TAB problem gambling would definitely be higher than betfair problem gambling though probably for different reasons.

Problem losing as you put it probably starts out with some degree of irrationality (a lot of the time combined with a degree of social isolation/helplessness where people turn to gambling for just something to do to get out of the house) before it deteriorates into a full-blown condition.

Quite simply for most bets you're irrational if your betting at the TAB.

Older, less sophisticated people are also more likely to frequent TABs rather than bet from home using an online bookmaker or betting exchange.
 
Daytripper said:
Have to disagree on point there Chief - Online wagering has exploded in the past 10 years.
Pokie losses would still well and truly outnumber other forms of gambling though.
Click to expand...

2006:
http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@...f22c182d6c6e1ad4ca2571ee00794c90!OpenDocument

Total net takings from gambling during 2004-05 was $15.5 billion, according to results released today from an Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) survey of gambling services businesses.

The major source of net takings was from poker/gaming machines in clubs, pubs, taverns and bars reaching $8.7 billion or 56.3% of total net takings from gambling.

Other major sources of net takings included off-course TAB takings of $2.1 billion, casino gambling of $2.6 billion and lotteries, lotto style games and football pools of $1.4 billion.
Click to expand...

Net takings from online gambling were $114.3 million
Click to expand...

Online gambling would have to have grown by 7600% or so since 2006 and pokies takings would have to have stopped growing for online to rival pokies today.

But beware: this $114m figure is for takings by Australian companies. It does not include O/S gambling.

However I think we can safely say that online gambling would be less than $500m.

Even if it is $1b, that's still a fraction of the pokies take.


Conservatively, poker machines suck money out of the community at more than 10 times the rate of online gambling.
 
Chief said:
Conservatively, poker machines suck money out of the community at more than 10 times the rate of online gambling.
Click to expand...

Don't the football clubs earn less from pokies than they used to? IIRC Waverley Gardens is not as profitable as it once was for Hawthorn.

Someone on here must know re football clubs and poker machine revenue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Tasmania Pokies reform
Replies
6
Views
385
Golden_6
Golden_6
Caesar
Federal Government Winding Back Super Fund Accountability Reforms
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
nut
nut

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top