That's some big numbers, I'm curious as to where you got them from.
-
LIVE: St Kilda v Western Bulldogs - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Saints at 51% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
The Pokie Debate - My Personal View
- Thread starter Tzatziki_Man
- Start date
- Tagged users None
That's some big numbers, I'm curious as to where you got them from.
I work in the industry, not that any changes will effect me, as I've got 2 months left before I persue my career (what was a 6 month fill-in has turned into 3 yrs making 55k a year - not bad for a then 18 yr old)
all the relevant info is on the aha (I think that's the one) website
- Banned
- #254
Any pub or club that needs pokies to stay alive is a shitly run pub or club.
- Jun 20, 2011
- 2,671
- 2,673
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
2% of the working population is directly employed by the pokies industry?
- Banned
- #256
Democratic Socialism IS common sense.
If you've got a (in your mind) reasonable criticism of it, I'm hardly stopping you from putting your point forward.
But if (as I suspect) you don't have s**t, stop posing. People that think they're above an ideology of some kind, are usually politically ignorant (i.e. they think that what THEY think hasn't been thought of before, which is just plain narcissism - my evaluation of you fits this, btw) or they're actually mentally ill (i.e. politics is out to get me, I know the truth etc etc)
sounds far fetched, however, if you look at how many gaming rooms there is Australia-wide, and the amount of staff at each (gaming room I first worked at had 20 staff, and most have about 10) it is fairly conceivable
http://aha.org.au/industry-data
if you head to the above link, it will give you industry statistics, note, it totals at just over 300k, excluding bottleshops and industry techs....
2% of the population employed by pokies? Sounds like a pretty spectacular misallocation of labour. Think what else those people could be doing.
Well, that'd be the case if Mitch wasn't conflating "employed by pokies" with "everyone who works in hospitality" I assume Mitch that nobody is employed in hospitality in Western Australia?
PWC, in that very link Mitch provides, says only 15 000 jobs are contributed to the hotels industry by electronic gaming machines. That's extrapolated via modelling from things like proportions of revenue. And of course, pokies aren't going to be disappearing so it's not like all revenue and jobs from them will disappear, no matter how successful mandatory pre-commitment is.
Well, that'd be the case if Mitch wasn't conflating "employed by pokies" with "everyone who works in hospitality" I assume Mitch that nobody is employed in hospitality in Western Australia?
PWC, in that very link Mitch provides, says only 15 000 jobs are contributed to the hotels industry by electronic gaming machines. That's extrapolated via modelling from things like proportions of revenue. And of course, pokies aren't going to be disappearing so it's not like all revenue and jobs from them will disappear, no matter how successful mandatory pre-commitment is.
People like gambling. Gambling is a fact of life in every society. If clubs can benefit good for them. If they are not benefitting then someone else will because people will gamble anyway.
Simple as that. I wouldn't mind Richmond making millions from pokies.....most pokie fans are Maggie fans and it would be nice to have their support for the Tiges.
Simple as that. I wouldn't mind Richmond making millions from pokies.....most pokie fans are Maggie fans and it would be nice to have their support for the Tiges.
- Jun 20, 2011
- 2,671
- 2,673
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
Which also ignore the point that all the money not spent on the pokies doesn't just disappear. It will be spent else where in the economy creating new jobs. This could in fact be a net creator of jobs.
188,000 employed by pub-style hotels
that's pokies people
legally they are not allowed to promote gambling in any way
that's at hotels, this doesn't include the club-hotels, which are are a different category
also, people would save money, not necessarily spend it, meaning jobs may not be created
that's pokies people
legally they are not allowed to promote gambling in any way
that's at hotels, this doesn't include the club-hotels, which are are a different category
also, people would save money, not necessarily spend it, meaning jobs may not be created
- Jun 20, 2011
- 2,671
- 2,673
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
So Pubs no longer serve food/drink. It is all 100% pokies.
Yes but they could also spend money in areas which create more jobs per dollar spent than pokies. So what you should be actually saying it may cost an unspecified job in the hospitality industry while at the same time creating an unspecified amount of jobs new in the hospitality or other industry with the net effect being unknown.
when aha refers to pub-style hotels, it is refering to gaming venues.
if you go into the link on the pg, you'll see a full list
no, I'm saying there is a garuntee of job loss and a loss of income to the government, in turn a greater strain on the Australian welfare system
I am not defending the gaming industry, I'm being realistic about the effect on the Australian public
unless you actually work in the industry, you won't understand
I know I had many misconceptions prior to beginning work in the industry
To be fair Democratic Socialism is a very hard political doctrine to define, it is open to many interpretations that all in all confuse the **** out of me. Social democrat. democratic socialist?? Is the endgame still to achieve a socialist society??
O
Old Spice
Guest
It's no more confusing than the various names that pepper conservative parties from Germany to America to Australia. 'Oh, what is a conservative, there are so many names?'
A socialist party ís (historically) concerned with the redistribution of wealth. Not because they believe hand-outs make the world go round, but because they (have) believe(d) that labour is the true material source of value in society and that workers and others should get their fair share.
It wasnt just socialists who believed in this labour theory of value, in fact it was early economists like David Ricardo who first posited the idea.
Alan Joyce on the other hand believes companies spontaneously create value by having a fat plonker sitting on a directors chair. Well, that was until the QANTAS workers went on strike, then he ran like a good Ricardian to FWA to force workers back to work. Not that he'd admit labour has any value.
- Banned
- #266
It isn't hard to define imo.
The simplicity of it is that its a socialist doctrine, that still recognises the need for a largely autonomous economy, but with reasonable regulation.
A democratic socialist believes legislation exists primarily to create more freedom.
A liberal believes that legislation exists to curtail freedom.
Of course, the 'liberal' definition of freedom, is in actuality a complete free for all where those with power gain even more power due to lack of regulation about how they use that power.
A DS says that legislation can and should be used to make sure people with power don't act against the interests of others.
On a personal note, I lost more than I want to acknowledge with pokies. However about 12 months ago decided enough is enough.
Have a family and all that and need to think of others than just my egotistical self.
Its been 1 year and 1 day since my last visit to the dreaded machines.
Here's to another clean year.
Have a family and all that and need to think of others than just my egotistical self.
Its been 1 year and 1 day since my last visit to the dreaded machines.
Here's to another clean year.
O
Old Spice
Guest
Here's to another year. Best of luck.
telsor
Hall of Famer
Looking further through the report, ~25k of those are in WA, where there are no pokies (outside the casino), so your statement is clearly incorrect.
Disagree completely with this.
- Banned
- #271
So instead of pumping money into the wallets of wealthy club owners, the money could actually be saved by the (on average) low income earners who use pokies?
And you think they would just hoard this money? Only the rich do that.
This money would invariably go to education for their children, or health insurance, or simply back into the economy via luxury spending.
The idea that the money just "disappears" from the economy simply because it isn't going into pokies...
well...
Its simply stupid at best, and at worst a lie.
well I'm going by the report given by aha to all pubs & clubs which stated it is worded to avoided conflicting with laws prohibiting gaming advertising. this was handed out in 2009 when the laws were amended to allow company (taberet, tatts) to advertise as long as there was no reference to gambling in the promotion
even IF it was incorrect, you avoid acknowledging the employment numbers between states with pokies compared to those without them.
how many jobs are provided outside meteopolitan areas etc...
you also fail to acknowledge the tax-rate and the effect losing a 500million injection each year would have on Australia, that's right, 500mil in tax comes from gaming venues.
even if people spent money elsewhere, they'd have to spend a f-load more to match the same being returned to the government
I suppose, they can make it like an episode of sci-fi series sliders, where the government forced all citizens to spend 90% of thier pay each week
I give up.
if people want to believe that it'll happen as you say, they can, but I'll be boned if I'm going to stand around and allow the butterfly effect to occur.
loss of income, loss of jobs, increase tax to ALL, a reduction in the amount of welfare funding, or reduction in funds from other areas to fund welfare, increased medical expenses etc...
mods, this should be on the society board
CarltonBlues25
Debutant
- May 30, 2011
- 128
- 3
- AFL Club
- Carlton
A reasonable criticism hey?
Go have a chat to the millions of people killed by Stalin, Mao and Kim Jong - all started with a solution very similar to socialism.
Also have a chat to some of the socialist government's in Europe (e.g. Greece). They are suffering much worse than the USA, the poster child for right wing extremism.
It is easy to blame the GFC on run-away capitalism, and in part it is to blame, but there are also other causes (such as forcing banks to lend to people who couldn't afford the loans on the basis of fairness). Also go have a chat to the thousands fleeing Cuba each month.
Capitalism is not even close to perfect and unrestrained capitalism is wrong, but capitalism with sensible regulation is the best form of government there is.
In arguing for socialism you clearly show your lack of understanding of human behaviour, and more importantly, the lessons from history. Generally blaming something as complex as the GFC on one factor shows you haven't got a proper grasp of the situation. There are many lessons from the GFC - one of which is the need to properly regulate financial markets, but the lesson is not that socialism trumps capitalism. If anything the GFC shows that socialist economics lack the flexibility to adjust and respond to global shocks.
telsor
Hall of Famer
Yes, the report you linked to, the same one...and there methodology has nothing to do with 'advertising' ( how would such a report count in that way? ), it has a lot to do with the agenda of those who funded it, the AHA, which has a very clear case for making the industry seem nice/valuable.
Yes, some jobs would be lost, but most, if not all would be made up in whatever industries the dolalrs not spent on pokies go to.
Similar threads
