Pokies the Moral Backbone of the Eastern States of Australia

[MrBurns]

No, just sticking up for the right of the individual to choose how they spend their own money.

I agree, but we wouldn't want people who prey on the vulnerable to hide behind that argument would we

 

[basilio]

The trouble is that the most profitable commercial activities generally involve preying on the vulnerable. When you build a business model on creating and then feeding addictions you are unlikely to have a conscience about the effects on the "weak and feeble minded fools" you are milking.

Of course one is not allowed to say that in polite society so there are many euphemisms for how we accept the situation. Peoples Freedom of Choice is always a good one.

 

[gav]

No problem but I do despise those who engineer, within the law, a machine designed to feed an addiction.

What about a legal drug (caffeine) or food designed to feed an addiction? There are studies that show addiction to salt/fat/sugar foods, so should we place some limit on how much people are allowed to eat, due to these "vulnerable people"? Some people are addicted to social networking sites, which can have negative effects on other parts of their life. Should we limit this too? What about restricting the sale of alcohol due to alcohol-induced violence?

Every step taken to "protect the vulnerable" removes the freedom/liberty of others.

 

[MrBurns]

What about a legal drug (caffeine) or food designed to feed an addiction? There are studies that show addiction to salt/fat/sugar foods, so should we place some limit on how much people are allowed to eat, due to these "vulnerable people"?

Show me the stats on suicides and marriage failures attributed to drinking coffee and we'll talk.

 

[Julia]

The trouble is that the most profitable commercial activities generally involve preying on the vulnerable. When you build a business model on creating and then feeding addictions you are unlikely to have a conscience about the effects on the "weak and feeble minded fools" you are milking.

So let's encourage individuals to think for themselves and make valid decisions.
Your stance seems to say to people "you are so stupid and incompetent that you will always be unable to make sensible choices".
As I've said before, such a mantra eventually results in those people accepting their incapacity.

Of course one is not allowed to say that in polite society so there are many euphemisms for how we accept the situation. Peoples Freedom of Choice is always a good one.

Oh for god's sake, don't be so mealy mouthed. Freedom of choice is fundamental to a well functioning society. What is it about so many of you on the Left that you want to encourage people to be dependent instead of self validating?

What about a legal drug (caffeine) or food designed to feed an addiction? There are studies that show addiction to salt/fat/sugar foods, so should we place some limit on how much people are allowed to eat, due to these "vulnerable people"? Some people are addicted to social networking sites, which can have negative effects on other parts of their life. Should we limit this too? What about restricting the sale of alcohol due to alcohol-induced violence?

Every step taken to "protect the vulnerable" removes the freedom/liberty of others.

Show me the stats on suicides and marriage failures attributed to drinking coffee and we'll talk.

Mr Burns, that's not a reasonable response. Gav did not say coffee and sugar cause marriage failures etc. He makes a perfectly reasonable point about individual choices.

e.g. if you want to limit people's access to gambling because it's bad for them, then you should also be in favour of limiting their access to sugar, fat and other unhealthy substances.

The inevitable sequalae to such limitation of personal choice would be refusal of medicare services for those people who are overweight, drunk, or experiencing any of the multiple medical conditions which arise from unhealthy consumption.

How would you go with that?

 

[MrBurns]

Mr Burns, that's not a reasonable response. Gav did not say coffee and sugar cause marriage failures etc. He makes a perfectly reasonable point about individual choices.

e.g. if you want to limit people's access to gambling because it's bad for them, then you should also be in favour of limiting their access to sugar, fat and other unhealthy substances.

I think you dont understand that some things are bad other things are very very bad, Addiction to gambling is a little worse than eating too many lollies dont you think ?

 

[basilio]

Julia, I agree there is a case for arguing that individuals should think for themselves and make their own decisions. I can also see that if people are molly coddled too much they will become dependent on the State. I think these are serious issues worth debating in other contexts.

I suggest the ongoing conversation is how much freedom do we give up and on what conditions. At its simplest my freedom to swing my arms around needs to stop at the point of someone else nose... Otherwise I am impinging on his/her freedom.

We started this discussion on the question of how dangerous poker machines might be to people individually and then the health of the greater society. The problem seems to be that what seemed to start as a way to spend/lose a few dollars seems to have escalated into a particularly effective way to strip many, many people of all their money as well as their friends, family and workplace. ( The wider social effects.)

An analogy to this would be the introduction of cheap gin to London in the early 1700's. Until then people drank beer and got merry and probably drunk. But it was sort of controlled.

Gin however was far more potent and very cheap. Within a few short years tens of thousands of people were hopeless alcoholics. It was so bad the British government took action to close down the gin "palaces" because of the damage it was doing. Was this a good thing or should the government have allowed people to have the freedom to stay paralytic for as long as they could ?

Cigarette smoking. Another drug. Certainly very moreish. Very addictive and highly pleasurable. And then we discover that it causes cancer as well as scores of other health problems. And the effect of these illnesses does beyond the users to their families and people whole inhale the smoke.

Of course the tobacco industry spent tens of millions in lies and lobbying to protect their right to "advertise, promote and sell a legal product". But these days in Australia at least overt promotion and advertisements for smoking arn't allowed. Does this represent an overall improvement in the health and quality of life of our community or should we allow the free enterprise system and personal freedom of (addicted) smokers free rein ?

How about .05 drink driving legislation that is aimed at stopping drunk drivers from killing themselves and others ? It seems like a great idea now but I can remember the fierce debate when it first came in with the cries of "freedom of choice " and "the nanny state".

Anyway the genie is out of the bottle with poker machines. We can't simply ban them. But I think passing legislation that reduces the capacity of poker machine owners to gut and clean people makes sense. It is supposed to be a game not a life destroying habit.

 

[Tink]

You could see this coming after so many years of talking.
Personally, I find them boring.

Parents leaving their children in the car while they feed their addiction etc etc, its been one thing after another that they have had to deal with, and its just escalated.

 

[rumpole]

They should go back to the original proposal and have a $1 bet limit. Doesn't hurt social pokie players but might discourage people who spend hours at a machine.

Plain package pokies might help too . Olive grey paint, no flashing lights and a drawing of bags of money being flushed down a loo next to the handle.

 

[basilio]

They should go back to the original proposal and have a $1 bet limit. Doesn't hurt social pokie players but might discourage people who spend hours at a machine.

Plain package pokies might help too . Olive grey paint, no flashing lights and a drawing of bags of money being flushed down a loo next to the handle.

Sort of destroys the fun doesn't it

I thought the idea of all the music, flashing lights, aromas etc was to CONvince the punter he/she was having fun while being held upside down by their ankles ?

 

[IFocus]

They should go back to the original proposal and have a $1 bet limit. Doesn't hurt social pokie players but might discourage people who spend hours at a machine.

Plain package pokies might help too . Olive grey paint, no flashing lights and a drawing of bags of money being flushed down a loo next to the handle.

The proposed pokie laws had no impact on $1 machines a point happily missed by the proponents of choice or social pokie playing.

What it was trying to do is remove the high loss machines that are designed to strip a families weekly income in one to two hrs and thats what they do.

No where else in the world exist the same level of loss machines.................hey just say no

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I play the pokies once or twice a year and quite like it. I generally lose about $100 or win similar.

I do not see what all the kerfuffle is about.

If the problem gamblers did not play the pokies they would gamble on the internet and the money would go overseas.

At least this way it stays with the community.

Better help for gamblers would be a better way to go.

gg

 

[dutchie]

St George Illawarra Dragons in $6m bid to sign Melbourne Storm coach Craig Bellamy

Where do they get the money for that?? (have a guess suckers)

 

[pixel]

St George Illawarra Dragons in $6m bid to sign Melbourne Storm coach Craig Bellamy

Where do they get the money for that?? (have a guess suckers)

lemme guess:
Georgie has been a good boy, slaying lots of dragons and Santa filled his stocking accordingly.
Never mind that the kids of Illawarra "supporters" were left with empty stockings. Their parents should'a followed GG's example and only lost $100 once a year. All a matter of discipline, innit?

 

[basilio]

Trusted employee defrauds family business of $3.7 million and pours it all into a couple of local clubs. How did a modest wage earner become the number one pin up (loser) at two clubs over a number of years - and not ring any alarm bells as to where her money was coming from ?

I'm sure this story has been replicated a number of times. The question asked is whether the clubs have liability for the stolen funds ?

Vicki stole millions from work and put it in the pokies at a Sydney leagues club. Her boss wants it back

Vicki Clerke, 64, is in prison for stealing millions of dollars from her employer to fund her pokies habit. Her boss is now asking one of Sydney's biggest clubs for his money back.

www.abc.net.au

 

[basilio]

Another example of the way pokies destroy not just the lives of the loser but the people and business's they have ripped off.
Sad story . Judge certainly gives the industry both barrels.

Judge blasts 'abomination' of online pokies after travel agent steals $670,000 to fuel habit​

By court reporter Danny Tran
Posted 16m ago16 minutes ago

The employee admitted two fraud charges that ultimately forced her bosses to sell two homes.(
ABC News: Diana Hayward
)
Share

A Victorian travel agent with a pokies problem stole close to $670,000 from holidaymakers who were forced to cancel their vacations because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Key points:​

• Annette Roberts diverted funds into her own bank accounts in 522 transactions
• Her employers have been forced to delay their retirement because of her crimes
• Lawyers acknowledge a jail term is appropriate

Judge blasts 'abomination' of online pokies after travel agent steals $670,000 to fuel habit

A Victorian travel agent with a pokies problem stole close to $670,000 from holidaymakers who were forced to cancel their vacations because of the coronavirus pandemic.

www.abc.net.au

 

[sptrawler]

Another example of the way pokies destroy not just the lives of the loser but the people and business's

Yes Bas, the pokies are a horrible invention, I'm so pleased they have never taken hold in W.A.
I remember when we used to drive across the Nullarbor, for the Christmas school holidays with the kids, it was a yearly event. We always stopped at a caravan park on Ceduna's main drag, pitched the tents, then took the kids down to the hotel at the end of the jetty.
In the mid 1990's we stopped headed down to the pub, with the kids for the Nullarbor crossing celebration meal and the dining room was full of pokies.
We turned around and walked out, never been back to the pub, just as easy to stop at a cafe on the road.
Pokies should be banned, except for casino's, where they service a specific audience IMO.