Is Gambling Destructive to Society?

[Bricker]

@holmes

So what, you don’t think we as a society pay for drunk drivers? How much does your insurance cost? How much police energy is wasted on random stops? How many families lose their breadwinner, or require treatment because their loved one is killed by a drunk driver? Who pays for that, we do. Every single one of us.

Of course. We as a society pay for burglary too, with increased costs of home insurance. But we still live in homes. Because the benefits far outweigh the costs.

[msmith537]

@Futile Gesture

Do you include stock-broking in the definition of gambling? How about investment? Mortgaging your home a second time to set up your own business? If these aren’t gambles what are they?

Investing is distinctly different from gambling in the sense that with an investment, you are acquiring ownership of something you hope will appreciate in value. Gambling is simply buying a small opportunity for someone to hand you money. Unlike a business or piece of real estate, you are not buying a piece of the craps table. You do not benefit from the success of the roulette table. The owner of the casion has no incentive to provide greater opportunities to increase your wealth and 99.9% of the time, there is no return on your investment.
Fact of the matter is that casinos do generate a tremendous amount of revenue for the community they reside in. Las Vegas, Atlantic City and Foxwoods are pretty much defined by the gambling industry and the various dependent businesses.

Truly, one must be an idiot to go into a casino and not expect that they are going to lose their money. So, the question is do we legislate to the most simpleminded, weak-willed and gullible of our society? Do we regulate everything and anything where someone with no common sense might inflict damage on themselves?

[holmes]

@Bricker

I appreciate that… but there are others that would.

Certainly you can agree with a group on some things and disagree on others. But I think, if you quote them as an authority on some things, you lose - or at least damage - your ability to call them dishonest on other things. So I guess I should modify my statement from before: I assume that, even though you don’t endorse their positions regard abortion and homosexuality, you acknowledge that their research is done honestly and in good faith, even though you disagree with their results.

Yes?

I don’t know Bricker what are you asking me? If they pick and chose which research to use, like we do here, are they honest? Do they ignore other information that runs against what they believe? Can they not be honest in the Gambling study and dishonest on the stem cell research? Why not?

Sorry Bricker in this case, I can see and download the study myself and judge whether or not they’re distorting it. I can’t see where they’re getting their info that homosexuals can be cured or many of their other opinions, such as stem cell research.

They’re welcome to their opinion of course, but unless they provide a link, like they did for the gambling study; I have no idea if they’re being honest or not.

And again, I’m not endorsing anything, save a convenient way to view some of the points of the gambling study, without having to download the pdf. I simply didn’t like the suggestion that I must agree with everything a cite says or I can’t link to it, which is why I took issue with it.

[ElvisL1ves]

@holmes

So it looks like they can create some jobs, in some places, but overwhelmingly it doesn’t work out.

Why is Atlantic City mentioned in the same breath as Las Vegas? The money doesn’t even slow down to cross Pacific Avenue. The town away from the beach is just as decrepit as ever, the casino jobs are crappy and go to people from as far away as Philly instead of locals so that unemployment is still as high as ever, and the money goes straight to the corporations that own the casinos - largely based in Vegas. The state of NJ gets a cut, which was intended to support public education, but has simply had the effect of relieving the state of an obligation it previously covered through other revenue sources.

Don’t bother going there on days that Social Security checks come - the little old ladies come by the busload.
Bricker, interesting that you’re claiming that an activity only becomes a social ill if it is outlawed.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

[nitpick]What happens in casinos is referred to as “gaming”. Gambling is taking any risk, but what you do at a craps table, a roulette wheel, etc. is called gaming.[/nitpick]

I only mention this because the subject for debate is gaming, not stock investments or double mortgages or business start-ups, which may be gambling with your money, but are not casino games.

[Ravenman]

I weigh in on the side that says that gambling, on the whole, tends to have negative effects on society.

First, there’s factors of blight. With the exception of the Strip and Indian reservations in which a tribe controls surrounding land, my personal experienceis that gambling invites legions of pawn shops and loan shark-like operations that, in my view, prey on consumers. One can argue whether Walmart and its low prices are good for communities, but I just can’t see how those paycheck-to-paycheck moneylending businesses that charge absolutely exorbitent interest rates have any benefit whatsoever to society at large.

Yes, I recognize that these businesses exist elsewhere, but I think there is a strong correlation between pawn shops, moneylenders, and gambling that can’t be ignored.

Second, crime. Where there is gambling there are other vices, including prostitution and drugs. The DEA says that Nevada ranks 7th of states in terms of violent crime. Cite. Yes, correlation is not causation, but I think I see a pattern developing here. Compare Atlantic City (cite) to New York (cite ) and you see that AC has about twice the crime rate as Gotham. Illegal prostitution has a major presence in Las Vegas, even though tourists could simply take a quick bus ride to neighboring counties and do their business legally.

Third, like most other service jobs, I don’t think there is much value added in the gaming industry. Yes, tourism is promoted in certain gambling locations (especially Las Vegas, especially NOT Atlantic City), but the jobs created are, on balance, not that great. I have nothing against card dealers, waitresses, and custodial staff, but were not exactly talking about jobs with good career prospects. And think about all that second hand smoke!!

Finally, I simply have a problem with industries based on taking its customers as suckers. This bothers me far more with state lotteries than it does with casinos, but the principle holds. Honestly, has any Doper here ever sat for a spell to play the Big Wheel/Wheel of Fortune in a casino? God, I sure hope not.

All that being said, it can obviously be a boon to localities, even if it is a drag on society. (Atlantic City notwithstanding, of course.) And, even though it’s bad, bad, bad, I do love playing blackjack.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@Ravenman

Second, crime. Where there is gambling there are other vices, including prostitution and drugs. The DEA says that Nevada ranks 7th of states in terms of violent crime. Cite. Yes, correlation is not causation, but I think I see a pattern developing here.

[nitpick]

The DEA website says that Nevada ranks 7th in violent crime, but the website they link to as a source for the statistic says Nevada ranks 8th. cite

[Bricker]

@ElvisL1ves

Bricker, interesting that you’re claiming that an activity only becomes a social ill if it is outlawed.

That is interesting. It’s interesting to you because it may be the clue that permits you to track down the cirucmstances under which you experience visual hallucinations; it’s interesting to me because this is the first I’m hearing of it.

Where did I say that activity only becomes a social ill if it is outlawed?

[Bricker]

@Ravenman

Second, crime. Where there is gambling there are other vices, including prostitution and drugs. The DEA says that Nevada ranks 7th of states in terms of violent crime. Cite.

The state that ranks first, or fifth, and doesn’t have gambing - what’s the excuse for its placement? Why do you assume that Nevada’s sixth-place ranking has to do with gambling?

Yes, I recognize that these businesses exist elsewhere, but I think there is a strong correlation between pawn shops, moneylenders, and gambling that can’t be ignored.

And what’s the explanation for their existence elsewhere? I don’t understand how you can blame gambling for them when gambing is around, and accept the fact that they also exist in similar proportions where gambling ISN’T around. Isn’t it more likely that they exist in any city of size, and simply find it convenient to be close to casinos when casinos exist?

Third, like most other service jobs, I don’t think there is much value added in the gaming industry. Yes, tourism is promoted in certain gambling locations (especially Las Vegas, especially NOT Atlantic City), but the jobs created are, on balance, not that great. I have nothing against card dealers, waitresses, and custodial staff, but were not exactly talking about jobs with good career prospects. And think about all that second hand smoke!!

Sure, it would be better if there were a high-tech industry that sprung up in these benighted areas. But that doesn;t seem to be in the offing. So the question is… are those jobs better than no jobs at all?

Answer: yes.

[Evil_Captor]

The argument against gambling is what I would call an “outlier” arguments … it uses examples that, if they were data points in a chart, would be thrown out as as “outliers,” i.e., data point that were well outside the norm for the survey and probably representing extraordinary circumstances or badly collected data.

Thus:
You’ve got to outlaw gambling because a few years ago the City Treasurer went to Las Vegas and spent everything he owned and also the entire city treasury and it destroyed him and his family!

And:

You’ve got to outlaw porn because he saw a picture of a woman’s breasts with nipples and everything and proceeded to rape three cousins, a goat and a parakeet!

And:

You’ve got to outlaw booze because Billy Ray went drinkin’ all the time and eventually cut off his buddie’s head while they were out driving and carousing and never even noticed his buddy was dead when the cops came by to find out why there was a headless corpse sitting in his car!

The reality is that most people look at pics of a woman’s breasts and go “Tasty!” and never do more than, say, masturbate. The reality is that most people place reasonably-sized bets on the lotto or their football team, and win or lose, they’re OK with it, because it’s just entertainment to them. The reality is that most people control their drinking.

The question is, should most people suffer the loss of what are really minor pleasantries of life for the sake of a few who can’t control themselves? Why do we let disturbed individuals become the standard we all have to live by?

[ElvisL1ves]

@Bricker

That is interesting. It’s interesting to you because it may be the clue that permits you to track down the cirucmstances under which you experience visual hallucinations; it’s interesting to me because this is the first I’m hearing of it.

Where did I say that activity only becomes a social ill if it is outlawed?

Your post #16 was apparently a hallucination, then. :rolleyes:

Do you want to steer clear of the Pit or don’t you?

[Bricker]

@ElvisL1ves

Bricker, interesting that you’re claiming that an activity only becomes a social ill if it is outlawed.

@Bricker

Where did I say that activity only becomes a social ill if it is outlawed?

@ElvisL1ves

Your post #16 was apparently a hallucination, then. :rolleyes:

Do you want to steer clear of the Pit or don’t you?

@Bricker in Post #16

I view gambling as entertainment. Just as a visit to the opera may set me back $200, and leave me with nothing but enjoyment during the activity, and fond memory AFTER the activity, gambling is fun to do and fun to remember doing. I see it as similar to any other form of entertainment in this regard, with the added bonus that every now and then, it’s cheap, free, or even returns money.

I’d be very interested in seeing evidence of social ills such as prostitution being caused by, or increased by, the presence of legalized gambling.

Nowhere in Post #16 does it say that an activity only becomes a social ill if it is outlawed.

[Homebrew]

He probably meant #25, in which you said legal prostitution isn’t a social ill.

[ElvisL1ves]

That too, thanks.

So, Bricker, what *did * you mean by that?

[holmes]

@Bricker

Of course. We as a society pay for burglary too, with increased costs of home insurance. But we still live in homes. Because the benefits far outweigh the costs.

So you consider gambling a problem like burglary, but worth the price of admission? You note, I’m not nor have I advocated barring people from gambling. My point is gambling, whether illegal or not, adds to the general problems within our society. Even if the majority of people gamble and go home, the system is designed to allow a certain percentage of them to self-destruct. 10% of the population, is a lot of people to have be addicted, and that’s not counting the ones who are functional and the carnage they leave in their wake. Whole neighbourhoods are designed to enable these people to self-destruct, whether it’s the pawns shops or the 24 hour gaming or the easy credit. The entire system is geared to pull as many people into it’s craw as possible. That can’t be go for our society as a whole, even if you’re 200 miles away from them.

Do you consider prescription drug abuse a social ill? Unprotected sex with lots of partners? Sex with an underage prostitute? Why? What does ONE girl have to do with society, that 5% of addicted gamblers don’t?

What do you consider a social ill and how many people have to be affected before it matters? Does it have to be illegal? Must there be a stigma attached to it?

It is well established that crime rates rise substantially in areas where gambling is legalized. One striking example comes from Atlantic City, New Jersey, where according to the FBI, larceny increased by 467% in the first nine years after gambling was legalized there.[1] The state of Illinois, when debating whether to permit casino gambling in Chicago, estimated that increased costs in law enforcement would easily require more than all of the one hundred million dollars in expected tax revenue that gambling was supposed to bring the state.[2] And some estimates placed the increase in law enforcement costs at ten times that number–over one billion dollars annually.[3]

Not only does legalized gambling increase local crime, it is also destructive to individuals and families. Gambling is often addictive, and many people who gamble develop into problem or compulsive gamblers. The American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders characterizes pathological gambling as a “chronic and progressive failure to resist impulses to gamble, a gambling behavior that compromises, disrupts, or damages personal, family, or vocational pursuits.”[4] The number of compulsive gamblers and problem gamblers increases substantially when gambling is legalized. In 1974, when Nevada was the only state where gambling was permitted, the number of problem gamblers in the United States was much less than one percent of the country’s population; whereas, in Nevada it exceeded 2.5%.[5] Currently, the number of compulsive gamblers is estimated at approximately 1% of the population in states where gambling is illegal, but close to 5% in states where gambling is legal.[6] And fully 10% of the entire population constitute problem gamblers.[7]

Compulsive and problem gambling leads to personal indebtedness and tends to destroy the gambler’s family, emotionally as well as financially, as the family’s income, belongings, and even groceries are sacrificed to the insatiable desire to win. Gamblers’ debts frequently lead them to crime and other destructive behavior.[8] And this inflicts great costs not only on the gambler and his or her family, but also on society as a whole. It is currently estimated that each problem gambler costs the state $52,000,[9] and in 1994, the state of Maryland put the cost of all compulsive gambling in that state at 1.5 billion dollars.[10] The national and global costs are huge, and this is only the financial cost of an immense problem that has many destructive aspects for society and our families.

http://www.math.byu.edu/~jarvis/gambling/gambling/gambling.html

What I find incredibly ironic and I don’t mean to hijack the thread, is that most of the cites against gambling are from the very people that Bennett and his books of virtues would have appealed to.

[Bricker]

@Homebrew

He probably meant #25, in which you said legal prostitution isn’t a social ill.

Even if that’s what he meant…

@ElvisL1ves

Bricker, interesting that you’re claiming that an activity only becomes a social ill if it is outlawed.

That’s STILL not what I said. Even if you assume I meant ALL things legal are not social ills - which I did not say either – you cannot turn that around to mean something is a social ill only if it is illegal.

If A, then B does NOT equate to If B, then A. This is the fallacy of “affirming the consequent.”

[Bricker]

@ElvisL1ves

That too, thanks.

So, Bricker, what *did * you mean by that?

By what?

I never said what you claim I said.

@ElvisL1ves

Bricker, interesting that you’re claiming that an activity only becomes a social ill if it is outlawed.

I said legal prostitution is NOT a social ill. I didn’t generalize that to all social ills, and even if I had, I didn’t say that outlawing something is necessary for it to become a social ill. You have reversed the premise and conclusion parts of my statement.

[Homebrew]

So what distinguishes legal and illegal prostitution that makes it a social ill? Before you point out the 16-year-old run-aways that are undoubtly a ill, I want to state you should compare apples to apples. What makes Heidi Fleiss’ or the Happy Hooker’s well paid, healthy girls a social ill while the legal brothel’s working girls aren’t?

[Bricker]

@holmes

So you consider gambling a problem like burglary, but worth the price of admission? You note, I’m not nor have I advocated barring people from gambling. My point is gambling, whether illegal or not, adds to the general problems within our society. Even if the majority of people gamble and go home, the system is designed to allow a certain percentage of them to self-destruct. 10% of the population, is a lot of people to have be addicted, and that’s not counting the ones who are functional and the carnage they leave in their wake.

Where in heaven’s name do you get that 10% of the population is addicted??

And I notice that the paper you cite helpfully footnotes its claims, with HALF of its 33 footnotes coming from the same source: Gambling, Bruno Leone et. al. Not exactly a diversity of research for a paper, is it?

If you’re drawing the 10% figure from there, it claims that 10% of the population is a “problem” gambler. It’s unclear what criteria is used to determine “problem” gambler, but I’m willing to bet it’s not the official one.

The accepted standard for diagnosis, the American Psychiatric Association’s DSM-IV, defines the issue thus, in 312.31 :

@DSM-IV

Persistent and maladaptive gambling behaviour as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
[ul]
[li]is preoccupied with gambling (e.g., preoccupied with reliving past gambling experiences, handicapping, or planning the next venture, or thinking of ways to get money with which to gamble) [/li][li]needs to gamble with increasing amounts of money in order to achieve the desired excitement [/li][li]has repeated unsuccessful efforts to control, cut back, or stop gambling [/li][li]is restless or irritable when attempting to cut down or stop gambling [/li][li]gambles as of a way of escaping from problems or of relieving a dysphoric mood (e.g., feelings of helplessness, guilt, anxiety, depression) [/li][li]after losing money gambling, often returns another day to get even (“chasing” one’s losses) [/li][li] lies to family members, therapist, or others to conceal the extent of involvement with gambling [/li][li]has committed illegal acts such as forgery, fraud, theft, or embezzlement to finance gambling [/li][li] has jeopardized or lost a significant relationship, job, or educational or career opportunity because of gambling [/li][li] relies on others to provide money to relieve a desperate financial situation caused by gambling [/li][/ul]

[Bricker]

@Homebrew

So what distinguishes legal and illegal prostitution that makes it a social ill? Before you point out the 16-year-old run-aways that are undoubtly a ill, I want to state you should compare apples to apples. What makes Heidi Fleiss’ or the Happy Hooker’s well paid, healthy girls a social ill while the legal brothel’s working girls aren’t?

Society has no guarantee that Heidi Fleiss is enforcing medical checkups and providing security to girls to ensure that they won’t be attacked by a customer. While I’m willing to concede that instances of illegal prostitution may be just fine, the INDUSTRY of illegal prostitution has more crack-addicts than Fleiss Girls. As a whole, it’s problems are sufficient to live in the category of social ill.

If you wish to focus on the apples to apples only, I absolutely concede that Xaeria Hollander and Heidi Fleiss do not represent social ills. They are part of an industry that does, however.

In the same vein, I agree that illegal gambling houses represent a social ill.