i currently work in a bookies (for another 2 weeks) i hate the gambling industry and the direction is is going in is wrong and immoral. all bookies are in competition and the different organizations keep bringing out new betting oppatunities. the new customer is designed to bet on everything going including new aussie greyhounds which start at 8.30 in the morning. nowadays gambling breeds addiction and most betting shops are tailer made for desperate gamblers who gamble in hope for more money. (marketing helps them believe that this will become a reality.)
but what makes a coke dealer or a heroin dealer worse than a cashier working in a betting shop? they both ruin lifes!
Originally posted by imturningjapanese: but what makes a coke dealer or a heroin dealer worse than a cashier working in a betting shop? they both ruin lifes!
The difference between a drug dealer and a bookie is that a drug dealer gets paid more and has more free time in the summer...
While we think of it, what about the pub landlord that sells alcohol, or the newsagent that sells cigarettes, or the prostitute that sells sex or the TV evangelist that sell false hope? Are they different?
In fact, if you stand a bookie, a TV evangelist and a “Premium-Rate-Call-In-Quiz Show Host next to each other, at least you’d stand a better chance of seeing a return from the bookie in this life time…
I’m Arrogant and Condescending! That. Means. I. Talk. Down. To. You. Because. I’m. Better. Than. You.
I can see why you might have a moral problem with what you're doing, but maybe think of it this way...
If heroine were legal,
and regulated so that you always knew what you were buying and were always able to buy it in a safe environment,
and far less addictive (i.e. the risk of becoming a gambling junkie after putting one single bet on the Grand National is far far less than the risk of becoming a heroine junkie after one hit),
and if using heroine had no link to crime to fund it,
and didn't have health issue associations (to put it mildly),
and there was no exploitation of 90% of the suppliers of heroine,...
if all that were true would you have such a problem with it?
Bookkeeping is a fine and upstanding profession. It helps support the magnificent racing industry, which enriches thousands of lives, including my own.
The American religious right and neo-conservative view on the gambling industry is one which I hope the UK government never considers. Lets face it, if these people had their way, they'd outlaw anything that's fun, so we had more time to pray that God vanquish all infidels.
People with addictions of any kind, always have fundamentally deeper problems than their habit. Poverty, dysfunctional family life, poor mental health care, weak education - all ruin lives and need to be addressed before the drug dealer and bookkeeper.
I personally do not think the gambling industry is moral and that includes the national lottery. I have seen, first hand, the consequences of addictive gambling. My colleague at work lost everything, including his family and left him suicidal.
Just because it is legal does not help addicts. If you had a card that you had to register for and limits were set based on your earnings this would be a sfae guard; but people have the right to choose. And it is the freedom of the masses that is important in this society, but this freedom comes at a cost. And people like my colleague are the price we pay.
the government should take control of all these vices then just slap a tax on them with a government health warning , just like cigarettes. Then we can all, as responsible adults , make up our own minds.
i hate the national lottery and see it as a stealth tax on the poor.... its unbearable watching pensioners and social security mums shelling out for their little tickets of hopelessness. self inflicted i know, but the lottery trades on the hope and desperation of the most disadvantaged.
self inflicted i know, but the lottery trades on the hope and desperation of the most disadvantaged.
But don't forget pays for a number of charities who work with the most significantly disempowered in society.
Example: my wife worked as a benefits adviser for the blind. Her post was lottery funded. She helped many people claim benefits they didn't realise they were entitled to our had been cheated out of by the DWP. Had there been no lottery, these people would be worse off. This is one reason why I play the lottery (the other being the spectacularly small chance that I will win enough to allow me to quit work and write music full-time).
You forget who the really impoverished are. Social security mums? Nah. Rich they ain't, but compared to the disabled and the homeless in the UK, and the poor in some other countries they are positively loaded, and their money management is often dreadful. Their poverty is relative.
Pensioners? Yes, there's a case there. But if you think they're badly off, just wait till you see what our generation gets for the state pension we've paid for all our working lives...
Originally posted by InAbsentia: But don't forget pays for a number of charities who work with the most significantly disempowered in society.
oh i know, also the arts benefit from the lottery, but how ironic that it is the poor(er) sections of our society that are primarily paying for this...
Originally posted by InAbsentia: But don't forget pays for a number of charities who work with the most significantly disempowered in society.
oh i know, also the arts benefit from the lottery, but how ironic that it is the poor(er) sections of our society that are primarily paying for this...
No fair, I wanted to post that!
Its great how money from poor people goes to pay for rich peoples entertainment such as opera and ballet.
Originally posted by kevlar: And it is the freedom of the masses that is important in this society, but this freedom comes at a cost. And people like my colleague are the price we pay.
there is no freedom of choice in gambling. people are enticed to gamble by clever marketing and then are drawn into it. some people come in and bet on everthing going. that is horses, dogs, virtual horses, virtual dogs, virtual football, american horses and australian dogs ect ect etc. the more choice there is the more tey will gamble. anyone that bets race by race on virtual racing is betting in hope and desperation.
Originally posted by InAbsentia: But don't forget pays for a number of charities who work with the most significantly disempowered in society.
oh i know, also the arts benefit from the lottery, but how ironic that it is the poor(er) sections of our society that are primarily paying for this...
No fair, I wanted to post that!
Its great how money from poor people goes to pay for rich peoples entertainment such as opera and ballet.
I don't agree with gambling either and think that turning the white elephant a.k.a. the Dome into a super casino is a mistake.
Please note that Opera and Ballet is not just for "rich" members of society.
I've known Restaurant waiters who have gone to the Opera. As well as Hotel Receptionists that go to the Ballet.
It's ignorance if you have the opinion of both events being "high brow".
“You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.” Friedrich Nietzsche
I've known Restaurant waiters who have gone to the Opera. As well as Hotel Receptionists that go to the Ballet.
It's ignorance if you have the opinion of both events being "high brow".
I totally understand this but you must face facts that it is far more likely that you will get upper and middle class people attending. Whilst you are far more likley to buy a lottery ticket if you are working class or poor.
Originally posted by imturningjapanese: i currently work in a bookies (for another 2 weeks) i hate the gambling industry and the direction is is going in is wrong and immoral. all bookies are in competition and the different organizations keep bringing out new betting oppatunities. the new customer is designed to bet on everything going including new aussie greyhounds which start at 8.30 in the morning. nowadays gambling breeds addiction and most betting shops are tailer made for desperate gamblers who gamble in hope for more money. (marketing helps them believe that this will become a reality.)
but what makes a coke dealer or a heroin dealer worse than a cashier working in a betting shop? they both ruin lifes!
What is a 'meaning of life'?
Be 'open' for all kinds of meaning rather than trying to 'close' off others, just because 'you' don't like it.
The problem with deeply 'moral' lot is that they treat people like 'kids', don't know anything until 'they' tell the people.
Why do you complain about the industry if you worked in it? Deeply hypocritical!
Reminds me of a Muslim deeply hating porn, (i) stays at a hotel in US, (ii) watch the damm porn, (iii) three complain that it's immoral!
Ah morals, I'd love to know what they feel like...
quote:
Originally posted by kevlar: I personally do not think the gambling industry is moral and that includes the national lottery. I have seen, first hand, the consequences of addictive gambling. My colleague at work lost everything, including his family and left him suicidal.
Just because it is legal does not help addicts. If you had a card that you had to register for and limits were set based on your earnings this would be a safe guard; but people have the right to choose. And it is the freedom of the masses that is important in this society, but this freedom comes at a cost. And people like my colleague are the price we pay.
That is indeed the true price of freedom... Is it worth paying? I suppose that depends on who you are... If you have an addictive personality, then living in a state that essentially protected you from yourself maybe what you might choose, but those that can control themselves would probably miss the choice.
A card system seems unworkable, and if you introduce it for betting, then why not alcohol, cigarettes and high calorie foods?
quote:
Originally posted by Greenjack: the government should take control of all these vices then just slap a tax on them with a government health warning , just like cigarettes. Then we can all, as responsible adults, make up our own minds.
As it already does. The Chancellor takes 15%GPT of everything a bookie wins, which is approximately 15-18% of the average shops turnover. If an average shop takes about 5.5 million in turnover a year, then the Treasury is going to receive about £150K from that one shop alone.
Taxation doesn't control the betting industry, taxation allows the betting industry to control government policy. The betting industry proposed the change in the way the betting industry was taxed, this has made it possible for "Fixed Odds Betting Terminals" to be financially viable within a shop, meaning more profit and more taxes. Now the industry has pushed for early opening and late closing all year round as of summer 2007, meaning more profits... say it with me now... and more taxes.
It is lobby groups such as GamCare which ultimately bring the industry to task. It was extensive lobbing by them that set limits and controls on what the industry could do. This is why you'll never see more than 4 machines in a shop, why there are time limits between game events, why there is a tool on each machine which allows the customer to set his own time/money limits, and why there is a policy of promoting responsible gambling in all shops.
quote:
Originally posted by MizDemeanour: i hate the national lottery and see it as a stealth tax on the poor.... its unbearable watching pensioners and social security mums shelling out for their little tickets of hopelessness. self inflicted i know, but the lottery trades on the hope and desperation of the most disadvantaged.
I believe the NatLot should have a minimum age of 18, like all other types of gambling, and it shouldn't be allowed to advertise on TV. Bookmakers aren't allowed to advertise on TV, but that is soon to change.
As for it being a tax on the poor, it is like any other form of gambling. The more money you have the more you can risk. The really successful gamblers are those who lump a large amount on a short priced dead-cert. Although the returns are smaller, they are substantial when betting thousands of pounds. The average punter however is playing with small stakes and clutching to nothing but hope. They tend to take bigger risks with smaller amounts, and ultimately will lose in the end... did I mention the tax?
quote:
Originally posted by imturningjapanese: there is no freedom of choice in gambling. people are enticed to gamble by clever marketing and then are drawn into it. some people come in and bet on everything going. that is horses, dogs, virtual horses, virtual dogs, virtual football, American horses and Australian dogs ect ect etc. the more choice there is the more tey will gamble. anyone that bets race by race on virtual racing is betting in hope and desperation.
Of course there is freedom of choice in gambling. No-one is forced into a bookies, forced to write out a bet, forced to part with they're money. They do so out of their own free-will.
And if anyone does have a problem, they must first want the help on offer before anything can be done. It is not up to a bookmaker to judge whether or not one of his customers has a problem nor is it in his power to force that person to attend GA meetings.
If someone thinks they have a problem, they can receive basic advise from his bookmaker, who will advise him to contact the GamCare Helpline, and can also set up a self-exclusion agreement for that customer.
The betting industry has taken its responsibility seriously, and aren’t quite the evil pusher you make them out to be.
Clearly, your not comfortable in your job, but I’d be interested to find out what you do want to do with your life… as there aren’t many jobs out there that don’t have their own moral pitfalls.
I’m Arrogant and Condescending! That. Means. I. Talk. Down. To. You. Because. I’m. Better. Than. You.
I believe the NatLot should have a minimum age of 18, like all other types of gambling, and it shouldn't be allowed to advertise on TV. Bookmakers aren't allowed to advertise on TV, but that is soon to change.
Whats worse is a private profit making organization is the only company to get advertising on the BBC, and half an hours worth prime time at that!
originally posted by just joe I believe the NatLot should have a minimum age of 18, like all other types of gambling, and it shouldn't be allowed to advertise on TV. Bookmakers aren't allowed to advertise on TV, but that is soon to change.
As for it being a tax on the poor, it is like any other form of gambling. The more money you have the more you can risk. The really successful gamblers are those who lump a large amount on a short priced dead-cert. Although the returns are smaller, they are substantial when betting thousands of pounds. The average punter however is playing with small stakes and clutching to nothing but hope. They tend to take bigger risks with smaller amounts, and ultimately will lose in the end... did I mention the tax?
this is exactly what i mean - no 'professional' gambler would bother with the lottery : the odds are just too astronomical, especially for a small stake. spendin £10 on lottery tickets is a tiny stake with virtually no hope of any return, but thats nearly 20% of the £56.00 an individual on benefits has to live on per week.... and the lottery is entirely propped up by seducing (usually less well off) people to bet on a virtual no hoper.
I totally understand this but you must face facts that it is far more likely that you will get upper and middle class people attending. Whilst you are far more likley to buy a lottery ticket if you are working class or poor.
Hmmm, interesting point...
The propulation at large demonstrably pump money into crass low brow entertainment - e.g. Celebrity Love Island, Heat Magazine, That godawful "Sound of Music" thing that's on at the weekend, Eastender, Tabloid Newspapers, Roy Chubby Brown, Girls Aloud, etc. etc.
Is it necessarily a bad thing if some of their money is commandeered and pumped into things which are actually worth something?
------ "The lack of flying kangaroos patently proves that Darwinism is false." - blast99
I totally understand this but you must face facts that it is far more likely that you will get upper and middle class people attending. Whilst you are far more likley to buy a lottery ticket if you are working class or poor.
Hmmm, interesting point...
The propulation at large demonstrably pump money int
, make up our own minds.
