Gambling Industry In The Firing Line

weldoninhio · 02-08-2018 10:56PM

Muahahaha wrote: »

Gambling is only taxed at 1% yet the cost to society of addicted gamblers is far higher. Even alcohol being taxed a lot more still does not come near the costs that are put on the health service because of it.

With gambling, alcohol and tobacco society is effectively subsidising the costs of the fall out of these products while the industry takes the profits.

What is the “cost to society of addicted gamblers”??

happywithlife · 02-08-2018 11:14PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

What is the “cost to society of addicted gamblers”??

Addiction treatment.
Embezzlement by addicts to fund their addiction.
Breakdown of the family unit due to addiction.
Court time & associated resources
That's just off the top of my head

happywithlife · 02-08-2018 11:16PM

Pauliedragon wrote: »

So you can put bets on without ID but if you win the bookies don't payout without ID? Where does the winnings an 15 year old make go so?

I'd imagine if they can't withdraw wins they just use them to place more bets so ultimately it'll go back to the bookie

jimbobaloobob · 02-08-2018 11:40PM

Would that mean an end to the lotto adds aswell ?

weldoninhio · 03-08-2018 08:11AM

happywithlife wrote: »

Addiction treatment.
Embezzlement by addicts to fund their addiction.
Breakdown of the family unit due to addiction.
Court time & associated resources
That's just off the top of my head

Going by the only figures I could find, there are up to 40,000 gambling addicts in Ireland. 0.8% of the population.

I’m calling bullsh*t on it costing the state anything significant. It’s an easy target for the perpetually outraged.

happywithlife · 03-08-2018 09:00AM

weldoninhio wrote: »

Going by the only figures I could find, there are up to 40,000 gambling addicts in Ireland. 0.8% of the population.

I’m calling bullsh*t on it costing the state anything significant. It’s an easy target for the perpetually outraged.

40,000 addicts - right what if half of them are married? Thats another 20k affected by gambling.
The 40k will in all likelihood have either living parents or a young family.
Their siblings are affected.
The wider family network is affected
Their friends
Work colleagues.
"Cost to society" as you originally asked doesn't just mean an economic cost. You're not seeing the bigger picture here.
The stat I know is for every gambler 3 people are affected in a direct life altering manner and I think it was 9 are affected greatly but to a lesser extent.
And that doesn't account for the ripple effect of addiction within the person's greater network.

But let's stick with your 40,000 - are you saying they don't count? If 40k people were affected by serious consequences of say a side effect of a drug do you not think there'd be public outcry? Or 40k misdiagnosed? 40k lost their job in the morning? Of course there would. Gambling is an insidious addiction that worms its way into the heart of nearly every community in Ireland. It badly needs to be recognised for the damage it's doing and far more needs to be done to curtail it and abnormalise it rather than normalise it

weldoninhio · 03-08-2018 12:14PM

happywithlife wrote: »

40,000 addicts - right what if half of them are married? Thats another 20k affected by gambling.
The 40k will in all likelihood have either living parents or a young family.
Their siblings are affected.
The wider family network is affected
Their friends
Work colleagues.
"Cost to society" as you originally asked doesn't just mean an economic cost. You're not seeing the bigger picture here.
The stat I know is for every gambler 3 people are affected in a direct life altering manner and I think it was 9 are affected greatly but to a lesser extent.
And that doesn't account for the ripple effect of addiction within the person's greater network.

But let's stick with your 40,000 - are you saying they don't count? If 40k people were affected by serious consequences of say a side effect of a drug do you not think there'd be public outcry? Or 40k misdiagnosed? 40k lost their job in the morning? Of course there would. Gambling is an insidious addiction that worms its way into the heart of nearly every community in Ireland. It badly needs to be recognised for the damage it's doing and far more needs to be done to curtail it and abnormalise it rather than normalise it

40k is a drop in the ocean. And you are the one that brought economics into it be claiming they were taxed at 1%, but the cost was higher. In Ireland gambling is a billion euro business. 1% tax is plenty. Can't handle yourself, tough.

Muahahaha · 03-08-2018 02:16PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

40k is a drop in the ocean. And you are the one that brought economics into it be claiming they were taxed at 1%, but the cost was higher. In Ireland gambling is a billion euro business. 1% tax is plenty. Can't handle yourself, tough.

It was me who brought up the 1% and it is not plenty IMO. Taxation on gambling was 10% for decades until free wheeling Charlie McCreevy came in and reduced it to 0% during the Tiger years. Its only in the last 3 years that it was raised from 0% to 1% which is laughable really. In fact even Horse Racing Ireland themselves have called for it to be raised which goes to show how low it is.

As for the 1% gambling tax covering the costs to society- not a hope, nowhere near it, society is subsidising the cost of gambling addiction. In 2016 gambling receipts were 50 billion (more than the entire Irish states annual budget) and 1% of that yielded 50 million in tax. Also in 2016 a single gambling addict alone stole 1.75m from his employer (An Post) and gambled the lot away with Paddy Power who knew all along he was a postman and could not have had access to nearly 2 million quid. But they let him carry on regardless. The taxpayer is now on the hook for that 1.75m that Paddy Power took in profits whatever way you look at it because the post man sure as hell wont be paying it back. And thats just one gambling addict, if we have 40,000 of them then the 1% taxation would not come anywhere near paying for the costs to society of this addiction.

Working class heroes · 03-08-2018 02:22PM

Free entry for under 12’s into the Galway races.

weldoninhio · 03-08-2018 03:58PM

Muahahaha wrote: »

It was me who brought up the 1% and it is not plenty IMO. Taxation on gambling was 10% for decades until free wheeling Charlie McCreevy came in and reduced it to 0% during the Tiger years. Its only in the last 3 years that it was raised from 0% to 1% which is laughable really. In fact even Horse Racing Ireland themselves have called for it to be raised which goes to show how low it is.

As for the 1% gambling tax covering the costs to society- not a hope, nowhere near it, society is subsidising the cost of gambling addiction. In 2016 gambling receipts were 50 billion (more than the entire Irish states annual budget) and 1% of that yielded 50 million in tax. Also in 2016 a single gambling addict alone stole 1.75m from his employer (An Post) and gambled the lot away with Paddy Power who knew all along he was a postman and could not have had access to nearly 2 million quid. But they let him carry on regardless. The taxpayer is now on the hook for that 1.75m that Paddy Power took in profits whatever way you look at it because the post man sure as hell wont be paying it back. And thats just one gambling addict, if we have 40,000 of them then the 1% taxation would not come anywhere near paying for the costs to society of this addiction.

He stole 1.75m over 10 years. If you're gonna go all Helen Lovejoy, lets stick to the facts.

Muahahaha · 03-08-2018 05:36PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

He stole 1.75m over 10 years. If you're gonna go all Helen Lovejoy, lets stick to the facts.

I never said he didnt, he got caught in 2016 which is when it all came out. And it doesnt negate the fact it happened nor does it support your argument that the paltry 1% tax on gambling comes anywhere near covering the cost to society. 50 million a year in taxation is nothing when you have 40,000 gambling addicts in the country flittering away all the money they can lay their hands on. The 1% rate is a joke, it should be what it was for decades before McCreevy got his hands on it, 10% is a fair rate, 1% is a pisstake of PAYE workers who are nailed to the wall paying 52% taxation and are effectively subsidising the gambling industry. All whilst the likes of Paddy Power report hundreds of millions in profits. It is corporate welfare plain and simple and its about time it got called out.

happywithlife · 03-08-2018 09:24PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

40k is a drop in the ocean. And you are the one that brought economics into it be claiming they were taxed at 1%, but the cost was higher. In Ireland gambling is a billion euro business. 1% tax is plenty. Can't handle yourself, tough.

??? Eh no I didn't

GoneHome · 03-08-2018 10:44PM

I spent a few days at the races earlier this week, my betting would be small - €5 double, €2.50 each way, a €7.50 lucky 15, that kind of money, after my four days racing I came out with €220 profit which today I lodged into my Credit Union account to put towards a nice holiday later in the year. I would generally do a few bets every weekend mainly on the horses but a few GAA or soccer bets at times, never gambling more than €20/€30 over the whole weekend. Most weekends I would at the very least break even, any profit I make even if it's only €10 goes into the Credit Union account.

Gambling for me is an enjoyable pass time, a great day out at the races meeting up with people I might not have seen all year or sitting in front of the tv on a cold Winter's day watching the racing for a couple of hours. I know plenty of people who would laugh at my betting regime but they are the fools who are losing €100s when they don't even have it in the first place to lose. At the end of the day it comes down to personal responsibility. It is like the way the drinks industry in this country has been regulated to the hilt (closing off licences at 10 pm, talk of minimum unit pricing, etc) just because a small minority can't control their drinking, the gambling industry is going the same way with these talks of increased taxes. The majority being punished because a small minority can't take personal responsibility for their actions.

Working class heroes · 03-08-2018 11:54PM

GoneHome wrote: »

I spent a few days at the races earlier this week, my betting would be small - €5 double, €2.50 each way, a €7.50 lucky 15, that kind of money, after my four days racing I came out with €220 profit which today I lodged into my Credit Union account to put towards a nice holiday later in the year. I would generally do a few bets every weekend mainly on the horses but a few GAA or soccer bets at times, never gambling more than €20/€30 over the whole weekend. Most weekends I would at the very least break even, any profit I make even if it's only €10 goes into the Credit Union account.

Gambling for me is an enjoyable pass time, a great day out at the races meeting up with people I might not have seen all year or sitting in front of the tv on a cold Winter's day watching the racing for a couple of hours. I know plenty of people who would laugh at my betting regime but they are the fools who are losing €100s when they don't even have it in the first place to lose. At the end of the day it comes down to personal responsibility. It is like the way the drinks industry in this country has been regulated to the hilt (closing off licences at 10 pm, talk of minimum unit pricing, etc) just because a small minority can't control their drinking, the gambling industry is going the same way with these talks of increased taxes. The majority being punished because a small minority can't take personal responsibility for their actions.

Yes Paddy.

ArmaniJeanss · 04-08-2018 12:29AM

Muahahaha wrote: »

I never said he didnt, he got caught in 2016 which is when it all came out. And it doesnt negate the fact it happened nor does it support your argument that the paltry 1% tax on gambling comes anywhere near covering the cost to society. 50 million a year in taxation is nothing when you have 40,000 gambling addicts in the country flittering away all the money they can lay their hands on. The 1% rate is a joke, it should be what it was for decades before McCreevy got his hands on it, 10% is a fair rate, 1% is a pisstake of PAYE workers who are nailed to the wall paying 52% taxation and are effectively subsidising the gambling industry. All whilst the likes of Paddy Power report hundreds of millions in profits. It is corporate welfare plain and simple and its about time it got called out.

It's more than 1% because of the turnover effect which doesn't apply to consumable items like say drink or food.
e.g., tomorrow morning I'll go into the bookies with €100 and do some bets on the early greyhounds and pay 1% so €1 in tax. Some of my bets will win and I might get €90 back, which I'll spend on the afternoon horses (anther 90c tax). I'll get a winner which bumps me up to €200 and I'll do a few more horse bets (€2 tax). They'll be mostly losers but I'll be left with €60 by 5clock which I'll stick on a football match (60c tax).
So I'm still turning over the original €100 I went in with but have paid €4.50 in tax. If my final soccer bet wins I'll rinse and repeat on Sunday still paying tax on my original €100 weekly betting bank.

Now I'm not actually that degenerate and likely won't even be in the bookies tomorrow, but it serves as an example of how the tax builds up for the punters who will do the above tomorrow.

Some other points re the 10% you suggested.
It was just about plausible pre-internet, not really a runner nowadays with online access to perfectly legal lower-taxed betting in the EU.
Also its arguable whether the tax was ever truly 10%. Yes, the 25p e/w punter did indeed get charged an extra 5p on their stake, but the £100 punter was generally not paying £10 tax in their local independent bookie - the system was hand over £100 but mark £10 and your initials on the docket and pay just £1 in tax, the bookie would know who you were and that it was a £100 bet. Or alternatively go into the local pub and bet with an unlicensed but reliable 'part-timer'. Every decent boozer had one. No tax at all there.
Over the years the various government realised it was better to get 1% of absolutely everything rather than 10% from the small amount of punters who wouldn't be savvy enough to go online or to find a tax free alternative.

I'm Paddy Power obviously.

GoneHome · 04-08-2018 12:40PM

[QUOTE Yes Paddy.[/QUOTE]

There's no need to be like that, I was only giving you my experience to illustrate that everyone who likes a bet is not spending thousands, the vast majority of gamblers do it the way I've outlined purely for the enjoyment of it, we're not all gambling addicts stealing millions from our employers to fed our habit :rolleyes:

weldoninhio · 05-08-2018 10:52AM

Muahahaha wrote: »

I never said he didnt, he got caught in 2016 which is when it all came out. And it doesnt negate the fact it happened nor does it support your argument that the paltry 1% tax on gambling comes anywhere near covering the cost to society. 50 million a year in taxation is nothing when you have 40,000 gambling addicts in the country flittering away all the money they can lay their hands on. The 1% rate is a joke, it should be what it was for decades before McCreevy got his hands on it, 10% is a fair rate, 1% is a pisstake of PAYE workers who are nailed to the wall paying 52% taxation and are effectively subsidising the gambling industry. All whilst the likes of Paddy Power report hundreds of millions in profits. It is corporate welfare plain and simple and its about time it got called out.

“in 2016 a single gambling addict alone stole 1.75m from his employer (An Post) and gambled the lot away with Paddy Power”

You did.

Also just because there are 40k addicts, it doesn’t mean all of them are stealing millions. You misrepresented the facts and were called out on it. Get over it.

06-08-2018 02:33PM

I saw this ad for Ladbrokes the other day.

Jay from The Inbetwneers lands in a space suit or jet pack or something infornt of a group of people, mainly males 20ish, and starts talking about great football comeing up and great odds for such and such from Ladbrokes.

Now one thing that struck me about it.

What demographic are interested in space suits or jet packs?
7 to 12 year old kids, boys mainly, I reckon.

And what demographic are interested in football ?
7 to 107 year olds, boys mainly I reckon.

That's the link, get the kids interested early, link the jetpack to the football to the betting.

You'll have them for life.

Muahahaha · 07-08-2018 03:16AM

weldoninhio wrote: »

“in 2016 a single gambling addict alone stole 1.75m from his employer (An Post) and gambled the lot away with Paddy Power”

You did.

Also just because there are 40k addicts, it doesn’t mean all of them are stealing millions. You misrepresented the facts and were called out on it. Get over it.

Ah here weldonninho the point just went completely whoosh over your head. If one gambler can lose 1.75m then how do you think that 40,000 of them would come anywhere near covering the paltry 50m year it takes in taxation ? That was the point, you just failed to get it.

Plus youre the poster who was trying to act like Billy Big Balls on the Mayweather thread offering 500-1 odds for anyone willing to back McGregor. When I offered to take you up on the bet you completely chickened out. Bit rich of you now to be coming on here trying to down play the extent of gambling addictions in Ireland when you yourself were throwing ridiculous odds of 500-1 in a two horse race :rolleyes:

weldoninhio · 07-08-2018 08:31AM

Muahahaha wrote: »

Ah here weldonninho the point just went completely whoosh over your head. If one gambler can lose 1.75m then how do you think that 40,000 of them would come anywhere near covering the paltry 50m year it takes in taxation ? That was the point, you just failed to get it.

Plus youre the poster who was trying to act like Billy Big Balls on the Mayweather thread offering 500-1 odds for anyone willing to back McGregor. When I offered to take you up on the bet you completely chickened out. Bit rich of you now to be coming on here trying to down play the extent of gambling addictions in Ireland when you yourself were throwing ridiculous odds of 500-1 in a two horse race :rolleyes:

I offered to take the bet. You wanted the money (that you wouldn’t have won) up front. I was right then, and I’m right now. You knew you were going to lose, so rather than back up your assertion that you wanted to get you fudged the issue. I offered 500/1 you said you’d take it, then tried to move the goalposts.

You can backtrack and deflect all you want but you said he lost €1.75m “in 2016 ALONE”. Not every gambling addict is a thief. Not every gambling addict is making huge bets. I’m willing to bet (pun intended) that the vast majority of problem gamblers spend €5 to €10 a bet.

07-08-2018 08:35AM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Have you never heard of the devestating effects gambling can have on the addict and their families either?

Not all gamblers have a problem just like not all drinkers are alcoholics.

weldoninhio · 07-08-2018 08:36AM

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I saw this ad for Ladbrokes the other day.

Jay from The Inbetwneers lands in a space suit or jet pack or something infornt of a group of people, mainly males 20ish, and starts talking about great football comeing up and great odds for such and such from Ladbrokes.

Now one thing that struck me about it.

What demographic are interested in space suits or jet packs?
7 to 12 year old kids, boys mainly, I reckon.

And what demographic are interested in football ?
7 to 107 year olds, boys mainly I reckon.

That's the link, get the kids interested early, link the jetpack to the football to the betting.

You'll have them for life.

Very solid scientific reasoning there, I reckon.

:rollseyes:

07-08-2018 08:37AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Not all gamblers have a problem just like not all drinkers are alcoholics.

I don't think anyone is suggesting they are.

It's just that gambling addictive, very easy to access and problem gambling is bexomeing a major problem in modern society, espically with you males.

Gambling is the only addiction that you end up doing more of to try and help yourself.

07-08-2018 08:39AM

weldoninhio wrote: »

Very solid scientific reasoning there, I reckon.

:rollseyes:

I'll find links and sources later.

Look at the history of advertising in the smoking industry, very similar.

Link
Regulators have launched a crackdown on child gambling by demanding online gambling sites remove “unacceptable” adverts featuring cartoon characters likely to appeal to children.

Muahahaha · 07-08-2018 04:17PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

I offered to take the bet. You wanted the money (that you wouldn’t have won) up front. I was right then, and I’m right now. You knew you were going to lose, so rather than back up your assertion that you wanted to get you fudged the issue. I offered 500/1 you said you’d take it, then tried to move the goalposts.

Lol talk about revisionism- I can go and dig up those posts where you embarrassed yourself if you want. I was perfectly fine with taking the bet, the problem was you didnt have the money to back up your big mouth and the 500-1 odds coming out of it. You were trying to act the Billy Big Balls and me and other posters called you out on it. In fact you even got so wound that you went as far as posting up a picture of a few 50 quid notes, what was it, 1,000 euro? Sure that only goes as far as covering a 2 euro bet at 500/1 odds, who would even bother themselves with a 2 euro bet? It was at that stage I decided to lay off you because you were embarrassing yourself on a public forum and I didnt want to see you do it any further.

Fact of the matter was you have such rage and anger in you about McGregor that it led to you getting all emotional and coming out with ridiculous 500-1 odds in a two horse race. Only an idiot would give those type of odds when there are only two outcomes.

You can backtrack and deflect all you want but you said he lost €1.75m “in 2016 ALONE”

.
Yet again the point has gone whoosh over your head. Plus you misquoted me to suit your argument. About the 1.75m I said "Also in 2016 alone" in context of the government taking in a paltry 50m in gambling taxes in 2016. The point was the single year of 2016 saw 50m in gambling taxes and it ALSO saw a single gambler steal 1.75m from his employer. Which clearly backs up my argument that Govt. taxation on gambling does not come anywhere near paying for the costs to society, especially not when we have 40,000 problem gamblers.

Not every gambling addict is a thief. Not every gambling addict is making huge bets. I’m willing to bet (pun intended) that the vast majority of problem gamblers spend €5 to €10 a bet.

Are you giving out more of your crazy 500-1 odds? And do you actually have the money this time to back your mouth up? Somehow I doubt it. In any case I can point to academic research that shows problem gambler in the UK losing an average of £150,000. What academic research can you point to that backs up your claim that "vast majority of problem gamblers spend €5 to €10 a bet"? None I suspect but sure humour me anyway.

weldoninhio · 07-08-2018 05:55PM

Muahahaha wrote: »

Lol talk about revisionism- I can go and dig up those posts where you embarrassed yourself if you want. I was perfectly fine with taking the bet, the problem was you didnt have the money to back up your big mouth and the 500-1 odds coming out of it. You were trying to act the Billy Big Balls and me and other posters called you out on it. In fact you even got so wound that you went as far as posting up a picture of a few 50 quid notes, what was it, 1,000 euro? Sure that only goes as far as covering a 2 euro bet at 500/1 odds, who would even bother themselves with a 2 euro bet? It was at that stage I decided to lay off you because you were embarrassing yourself on a public forum and I didnt want to see you do it any further.

Fact of the matter was you have such rage and anger in you about McGregor that it led to you getting all emotional and coming out with ridiculous 500-1 odds in a two horse race. Only an idiot would give those type of odds when there are only two outcomes.

.

Yet again the point has gone whoosh over your head. Plus you misquoted me to suit your argument. About the 1.75m I said "Also in 2016 alone" in context of the government taking in a paltry 50m in gambling taxes. The point was the single year of 2016 saw 50m in gambling taxes and it ALSO saw a single gambler steal 1.75m from his employer.

Are you giving out more of your crazy 500-1 odds? And do you actually have the money this time to back your mouth up? Somehow I doubt it. In any case I can point to academic research that shows problem gambler in the UK losing an average of £150,000. What academic research can you point to that backs up your claim that "vast majority of problem gamblers spend €5 to €10 a bet"? None I suspect but sure humour me anyway.

As was proven during the ten rounds that Mayweather carried McGregor, there was zero risk of me losing.

Is that £150,000 over a lifetime?? Works out at £20.55 a day over 20 years. How many people spend that on 2/3 coffees and a wrap every day?? Have they a wrap/coffee problem??

Also, have no idea what academic research on UK problem gamblers will tell me about the problem in Ireland.

Muahahaha · 07-08-2018 06:52PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

As was proven during the ten rounds that Mayweather carried McGregor, there was zero risk of me losing

Course there was a risk of you losing, you just failed the assess it properly which is often a problem for people who gamble. Any boxer in a fight has a chance of a sucker punch so there is always the chance that they can win. The bookies and actuaries know this so they price the odds accordingly, this is basic probability and stats. You didnt seem to know this which is why you priced it at 500/1 in a two horse race where one guy always had a chance of a sucker punch.

Is that £150,000 over a lifetime?? Works out at £20.55 a day over 20 years. How many people spend that on 2/3 coffees and a wrap every day?? Have they a wrap/coffee problem??

Wow so now you are comparing addicted gamblers to people who drink coffee and eat wraps. So when is the last time you saw a coffee drinker in court for stealing money from their employer to feed their coffee habit? Never is the clear answer so your spurious comparison does not stand up to scrutiny. If addicted gamblers can lose £150,000 in throwing money at the bookies before it stops then its most certainly a problem for all their freinds and family around them and the lives that they destroy. Plenty of former gambling addicts have come out and admitted this, sure only last year we had GAA star Oisin McConville come out on record as having blown over £100,000 and destroy his whole family due to his addiction.

Also, have no idea what academic research on UK problem gamblers will tell me about the problem in Ireland.

Its pretty normal in academia to compare and contrast across nations. We are all humans after all, nationality doesnt come into academic research the way you seem to think it does.

Anyway I notice you dodged my question so I will ask it again -What academic research can you point to that backs up your claim that the "vast majority of problem gamblers spend €5 to €10 a bet".

07-08-2018 07:45PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

As was proven during the ten rounds that Mayweather carried McGregor, there was zero risk of me losing.

Is that £150,000 over a lifetime?? Works out at £20.55 a day over 20 years. How many people spend that on 2/3 coffees and a wrap every day?? Have they a wrap/coffee problem??

Also, have no idea what academic research on UK problem gamblers will tell me about the problem in Ireland.

Some problem gamblers are not even 20 years old.

Dravokivich · 07-08-2018 08:09PM

If we don't want them to advertise, we should just ban it. Otherwise it's just bollox. Kids don't get into it because of the adverts. The amount of pubs that lead into bookies. Kids spending all day in pubs. seeing their folks or folks friends go in and out from pub to bookies for bets. Odd stretch out to the newsagents for ciggarettes.

You think blocking adverts is the answer?

weldoninhio · 07-08-2018 09:36PM

Dravokivich wrote: »

If we don't want them to advertise, we should just ban it. Otherwise it's just bollox. Kids don't get into it because of the adverts. The amount of pubs that lead into bookies. Kids spending all day in pubs. seeing their folks or folks friends go in and out from pub to bookies for bets. Odd stretch out to the newsagents for ciggarettes.

You think blocking adverts is the answer?

They know it’s not the answer, but the Mrs Lovejoys of the world have to shriek about something.

Gambling Industry In The Firing Line

Comments