You have to prove that you can take the loss

[qwertyup23]

<snip..>

Although I highly appreciate the the efforts made by the government in order to address gambling addiction, they should not meddle on choices based on people's desire to gamble. If the the government regulates gambling by proving that 'you can handle such loss' then this could only be destructive in the long run. In addition, putting a soft cap of 100 euros will not help as people would circumvent and try to find a way in order to get pass through this regulation.

If the government sees gambling addiction as a major disadvantage, then creating job opportunities or providing other means of recreational activities can definitely help. Once you put this regulation, people will only be more inclined to know ways of breaking this implementation.

[peter0425]

I very much doubt that people will even want to give out information about themselves that they actually play gambling games in online casinos. In society, as a rule, there is a bias towards people who play in casinos. Therefore, in some cases, even the fact that someone will know about your online casino games will be enough for a person to stop playing in an online casino.

Government or any public or private organization should not intervene or interrupt in any activity that people are doing that may have a bad impression in the public, the general society has a bad impression on gamblers and this will discriminate them, they can just pose serious warnings but it's on the person to imposed it to himself not the government.

But sometimes Government must interfere to help the people or the addicted person because this can even effect the economy,imagine too much addict in gambling?they  are burden to the community and their family for sure.

i Support government in this kind of action and hoping each government will do the same for the goodness of their own people.

We can view this as a symptom of something else, I think, something in the mind is corrupting the mental faculties of these gamblers, losing their control over their urge to gamble and their willingness to give all they have to win and make big amounts of money. This needs to be dealt with the likes of anxiety and depression and addiction. In my opinion, this is a mental sickness and this needs mental specialists and psychologists to handle these people. Government should fund specialized sectors of the medical establishment that concentrates in combating addiction and depression.

I partly agreed but most of the time i believe that addiction comes from Desperation to become richer in easiest way,sorry to say but most of addcited gamblers are lazy people that don't want to stretch their body working instead they want easy money and this is why they fell into gambling when at first will let you win consecutively but after that?
all you got is losing and to the max that you don't even know addiction is right on your face.

[Mauser]

Although I highly appreciate the the efforts made by the government in order to address gambling addiction, they should not meddle on choices based on people's desire to gamble. If the the government regulates gambling by proving that 'you can handle such loss' then this could only be destructive in the long run. In addition, putting a soft cap of 100 euros will not help as people would circumvent and try to find a way in order to get pass through this regulation.

If the government sees gambling addiction as a major disadvantage, then creating job opportunities or providing other means of recreational activities can definitely help. Once you put this regulation, people will only be more inclined to know ways of breaking this implementation.

I agree with you that the hard cap of 100 EUR is just wrong. In my opinion it definitely makes sense to monitor loses of visitors on casinos and you find outliers, where people lose a lot of money in short time. Then there should definitely be a support system it place. But fixing loses to a pre determined number seems wrong, because different people have various amounts of money to gamble with. 100 EUR might be a lot of money for one person and only pocket change for someone else. It all depends on the risk involved.
Addicitions are a problem in every form for the government, including addicitions for acohol, drugs or gambling. It ruins peoples lifes. The economic costs down the road for such addictions are much higher.

[Ucy]

Addiction of the gamblers isn't tolerable especially if they are always doing it. The government can't do anything to but to do things like this that can help these addicted gamblers lessen their addiction into it.

I'm thinking too if the regulation that the government will put into these gambling casinos will affect the tax that they are paying or not. Hmmmmmm but anyway this will be a great help for the gamblers but I doubt that all of them will agree with this move.

It seems to me that ordinary players who do not have an addiction and like to sometimes spend time playing, will suffer from such restrictions. A dependent person will always find ways to circumvent the restrictions and continue playing as much as they want. Forbidden fruit is sweet.

If that person could prove that losing some money would not be an issue and can easily manage after that as well then should not be worry. But for those who are form hand to mouth situation then yes those people will have some tough time as this is government decision and can be seen form both the sides.

As a rule, government decisions may not be ideal for everyone. Because people are different and gambling addiction is different for everyone. Therefore, they cannot meet the interests of absolutely everyone. Someone will be harmed in their own interests and, as is usually the case, most likely ordinary players who do not have problems with gambling addiction will suffer.

I think the governments can make such rules/law "fair & just", by simply focusing on players who bet what they can't afford to lose. That includes both the wealthy and regular people/bettors. Both take big risk with their funds, so I don't see why one would be excluded from it.
This is why it's good to do these things via consensus, so one side does not dominate the other with unjust laws/rules. Besides, thorough and transparent research should've been conducted to help them base their final decision on fact/truth, and not what they think/want/feel.

[Betwrong]

~

Also, it is a common misconception that casino wants to take all your money. What casino really wants is to have a lot of players and earn from the house edge. It doesn't care about whether a particular player winning or losing.

That's the common line of the losers, they can't accept that casinos are winning and they are losing.
With house edge, they can win most of the time, but they'll never win all the time, but if you are gambling with a house edge, it's expected that you'll lose in the long run as you don't have the edge, it's pretty simple, so I hope they'll understand that before gambling.

I'm not sure I understand what are you trying to say. If it is expected that you'll lose in the long run(and by the "long run" we mean millions of games played, right?), you shouldn't gamble at all? Is that what you are saying?

I personally think that it would be more right to say that it is expected that casino will win in the long run, but it's not necessarily that casino will beat you in particular.

[AicecreaME]

~

Also, it is a common misconception that casino wants to take all your money. What casino really wants is to have a lot of players and earn from the house edge. It doesn't care about whether a particular player winning or losing.

That's the common line of the losers, they can't accept that casinos are winning and they are losing.
With house edge, they can win most of the time, but they'll never win all the time, but if you are gambling with a house edge, it's expected that you'll lose in the long run as you don't have the edge, it's pretty simple, so I hope they'll understand that before gambling.

I'm not sure I understand what are you trying to say. If it is expected that you'll lose in the long run(and by the "long run" we mean millions of games played, right?), you shouldn't gamble at all? Is that what you are saying?

I personally think that it would be more right to say that it is expected that casino will win in the long run, but it's not necessarily that casino will beat you in particular.

Most likely they were saying is that Gambling is a selfish business that all they care is about the money of players, which is normal because that is why it's called "business". However, those players who are always losing concluded that gambling sites or casinos will never let you win but will going to take all your money, which again is normal.

Casinos or gambling sites works that way because that's how they make bankroll every single day. Gambling sites never force anyone to play, therefore gamblers are the one who is responsible for their actions, whether they win or not.

[South Park]

...most likely ordinary players who do not have problems with gambling addiction will suffer.

I agree, especially those people that can take those losses ten or even maybe a hundred times the set cap by this regulation. I don't think they will be willing to face an ombudsman just to prove that they can take a loss since that might affect their persona negatively knowing that they are gambling like that and in that huge amount.

This is a law that does not benefit anyone and at the same time it affects the majority of gamblers that have their gambling under their control but that now need to follow this dumb regulation, and if you really think about it you will realize that the law is completely pointless because those that are addicted to gambling and that are losing huge amounts of money in it will find another way to gamble or they will find another way to lose their money and at the end they will end up in the same situation as before.

[Pamadar]

...most likely ordinary players who do not have problems with gambling addiction will suffer.

I agree, especially those people that can take those losses ten or even maybe a hundred times the set cap by this regulation. I don't think they will be willing to face an ombudsman just to prove that they can take a loss since that might affect their persona negatively knowing that they are gambling like that and in that huge amount.

This is a law that does not benefit anyone and at the same time it affects the majority of gamblers that have their gambling under their control but that now need to follow this dumb regulation, and if you really think about it you will realize that the law is completely pointless because those that are addicted to gambling and that are losing huge amounts of money in it will find another way to gamble or they will find another way to lose their money and at the end they will end up in the same situation as before.

Most of us have that same sentiments, it's not going to benefits those gamblers who know how to take their losses, the approval of this rules will really affects those gambling sites who are legally facilitated, while gamblers will choose to find other ways to hide their activities.

It wont help either way, as while helping gambling addicts you also removing gamblers from playing inside legit casino house.

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

~

Also, it is a common misconception that casino wants to take all your money. What casino really wants is to have a lot of players and earn from the house edge. It doesn't care about whether a particular player winning or losing.

That's the common line of the losers, they can't accept that casinos are winning and they are losing.
With house edge, they can win most of the time, but they'll never win all the time, but if you are gambling with a house edge, it's expected that you'll lose in the long run as you don't have the edge, it's pretty simple, so I hope they'll understand that before gambling.

I'm not sure I understand what are you trying to say. If it is expected that you'll lose in the long run(and by the "long run" we mean millions of games played, right?), you shouldn't gamble at all? Is that what you are saying?

I personally think that it would be more right to say that it is expected that casino will win in the long run, but it's not necessarily that casino will beat you in particular.

Most likely they were saying is that Gambling is a selfish business that all they care is about the money of players, which is normal because that is why it's called "business". However, those players who are always losing concluded that gambling sites or casinos will never let you win but will going to take all your money, which again is normal.

Casinos or gambling sites works that way because that's how they make bankroll every single day. Gambling sites never force anyone to play, therefore gamblers are the one who is responsible for their actions, whether they win or not.

Indeed. It is the reason why casino owners earn money in their gambling business that they take all away the money of every gamblers losses, which is definitely normal. So gamblers are really the one's who is responsible for their action because it is their choice to risk all of their money. It is why if you want to enjoy gambling, even you experiences losses you should only overcome greed.

[blckhawk]

I very much doubt that people will even want to give out information about themselves that they actually play gambling games in online casinos. In society, as a rule, there is a bias towards people who play in casinos. Therefore, in some cases, even the fact that someone will know about your online casino games will be enough for a person to stop playing in an online casino.

Government or any public or private organization should not intervene or interrupt in any activity that people are doing that may have a bad impression in the public, the general society has a bad impression on gamblers and this will discriminate them, they can just pose serious warnings but it's on the person to imposed it to himself not the government.

Some part of it I agreed. The problem here is not those who run casinos but the gamblers who are greed. Casinos are just being how are they supposed to be, such as earn profit from players and entertaining them at the same time. While on the other side, players can play along with it but few of them are getting indulge in pleasure and being greedy. In fact, the government receives a great kickback out of it and that was the tax. Hence, they have no much reason for them to intervene.
However, this could also be have an impact on the country in the way that, people are getting lazy and unemployed thus make give more effort for them to support their people.

[johhnyUA]

The casino will always have a way to take everything from the idiots who don't realize that because the casino will tempt them to play gambling more and more.

Just in one case it will be harder to do than in another. It's enough hard to get everything from a man if he can lose only 100 euro per week (or month) 

Also, it is a common misconception that casino wants to take all your money. What casino really wants is to have a lot of players and earn from the house edge. It doesn't care about whether a particular player winning or losing.

It's like an ideal engine and real engine, i think. Casino does not care about how their customer wealth and where they get money. This is questions out of this business. (the same as barista doesn't interested where you've took money for his coffee). Casino just want to make you spend your money as many as you can (the same as barista want's you to buy his drink. And it would better if you buy more expensive). And yeah, of course in both cases they trying to make client come back again.

But the difference is that in barista case, you change your money for his coffee. Trading. Product or service for money. And casino is just spending money into the hole (if we are talking about "pure" casino games - dice, slots, roulette) 

[STT]

Learning to take a loss is a secret to success in trading also, not surprised it would be a dynamic to gambling since they are so similar in requiring some discipline under pressure.

casino really wants is to have a lot of players

Revenue is the key to many businesses.   Its hard to keep high margins vs competition but economies of scale benefit a high flow of customers vs standing costs so that the greater the number of people even with a low percentage margin it becomes a more profitable business because online serving scales so well.

[finaleshot2016]

Learning to take a loss is a secret to success in trading also, not surprised it would be a dynamic to gambling since they are so similar in requiring some discipline under pressure.

casino really wants is to have a lot of players

Revenue is the key to many businesses.   Its hard to keep high margins vs competition but economies of scale benefit a high flow of customers vs standing costs so that the greater the number of people even with a low percentage margin it becomes a more profitable business because online serving scales so well.

Actually, it's a general value that should apply to ourselves that accepting defeat on every situation we are facing is a must to grow ourselves and learn from our mistakes. This is a fact that will help you to attain your goals in life.

That's why I really support devs who really spent their time on searching the platforms' flaws to attain more users in their business. The more users they have, the more revenue will come to their business, this is a business mindset that most businessmen are applying also in life.

[Mauser]

Actually, it's a general value that should apply to ourselves that accepting defeat on every situation we are facing is a must to grow ourselves and learn from our mistakes. This is a fact that will help you to attain your goals in life.

That's why I really support devs who really spent their time on searching the platforms' flaws to attain more users in their business. The more users they have, the more revenue will come to their business, this is a business mindset that most businessmen are applying also in life.

The problem comes into place once you get hooked on gambling. Only a fraction of player have problems with addicitions but it can definitely happen. And once you are addicited to gambling it's very hard to stop. Checking if someone can take a big loss could also help to prevent addicits from losing everything in a casino. I agree that most people can handle their emotions and are stable in life. For them it's just another form of regulations that is probably unnecessary. But for a few unlucky people it could really make a difference.

Having a businessmen mindset is great because you think in terms of risk and reward. This definitely helps in gambling and investing.

[Betwrong]

~
Casinos or gambling sites works that way because that's how they make bankroll every single day. Gambling sites never force anyone to play, therefore gamblers are the one who is responsible for their actions, whether they win or not.

In purely luck-based games the outcome is independent of your actions. The only thing it depends on is luck. You can save your money by not playing at all, but, as they say, "you won't win a lottery if you don't have a ticket".

~

Also, it is a common misconception that casino wants to take all your money. What casino really wants is to have a lot of players and earn from the house edge. It doesn't care about whether a particular player winning or losing.

It's like an ideal engine and real engine, i think. Casino does not care about how their customer wealth and where they get money. This is questions out of this business. (the same as barista doesn't interested where you've took money for his coffee). Casino just want to make you spend your money as many as you can (the same as barista want's you to buy his drink. And it would better if you buy more expensive). And yeah, of course in both cases they trying to make client come back again.

But the difference is that in barista case, you change your money for his coffee. Trading. Product or service for money. And casino is just spending money into the hole (if we are talking about "pure" casino games - dice, slots, roulette) 

But not all gamblers' money are going "into the hole". Even in games with huge house edge, like 5%, 95% is returned to player. Not to a particular player, but to all players combined. It breaks down like this. If $1 million is wagered, $50,000(5%) is taken by casino, and $950,000 is won by players. Now, since less is returned than what was staked, surely some gamblers will find themselves in a loss, but a big win by some others is not ruled out. That's why so many people keep playing luck-based games, like dice, slots, roulette etc. - some of them win big.

[finaleshot2016]

Actually, it's a general value that should apply to ourselves that accepting defeat on every situation we are facing is a must to grow ourselves and learn from our mistakes. This is a fact that will help you to attain your goals in life.

That's why I really support devs who really spent their time on searching the platforms' flaws to attain more users in their business. The more users they have, the more revenue will come to their business, this is a business mindset that most businessmen are applying also in life.

The problem comes into place once you get hooked on gambling. Only a fraction of player have problems with addicitions but it can definitely happen. And once you are addicited to gambling it's very hard to stop. Checking if someone can take a big loss could also help to prevent addicits from losing everything in a casino. I agree that most people can handle their emotions and are stable in life. For them it's just another form of regulations that is probably unnecessary. But for a few unlucky people it could really make a difference.

Having a businessmen mindset is great because you think in terms of risk and reward. This definitely helps in gambling and investing.

Gambling addiction is a hard case for an individual, you also need a long term solution to this for a full recovery. Some people don't know that they're already addicted to gambling and they thought that it's still normal.

This means that gambling addiction is a critical condition and should be avoided, emotions must not apply when playing gambling because it will just ruin and can cause a losing streak.

[jrrsparkles]

I very much doubt that people will even want to give out information about themselves that they actually play gambling games in online casinos. In society, as a rule, there is a bias towards people who play in casinos. Therefore, in some cases, even the fact that someone will know about your online casino games will be enough for a person to stop playing in an online casino.

Government or any public or private organization should not intervene or interrupt in any activity that people are doing that may have a bad impression in the public, the general society has a bad impression on gamblers and this will discriminate them, they can just pose serious warnings but it's on the person to imposed it to himself not the government.

Its government right to regulate anything inside their land, even in democracy you can't ask questions if it has been made a law.And not much people going to consider themselves as gambler community,they will just move to online gambling where there is no restriction and no documentation.

[johhnyUA]

they will just move to online gambling where there is no restriction and no documentation.

No restriction at the moment  This will be not easy to do, but as we see trough few topics in this section, government starting to make regulations even about online casinos. 100 euro per week and no more 

Maybe only dex and ethereum casinos can stand up against that.

[Twinkledoe]

I don't care as long as I won in the end

That is the main goal of gamblers. But how can you tell if your winnings are already enough and that's enough for you? How do you define "in the end" here?

they will just move to online gambling where there is no restriction and no documentation.

No restriction at the moment  This will be not easy to do, but as we see trough few topics in this section, government starting to make regulations even about online casinos. 100 euro per week and no more 

Maybe only dex and ethereum casinos can stand up against that.

But that will be a long way to go. Right now, gamblers can enjoy playing  on these reputable casinos that are not requiring KYC at the moment.

[Hippocrypto]

There's no need to prove as long as you're learning from that mistakes everytime you fail in gambling. However every single instance would bring more chances of winning, so it doesn't matter to me as long as I'll win those potential bets I had.
Those betting games that has no assurance will bring proof once I begun to take courage with my funds risked, just for expectations of lucky winning profit.