the other side of banning gambling

[Z-tight]

why is it that the authorities often do not consider or acknowledge gambling as a real or legitimate profitable industry that drives the economy and helps thousands of people in their livelihood?

The government isn't directly trying to shut down gambling operation, they are trying to raise revenue through increasing taxation in the gambling industry. According to them:

such an increase could raise £3.2bn.

However, gambling operators are worried, such a jump in tax could eat up their revenue and profit and force them to shut down. So that is the thing here, government need to ensure that such hike in taxes would be sustainable for gambling operators, because if many of them are forced to shut down, that means job losses in thousands and it becomes counterproductive.

[bhadz]

why is it that the authorities often do not consider or acknowledge gambling as a real or legitimate profitable industry that drives the economy and helps thousands of people in their livelihood?

Because they know that it's a vice for most of their citizens. While they are aware that there's a real industry in gambling and that makes the government earn a lot from the taxation the get from there. Concerned governments are there to protect their people and not to push them into gambling. That's why some countries have strict rules about gambling and they're not allowing their citizens to be a part of it but only the tourists and visitors that come and go to their countries.

[leonair]

why is it that the authorities often do not consider or acknowledge gambling as a real or legitimate profitable industry that drives the economy and helps thousands of people in their livelihood?

Double standards as always. They hate it due to the healthy of society, but they welcome the tax from gambling. I know gambling is bad, but killing thousands of people by increasing the tax a lot is also bad too.

The answer to gambling money is that it puts gamblers in great danger because they lose the amount they can gain from gambling later by gambling again. The government will never take a share of the losses but will deduct taxes from the profits. In some countries, taxes are also demanded on wagering. Gambling is basically a place of entertainment, but many people now use it as a source of income and most gamblers think that they can get rich very quickly from here, due to which many sell their valuable assets and deposit them here, which eventually destroys them completely.

[Solosanz]

@OP didn't you read the article you posted?

The UK didn't ban gambling, they just increase the taxes, it doesn't make gambling become illegal. Even the owner choose to close their casinos due to high taxes, gambling is still legal too.

Anyway the high taxes should still able to make the casinos survive because people who have a lot money seek for entertainment. The number of betting shops might not as high as 1,300, but the big betting shops will survive.

[coin-investor]

when lawmakers discuss about anything with regards to gambling or casinos, they usually focus on its effects on gamblers so they always reason that it is always valid to ban gambling or discourage it because it will make gambling less prevalent in their countries but what the lawmakers do not take into consideration is that behind these casinos are also normal citizens who are trying to make money by building businesses or working

why is it that the authorities often do not consider or acknowledge gambling as a real or legitimate profitable industry that drives the economy and helps thousands of people in their livelihood?

Because this is an industry where there is a risk of addiction, and it's the government's job to protect its people, and they are torn between protecting their people and the industry that provides jobs and income for the government, and sometimes the will of the citizen prevails, resulting in the banning of casinos.

The authorities acknowledge their contribution to their coffer, but they have to apply a different perspective or adjust their guidelines because they protect their people more than their income.

[HONDACD125]

Even though I'm not in favour of excessive or addictive gambling, I would say that it's not the fault of casinos or gambling houses if people lose money that they shouldn't be losing. If you have some money that you are not supposed to use for gambling, you shouldn't use it for gambling, you have a brain and the ability to think and understand, but if you fail in utilizing those abilities and do what's not right, you can't blame something else for your mistakes, and lawmakers need to understand this thing.

Banning gambling might reduce this, but it also reduces the taxes generated through gambling that goes to government treasury, it will, as you said, remove a lot of jobs from the market that could help the citizens make money and have job opportunities, and, it will force the gambling houses and their owners to move their businesses elsewhere, somewhere where they are welcomed, and aren't threatened for running a business only because the customers aren't able to hold their horses and spend recklessly. You can't blame a business for that.

[uneng]

why is it that the authorities often do not consider or acknowledge gambling as a real or legitimate profitable industry that drives the economy and helps thousands of people in their livelihood?

They know the pros and cons, and after all the only thing they want is a big slice of the cake for themselves through taxation. If casinos are willing to pay heavy taxes to the government, the government is fine in allowing the industry to operate inside the country. Everything else you hear is bullshit and propaganda. Even countries which have been hostile towards gambling in the past are already changing their concept nowadays by allowing sports betting platforms to operate on their territories.

The fact the industry employees thousands of people is a secondary factor which governments aren't really concerned about. It's important to highlight the most important aspect for them is how much they are making by allowing gambling to exist legally.

[BitMaxz]

but the government will always stand for what profits them the most.. get that straight into your head before anything else.
Secondly, disrupting these casinos is like leaving 46,000 people homeless and hopeless, minus over 6000 extra casino owners, but that doesn't even ring a bell to them.

Based on the article, that's what they see as the best solution to decrease the number of people who gamble.
Instead of banning casinos due to aftereffects, they decided to increase the tax instead because if they banned casinos, it would lead to more people using illegal betting websites.
That's why the government chooses profit over totally closing those betting shops.

I believe the aftereffect of increasing taxes is the expensive bets.
I don't know if the casino owner will suffer, but my guess is they are going to make bets more expensive.
I'm sure others won't agree with me, but for me, all these tax hikes do is make it more expensive for me to have a bit of fun.

Even this is the solution it could still lead other gamblers to switch to unlicensed casino where there’s no protection at all.

[o48o]

when lawmakers discuss about anything with regards to gambling or casinos, they usually focus on its effects on gamblers so they always reason that it is always valid to ban gambling or discourage it because it will make gambling less prevalent in their countries but what the lawmakers do not take into consideration is that behind these casinos are also normal citizens who are trying to make money by building businesses or working
-cut-

Of course they take that to account. If we start from a narrative that they want to protect people then it's the most vulnerable people that they are making laws for.
But it's not only because of pure thoughtfulness. Negative effects costs ton of money indirectly to governments.

Just like other rules. Seatbelt has to be on, because some people aren't responsible adults. And when they hurt themselves, it will hurt their families and will cost more to society to treat them. There are ton of consumer protection laws to protect most gullible people, and even if you aren't one of them, your grandmother might be a victim. Or anyone else who is gullible.

[Fiatless]

The government isn't directly trying to shut down gambling operation, they are trying to raise revenue through increasing taxation in the gambling industry. According to them:

such an increase could raise £3.2bn.

However, gambling operators are worried, such a jump in tax could eat up their revenue and profit and force them to shut down. So that is the thing here, government need to ensure that such hike in taxes would be sustainable for gambling operators, because if many of them are forced to short down, that means job losses in thousands and it becomes counterproductive.

They are targeting how to raise funds through taxes without considering the negative impact it would have on the gambling industry. If these gambling firms end up shutting down many client might decide to seek alternative. Some of them might end up using unregistered casino which  would make the government to lose revenue.


About 655,000 young people between the ages of 16 to 24 were unemployed in June to August 2025. The number is 61,000 more than in 2024. The government simply want to add to the number of jobless people in the UK if this tax laws is enforced.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn02797/

[boyptc]

@OP didn't you read the article you posted?

The UK didn't ban gambling, they just increase the taxes, it doesn't make gambling become illegal. Even the owner choose to close their casinos due to high taxes, gambling is still legal too.

Anyway the high taxes should still able to make the casinos survive because people who have a lot money seek for entertainment. The number of betting shops might not as high as 1,300, but the big betting shops will survive.

And they're always targeting those who are rich that doesn't know what to do with their money and so, they find the entertainment that's expensive to them.

With the high taxation that the UK government did, it's possible for the other countries to happen as well.

If they're not going to ban gambling into their public places, then they'll have to increase the taxes too.

[JeffBrad12]

@OP didn't you read the article you posted?

The UK didn't ban gambling, they just increase the taxes, it doesn't make gambling become illegal. Even the owner choose to close their casinos due to high taxes, gambling is still legal too.

Anyway the high taxes should still able to make the casinos survive because people who have a lot money seek for entertainment. The number of betting shops might not as high as 1,300, but the big betting shops will survive.

Increasing the tax is not making gambling become illegal, but it's killing gambling industry. So what's the difference here?
Don't you aware if they do it, it's the same like they try to make betting shop go away without forced them to go. It's a soft killing the gambling industry.

I know if they UK gov raise the tax like 50% or more, the gambling industry can still be in profit. However, they will hard to survive.
I'd rather nationalise the gambling instead of impose non sense tax that can kill them.

[Porfirii]

-snip-

why is it that the authorities often do not consider or acknowledge gambling as a real or legitimate profitable industry that drives the economy and helps thousands of people in their livelihood?

It is hard to find activities that are totally black or white and gambling is not an exception. Some people ruin their lives because of an addiction or risking too much, while others make a living and that of their families thanks to being employed in the industry.

About lawmakers banning it, I think it is more of a cultural issue, and I don't expect Europe or UK to do it anytime soon.

[aioc]

why is it that the authorities often do not consider or acknowledge gambling as a real or legitimate profitable industry that drives the economy and helps thousands of people in their livelihood?

First and foremost, things that can harm their citizen are treated differently by the government, whether it's a profitable industry or provides jobs for its people.
Government guidelines can change at any time for any risky business, and regulations on gambling can change if the government sees that it harms its people. The authorities treat gambling as a legitimate industry until there is a call for stricter measures.

[mcdouglasx]

I think politicians mostly touch on this topic to then somehow increase taxes on casinos. People have the right to decide whether they want to gamble or not. Banning casinos completely disrupts a democratic system. So what's the next step? Are we going to close pharmacies because someone might become addicted to a medication? It seems like an exaggerated move to try to ban gambling since addicted gamblers are a minority.

[r_victory]

Banning casinos, whether land-based or online, could put many people out of work. In my opinion, casinos are businesses like any other, with their own specificities, and require "special care" from regulators. Lawmakers need to assess all the risks, because if done correctly, these businesses can help boost the economy and increase revenue.

[silpersurfer]

when lawmakers discuss about anything with regards to gambling or casinos, they usually focus on its effects on gamblers so they always reason that it is always valid to ban gambling or discourage it because it will make gambling less prevalent in their countries but what the lawmakers do not take into consideration is that behind these casinos are also normal citizens who are trying to make money by building businesses or working

this is what can happen in the UK: The chancellor is considering increasing duties on sports betting from 15 to 30%, and on machine and online slots from 20 to 50%.

But Betfred chief executive Joanne Whittaker told The Sunday Times it would “lose the whole retail business” as a result.

The UK has roughly 5,900 licensed betting shops, employing 46,000 people.

why is it that the authorities often do not consider or acknowledge gambling as a real or legitimate profitable industry that drives the economy and helps thousands of people in their livelihood?

I would also like to ask the same question. Why does the government require tobacco companies to include strong warnings on their products, even though the tobacco industry clearly provides significant economic benefits—absorbing millions of workers and helping farmers make a living? They must be well conscious that the tobacco industry is indeed an enormous asset for millions of workers and farmers. It is the same case for the gambling industry because, by nature of the existence of casinos, sports betting, and online platforms, there are jobs that are created driving the local economy and contributing to the country’s tax revenue.

Nevertheless, despite the economic value attributed to the activity, one cannot deny the ugly side of gambling. It is one of the social evils comparable to the consumption of tobacco products, capable of ruining the life of one or many persons and their families. This is the reason authorities dither over it; they are more likely apprehensive, even stopping it. So it is not that they do not appreciate such economic aspects but know they have to try and realize the balancing act between industry benefits and possible social risks in society.

[EluguHcman]

when lawmakers discuss about anything with regards to gambling or casinos, they usually focus on its effects on gamblers so they always reason that it is always valid to ban gambling or discourage it because it will make gambling less prevalent in their countries but what the lawmakers do not take into consideration is that behind these casinos are also normal citizens who are trying to make money by building businesses or working

Casinos are regulated not just to keep records of players and taking taxes from casinos and players. in the norshell, they prioritize on gamblers wellbeing so as to control addictions. Maybe some countries actually don't care while focus on the making profits on taxes.

Moreover, the safety and responsibilities of the citizens are more of concerns than considering such employment with the potential of wrecking same citizens.
Whatever religion gambling has massively ravaged it citizens are more of banning land base casino or physical gambling shops to control the situations.

[Alpha Marine]

What I do not like about all these is that they want to ban it and at the same time get revenue from it in forms of taxes. Its a free world. People make their money however they see fit (legally, of course) and as long as they follow the laws and pay their taxes, they should be allowed to spend it how they see fit. All you can do is advice them on how to spend it, but you cannot force them to spend it in a particular way.

I don't like when people have a very unilateral view of life. People should be allowed to do what they want as long as its not illegal and its wrong. You cant give a people freedom and then turn around and say "no you cant do that" in a situation where they person should have a right to do it.
Like every other thing in the country, it should be regulated, but outright ban is against what "a free country" stands for.

[Kelward]

Exactly, there is a whole market surrounding casinos, gambling, etc. that must be considered.
My opinion is quite simple in these cases, and I think it is valid to have awareness campaigns about gambling, addiction, etc., but individual freedom must be preserved, and banning casinos or imposing exorbitant taxes is a mistake

On top of that, several places still benefit from casinos, such as hotels, restaurants, transportation workers, stores, etc

It saddens me to see how gambling is being labeled as something very bad because some gamblers abuse it and get addicted, responsible gamblers who engage in it for fun are not considered. The gambling industry is very big and profitable and it is a sector that employs labor, people depend on gambling jobs to survive and take care of their families. If over regulations and restrictions are in the industry it will affect more than the casinos that are targeted. Government focus should be on sensitizing their citizens about the dangers of gambling addiction and let them decide what they want to do with their money.