Is it just?

[iBaba]

Which country are you talking about? I do not believe this. If you mention the name of the country, I can make some findings about it. Or do you mean just as an instance but not what is happening in any country?

If it is the later that you mean, it is highly unfair, only people from the region that gambling is permitted should share the gambling revenue.

I don't like getting involved in religious matters because some people are extremists. They allow religion to cloud their sense of humanity. So I wouldn't mention the religion or country.. Maybe we should accept the example @Wiwo gave. At least Wiwo also gave you more examples about the regional imbalance in revenue sharing because of religious ideology.

@fiatless you actually raised an interesting point here and it is something that many people talk about in my country, even if it is not loudly on the mainstream but yes, it is also a topic of discussion over the central here but if we are to be fair, the situation is not as simple as you said it.

Let's look at it this way, Nigeria as a country currently operates a federal system where all the revenues generated from the states whether it is from oil, VAT, customs or even gambling go into a central account before being shared to every state and once that money enters into that pool, it loses its identity either as gambling money or alcohol tax it just becomes a national revenue and it is treated like that.

So even if the Northern states do not permit gambling because of religious laws in those northern states which I don't think it is entirely all states in the north because some states at least I can mention for some north central, people still gamble openly in betting shops, etc. So I don't see this as any form of hypocrisy but basically how our nation's fiscal structure works, the fiscal structure is not religious or morally operated, it is built on the federation principles.

Just imagine if each region were to start to analyze the kind of revenue they identify as morally or religiously okay or not, the system would have already collapsed by now.

[joeperry]

I'm wondering which country are you referring to OP. Anyway, I don't see any problems with that since they are only a one country and as a government you need to balance it, not because the Southern region is earning more, doesn't mean that the Northern region doesn't need to benefit it. I get your point that the money they've been using is a profit from gambling (I think mostly, not all) and it's hypocrisy to use it on their own people but government and religion is two different things and I think they government will not say that it came purely from gambling and I don't think they will ask where it came from.

So yeah, I think they know that it's not 100% came from gambling taxes and even if it is from gambling taxes there's not a thing they can do, the government will provide it to them and if they don't accept it, then they would collapse.

[SmartGold01]

This is very bad and is unjust..
I think there should be a way to stop them from receiving the financial allocation that was raised through gambling taxes because they prohibit gambling. If they are receiving allocation it is assumed that they are also gambling supporting gambling irrespective that they don't permits their people to gamble and could even lead life imprisonment. There should be proper way to regulate the allocation that is coming from gambling so that they wouldn't be a beneficiary of it. 

[Botnake]

If it’s about religious beliefs, that’s a tough one to answer.

Are the Southern and Northern zones you’re talking about following the same religion that forbids gambling? In Islam, for example, gambling is indeed prohibited.

But when money gets involved, people’s stance sometimes changes. It’s like they don’t want their own followers to gamble, but they’ll still allow others to do it. Similar to how some religions forbid eating pork, yet you’ll find people from the same faith owning stores that sell it. It really shows how beliefs can be interpreted differently depending on the situation.

[HONDACD125]

Generally, when we talk about rules in Islam, which is the most common religion that forbids gambling as it's considered Haraam (forbidden), a person who follows Islam shouldn't gamble or use the money earned from gambling and spend it on themselves or others, because the money also falls under the same rule. Now based on this, I think the money earned from gambling or gambling taxes shouldn't be used by the government where the religious beliefs don't allow gambling, but maybe there is a different ruling or something in the religion that I'm unaware of.

If we talk from an ethical point of view, I don't think it's unethical because at the end of the day, it's the same country and only different regions or states, so the money collected from the government from any part of the country is for the whole country and all the regions in it, and no matter what region a certain region follows, they have all the rights on that money because it's collected by the same government.

[Orpichukwu]

That's an unfair way of sharing revenue, since the federation already knows that a certain part of the country doesn't allow gambling, and there is also a proper record of how much is generated from gambling. It will be nice if whatever revenue they are sending to the states which forbid gambling is not from what was gotten from gambling. Those states where the revenue came from should benefit from it more.

[Rruchi man]

But during revenue sharing, the states in the Northern zone still benefit from the gambling taxes collected from the Southern region (since the revenue is collected by the Central government and shared with the states). Why would their religious beliefs command them to forbid gambling operations in their areas? But it doesn't prohibit them from collecting financial allocation realised from gambling taxes.

Is it just?

The entirety of the revenue generated by the government is not from gambling alone, and for that reason they cannot refuse revenue from the government even though they know that a percentage of it has gambling revenue in it.

That will be unwise because they have also contributed to that revenue through some other means.

[Kelward]

I don't have clarity whether northern states in Nigeria, that operates sharia law collects direct allocation of gambling taxes but it seems that they indirectly collect gambling taxes where some general allocations are shared from the federal. I also know that public consumption of alcohol is prohibited in those states and I have heard of alcoholic beverages that are destroyed in those states and people complain that the should also reject allocations from what they ban. Religious differences is a sensitive matter and I'm very careful when I discuss about it but it is totally unfair if these states that bans gambling and alcohol collects a dime of the revenue from them.

[bitcoin_mining]

I think no religion has mentioned gambling, but Islam has a direct prohibition on gambling. Just as people commit crimes and are punished for them, so too do many people gamble despite knowing that religion has strict prohibitions on gambling. Not only in African countries, but also in other countries, people are directly involved in gambling, although there are religious and legal prohibitions on gambling in those countries. In countries where gambling is a punishable crime, people in those countries keep their gambling secret because if their family or society knows about their gambling, they will not look at it well. However, in countries where there is no prohibition on gambling, people in those countries can easily discuss gambling with their family or people around them.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

A certain country has two major religions. This country can be broadly divided into the Southern and Northern zones. The religion of the people in the Southern zone permits gambling. So gambling activities are popular in this region and the government is making so much revenue through gambling taxes and licences. But the religion of the people on the Northern side forbids gambling. They have an agency that ensures strict enforcement of gambling restrictions. Gambling operations are more restricted than those of offenders, who can be imprisoned.

But during revenue sharing, the states in the Northern zone still benefit from the gambling taxes collected from the Southern region (since the revenue is collected by the Central government and shared with the states). Why would their religious beliefs command them to forbid gambling operations in their areas? But it doesn't prohibit them from collecting financial allocation realised from gambling taxes.

Is it just?

Well, it's absolutely not just at all because I presently live in this country you are talking about, it's no other country than Nigeria, and to be honest with you, it's very unfortunate that we find ourselves in this country being ruled but senseless people who are more tribalist than even those who form the tribes..

This injustice of inaccurate allocation sharing of funds realized from gambling taxes and casino licenses is not the only issue or problem we see, when we move to the oil sector, imagine that states that do not produce any oil at all still benefits more from the central or federal government when allocation of money made from oil is being shared, and sometimes I ask myself, who actually is deceiving who?
The states than ban gambling and yet gladly open their hands to receive money made from gambling taxes are only deceiving themselves.

[Pandu Geddon]

What if what is happening is actually an attempt by the central government to control the development of gambling? I don’t look at it from a religious perspective, but at how the government regulates the gambling business to operate only in certain areas.
Regarding the use of money obtained from the gambling business, the central government certainly has the right to allocate it evenly for the benefit of its people. This becomes state revenue, not the wealth of a particular region.

[HelliumZ]

Such a division can be seen on the basis of religion, where people of one region consider gambling religiously forbidden and people of another region consider gambling religiously sacred. However, if the central government wants to run the country, it has to provide benefits to both regions. Therefore, while collecting revenue from one region, it divides it equally between both regions. But I have never seen such a divided country where there are two types of laws for two regions where gambling is legal in one region and illegal in another.

[TelolettOm]

This is a bit of a dilemma. The regulation should be strict. While prohibiting gambling, it shouldn't accept compensation for said gambling. This could be called inconsistent regulation.

However, I personally can't comment more broadly because we don't know the considerations and reasons behind this policy. Every country has its own regulations, and every region has its own.

[$weetne$$]

It may want to sound unfair technically but logically you will see that revenues generated from both regions are remixed into the government as a revenue from the region, I do not think they will separate that generated from gambling from that generated from other sources, it may be indicated on their records but the funds themselves will not appeared so it will also be unfair that the money generated from the zone that prohibited gambling will be uses to fund the gambling side, except they are allowed to generate and fund themselves  I think it is only fair this way because both sites gets to benefit from each other.

[Porfirii]

It's just weird to here this kind of story. If the other side forbids gambling because of religion then for sure they are not going to accept anything for the other side because they know that it came from gambling.

-snip-

The story is weird, indeed, because I can easily think in different countries with different official religions and, therefore, different legislations towards gambling, but different regulations in a same country is difficult for me to apprehend.

Fair or not, if rules go in connection with the feeling of the majority of the population, we can say that said rules are reasonable. But whether to call it fair (or just, like the OP said) ir not is an ethical attribution I don't dare to assess.

[aylabadia05]

A certain country has two major religions. This country can be broadly divided into the Southern and Northern zones. The religion of the people in the Southern zone permits gambling. So gambling activities are popular in this region and the government is making so much revenue through gambling taxes and licences. But the religion of the people on the Northern side forbids gambling. They have an agency that ensures strict enforcement of gambling restrictions. Gambling operations are more restricted than those of offenders, who can be imprisoned.

But during revenue sharing, the states in the Northern zone still benefit from the gambling taxes collected from the Southern region (since the revenue is collected by the Central government and shared with the states). Why would their religious beliefs command them to forbid gambling operations in their areas? But it doesn't prohibit them from collecting financial allocation realised from gambling taxes.

Is it just?

I understand your intentions, even though it's just a thought you've expressed in your post. You're asking why people who believe gambling is forbidden are still willing to accept gifts derived from the proceeds of gambling.
We need to re-examine tolerance, and understanding it can enlighten our minds, as your analogy of two regions within one country points to that.
The law of tolerance, as I understand it, is one but different, or "for me, my religion, for you, your religion." This way, national life will be peaceful.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

Well, when tax is collected by government, do they have a different accounts that they put different tax that was collected from different industries or all the tax money goes into one account? Food industries, educational institutions, technology industries, petroleum industries, gambling industries, etc, when tax is being collected by all these people, government can note how much that was realized by these different industries but at the end of the day, the money goes into one account and the government decides the things to do with the money for the benefits of the country. So, every citizen of the country will definitely benefit from what ever the money was used for.

What if the northern part that doesn't permits gambling has a wide range of different resources that is generating a good revenue and paying big tax to the government, should the southern part never benefit from the tax too?

[hyudien]

Is it just?

From my lay perspective, I believe it's unfair for the northern region to still receive a share of gambling revenue from the central government, which strongly opposes gambling there. This certainly goes against their beliefs but from the perspective of the government, which is responsible for the welfare of its people, it must fairly distribute state revenues evenly across all regions. Regardless of the source of revenue, once it reaches the central government, it becomes public money.

[Davidvictorson]

But during revenue sharing, the states in the Northern zone still benefit from the gambling taxes collected from the Southern region (since the revenue is collected by the Central government and shared with the states). Why would their religious beliefs command them to forbid gambling operations in their areas? But it doesn't prohibit them from collecting financial allocation realised from gambling taxes.

This is a question that only the central government of such nation can answer. It must have something to do with balancing the resources so that one region does not seem more developed and the other one impoverish. Well, but like I said it is left for the government to answer, and maybe how it has already been structured from inception.

[Gozie51]

Is it just?

It is not fair if you look at it from legal perspective because you should not benefit from what you don't labour for but since the country is still existing as one, then proceed that is accruing to the country should be regarded and seen as the resources of the country. This is unfortunately the situation in the Nigerian lopsided system. This does not only happen in gambling but their is nepotism all over the country.

However, I have also seen some people who claim to be Muslim and are also gambling. I don't know if they should be called "modern Muslim" or what? I don't don't know. Some inhibitions from the Muslim societies are not strictly adhered to unlike years back. Like smoking, alcohol and use of drugs.