Is It Fair to Ban Gambling for Everyone Because of Addicted Gamblers?

[Satofan44]

If gambling is one of the major sources of income for a country, is banning it completely really the best solution just because some people are addicted?

This question is not the one that you posed in the title, you are asking here something else entirely. I will answer the title question first.

Is It Fair to Ban Gambling for Everyone Because of Addicted Gamblers?

Do you like Democracy, do you support the stupid democratic system? If you do, then it is fair and you have no right to complain. If you are against democracy, only then can you argue that it is unfair. Democracy is the rule by the stupid majority, and depending on you as an individual sometimes the majority will decide things that are good for you and at other times that are bad to you. All of it is fair under a democracy, you can't invent unfairness just because you do not like something.

I know gambling addiction is a serious problem, but sometimes governments go straight to the last option which is banning it totally, instead of trying other ways to reduce the addiction first. Because if they ban gambling, everyone gets affected, not only the addicted gamblers. Responsible gamblers, workers, businesses, and even government income will be affected too.

So what do you think governments should do instead of banning gambling completely?

Back to the question of a complete ban, it is basically impossible to state what would be the best solution. Anyone who argues that their supposed solution is the best is a retard that is hallucinating worse than ChatGPT. There is no known solution that has precedence to be claimed as the best solution. The better question to ask is: Is it a good solution? It absolutely is. As you can see with other activities that bring no benefit at all, such as smoking cigarettes, only gradual banning and phasing out can solve the stupid plague since most individuals can not control themselves.

Are there other good measures besides that one? Sure, but they may be more complicated and more costly to implement. So why would they try that route?

[YOSHIE]

So what do you think governments should do instead of banning gambling completely?

The local government in my country has implemented a total ban on online gambling, the reason is to prevent gambling addiction, damage morals and so on, instead of making every effort to prohibit it, what I see is that it is not effective in overcoming gambling addiction.

After the ban, hundreds of illegal gambling sites with fraudulent elements emerged, many users were trapped there, the situation was actually more complicated than expected, people were looking for other alternatives to continue betting.

For me, the government should not implement a total ban, but taking a balanced approach and also implementing strict regulations is enough for me. What's more, they pay taxes to the government, so creating a rehabilitation program for those who are addicted to gambling, in my opinion, is the best solution for the government to do.

[Hatchy]

So what do you think governments should do instead of banning gambling completely?

The truth is that gambling cannot be a major income stream. People might be able to make money from gambling, but calling it an income source doesn't align well with really thinking. People who see gambling as a source of income eventually ends up making wrong decisions because they want to make quick money. Regardless of that, the government of a country would not be willing to completely ban gambling, when they are already earning revenue from these platforms in form of taxes. They might not necessarily care more about how bad the gambling habits affects the gamblers. They will only show interest in gambling because of what they sit to benefit from casinos..

[LUCKMCFLY]

No, banning gambling solely because of addiction problems is not the right thing to do. Everyone who goes to a casino is aware of the dangers, and that's why there's a restriction that only adults can enter a casino. Everyone is responsible for their actions, and if they are adults, a business shouldn't have to sacrifice itself because of the irresponsibility of a few.

[bakasabo]

Of course that is not fair, and that will never be done. Nobody ban alcohol because some drunk people misbehave and some are addicted. Look at smoking industry. Not a single medical report show that smoking is healthy or give any benefits, however people still smoke and dont even consider quitting. Ban whole industry because some individuals cant handle themselves and control emotions, that is a total nonsense. It would be a total disaster if government ban and forbid everything that causes problems only to few people, when majority are doing good with it.

[adultcrypto]

Countries  lose a lot of money banning gambling especially if the reason is gamblig addiction. This is because the percentage of addicted gamblers is very small compared to the percentage of gamblers in the country. Instead of outright ban of gambling which is never 100% enforceable, they will gain more if the invest resources into educating their citizens against gambling addiction and the need to gamble the right way. They will even create jobs, allow lots of casinos to seek legality in the country and bring in lots of taxes.

[Gost ms]

The government can take several measures on this issue. The strongest and the first measure that needs to be taken is to enter the gambling website through their identity card, so that a minor cannot gamble and they can also stay away from gambling. The biggest reason for the increase in the number of gambling addictions is that minors become addicted to gambling.

Launch mental health centers and ensure that everyone can get high-quality services

Strongly publicize all the bad effects that are created by gambling

[L E G E N D A R Y]

The truth is that gambling cannot be a major income stream. People might be able to make money from gambling, but calling it an income source doesn't align well with really thinking. People who see gambling as a source of income eventually ends up making wrong decisions because they want to make quick money. Regardless of that, the government of a country would not be willing to completely ban gambling, when they are already earning revenue from these platforms in form of taxes. They might not necessarily care more about how bad the gambling habits affects the gamblers. They will only show interest in gambling because of what they sit to benefit from casinos..

The earlier people understand that gambling can be a source of income no matter how they tried to make it look like one, the better for them, because it can lead them in destroying their reputation and makes them to even go broke in life, as they will only be causing themselves more problems. So, its left for people to gamble in the right way because if they can expecting the government to intervene or by helping them if they ban gambling, that's their own headache, as the government won't do anything to help them, especially as they are benefiting from it, they won't want to jeopardise their own cash flow for the sake of addiction or anyone.

[asriloni]

So what do you think governments should do instead of banning gambling completely?

IMO gambling addiction should be taken personally. Banning gambling won't solve the problem because people can still access it by using VPN. When gov is banning gambling means their citizen will gamble illegally. So they can't even get tax from gambling site.

The best thing they can do is to allow gamble platform to keep operate but they also have to made gambling platform to comply with their rules. I think it's the best instead of ban gambling, then erase one of their tax source.

[robelneo]

So what do you think governments should do instead of banning gambling completely?

We had this issue a couple of years ago. The demand to totally ban gambling is very strong, but our government cannot ignore the
figures that they will lose in terms of revenues, in the end, the government prefers to keep the flow of revenue in exchange for tracking down illegal gambling and being strict on promotions and setting up a helpline for those who want help.
And so far the government is doing well, it's hard to let go of the revenues when the government badly needs it

[nimogsm]

In my country, this isn't the main source of budget revenue. Looking at the issue from this perspective, it's better to regulate rather than completely ban licensing services and collecting taxes. This is much more profitable, as players could play illegally on other platforms, and the government wouldn't profit from it. Another question is whether the government has sufficient tools to monitor and control gambling addicts and how it can help them. I haven't seen any public programs to help such players in my country.

[SOKO-DEKE]

Government banning gambling may seem like it can solve gambling addiction problems in a country or state but I don't think it will solve all the problems.but it will definitely reduce the rate of addiction.There are certain things that are prohibited by the government, yet people still do them. Take hard drugs, for example. I believe that no country allows the use of hard drugs, but people still take them, and many eventually become addicted. In some countries, the rate of drug addiction is even increasing despite the fact that hard drugs are illegal.So, to me, banning gambling should not the best approach for any government. Instead, governments should look for ways to reduce the harmful effects of gambling on people and If a government is willing to find solutions, it will definitely discover effective ways to tackle the challenges of gambling addiction within its country or state without completely banning gambling.

[jeremypwr]

No it's not fair to ban gambling for everyone because of gambling addicts.
That would be like banning drinking because some people are alcoholics.
That's unrealistic and would never happen.

[HustleZ]

So what do you think governments should do instead of banning gambling completely?

Without banning gambling there is no way addicted people can be stopped, if they are stopped new addicts will be formed because the people who are let gambling will eventually gamblr excessively and become addicts. I think they should introduce limit to how much a person can gamble and that should be a well researched limit so that people can gamble but not reach to a level that they get addicted.

[Akbarkoe]

If gambling is one of the major sources of income for a country, is banning it completely really the best solution just because some people are addicted?

I know gambling addiction is a serious problem, but sometimes governments go straight to the last option which is banning it totally, instead of trying other ways to reduce the addiction first. Because if they ban gambling, everyone gets affected, not only the addicted gamblers. Responsible gamblers, workers, businesses, and even government income will be affected too.

So what do you think governments should do instead of banning gambling completely?

This depends on how severe the addiction is in the country, because this is the final count before making a decision, imagine if 50% of citizens are addicted to gambling, even though it is the main income of the country, this needs to be taken firmly for the future sustainability of citizens in the country, this has become very severe when addiction is rampant.

It is very wise if the situation is like a country that makes a decision to ban gambling, but if it is still at 10% it is still considered not to be a problem.

[nara1892]

If, for example, the government legalizes gambling or even gambling is one of their main sources of income, then they will not make regulations that lead to prohibitions or any form of regulations that can limit someone from reaching gambling. If, for example, the government has legalized it and even made it a source of income, it means that they have considered the impact on society, unless, for example, the government has prohibited gambling from the start.

[retreat]

If gambling is one of the major sources of income for a country, is banning it completely really the best solution just because some people are addicted?

If it was one of the country's major sources of income, I don't think they would consider banning it entirely, because they have already reaped so many economic benefits from that industry, and a total ban would mean that the government would be cutting off a major source of income for their country. If the industry were to start showing negative signs, such as an increase in the number of gambling addicts, they should tighten regulations rather than ban it entirely. By tightening regulations, they can reduce the negative impacts without having to forgo the revenue they've traditionally derived from the gambling industry. Furthermore, a total ban would not have a significant impact on the number of addicts, since they would simply switch to online casinos, meaning the government's move toward a total ban would yield no results whatsoever.

[Muba20]

Governments can take better steps if they want to, without banning gambling. Currently, gambling has become an industry, and many jobs have been created depending on it. If the government bans gambling, then all those jobs will be lost. If a large number of people's jobs are lost without creating new jobs, then the government will have to take responsibility for it. In my opinion, if the government provide awareness among the general public about gambling and also tells about the negative effects of gambling, then I do not think there is any justification for banning gambling. Those who gamble despite knowing these will be responsible for it. This will not cause any financial loss to the government and the workplace will not be negatively affected. But if a direct ban is imposed, it will definitely be affected by the negative effects.

[DubemIfedigbo001]

I don't think that any country that gambling is their major source of income will go that far to ban gambling in the country because it will affect the country economy and gamblers will still continue to gamble in online casinos that's not in that country. Government should sensitise the citizens about the consequences of gamblingand get strict regulation to the casinos.

This is for Malta, IGaming is one of their economy powerhouse

Source

From what I read, their regulations is still one of the best.

The benefits: Jobs, tourism, and innovation
The case for gambling as Malta’s best bet is simple: it works.

Economic contribution: Around €1.5 billion per year, or one in every eight euros of GDP, comes directly from iGaming.
High-value jobs: From software engineers to compliance officers, the industry pays wages well above Malta’s average.
Tourism boost: Industry conferences and international staff bring steady demand for hotels, restaurants, and events.
Innovation hub: Malta has positioned itself at the cutting edge of online gaming technology, from mobile-first platforms to live dealer streaming.
For players too, the industry has been evolving. The MGA’s 2023 update to its Player Protection Directive pushed companies to offer clearer terms, better self-exclusion tools, and more transparent bonuses.

Source

[Vaskiy]

Years back lottery is banned in my state. In my personal opinion, the action taken by the government is great. During those days many families' life got ruined by the lottery, because the layman earns and spends at least half the earned money on lottery. After the ban there is a big variation in the growth of the entire state. Now once again rummy game got popular, and many youngsters started to get addicted to it. Once again, the government acted good at the right time with a ban and saved life of young people who are much into it. We'll be able to see few people gambling, but the reality is different. Right now, at least 20-25 people will be gambling out of 100 sample. This is big number and if proper measures weren't taken it'll go even worse.