You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > The nanny state
November 18 2019 9.40am

The nanny state

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 > Last Ľ

 

View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 04 Jul 19 10.44am Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

So William hill have said that as a direct result of the FOB terminal stake reduction they are closing 700 shops.
Because some people have no will power 1000s will now lose their jobs.
They started with Turkey twizzlers and now peoples actual lives will be shattered.
The solution to gamblers is dont have access to cash.
Trust someone else until you can trust yourself.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag Wisbech, England 04 Jul 19 10.55am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

I'm not sure as to the precise details as it relates to gambling but I do have some observations to relate to the 'nanny state'.

Roughly about 15 percent of the population have an IQ under 90. This is obviously going to have a major impact on their lives in a sophisticated society that is geared to relieving a person from their hard earned cash.

As a government exists for everybody.....those low IQ individuals just as much as it exists for the average or genetically gifted it's important that at least some safe-guards exist for those that are easily fooled or addicted.

So, for me, a certain level of nanny state has some justification......Whether it's appropriate for this case I don't know.

But I will say that I regard regular gambling as a very risky activity.


Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jul 2019 10.58am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 04 Jul 19 11.20am Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I'm not sure as to the precise details as it relates to gambling but I do have some observations to relate to the 'nanny state'.

Roughly about 15 percent of the population have an IQ under 90. This is obviously going to have a major impact on their lives in a sophisticated society that is geared to relieving a person from their hard earned cash.

As a government exists for everybody.....those low IQ individuals just as much as it exists for the average or genetically gifted it's important that at least some safe-guards exist for those that are easily fooled or addicted.

So, for me, a certain level of nanny state has some justification......Whether it's appropriate for this case I don't know.

But I will say that I regard regular gambling as a very risky activity.


Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jul 2019 10.58am)

I agree. To put it bluntly. With the level of stupidity prevalent in society, the state must sometimes protect people from themselves. It is arguably part of the value of a civilized society.

I don't gamble but given that restriction on gambling being lifted was always going to cause problems, it seems inevitable that countermeasures would follow.

It's depressing really that allowing more freedom to gamble, specifically so the government can make more tax revenue, now leads to tokenistic safeguards to protect people from situations that the government allowed in the first place.

Bonkers.

I blame all those smokers who had the audacity to try and avoid dying by giving up cigarettes.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag Wisbech, England 04 Jul 19 11.40am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I agree. To put it bluntly. With the level of stupidity prevalent in society, the state must sometimes protect people from themselves. It is arguably part of the value of a civilized society.

I don't gamble but given that restriction on gambling being lifted was always going to cause problems, it seems inevitable that countermeasures would follow.

It's depressing really that allowing more freedom to gamble, specifically so the government can make more tax revenue, now leads to tokenistic safeguards to protect people from situations that the government allowed in the first place.

Bonkers.

I blame all those smokers who had the audacity to try and avoid dying by giving up cigarettes.


Yep...the 'free for all' on gambling is yet another thing we can blame Blair for.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Midlands Eagle's Profile Midlands Eagle Flag 04 Jul 19 11.43am Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle Add Midlands Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

So William hill have said that as a direct result of the FOB terminal stake reduction they are closing 700 shops.

At least they haven't blamed Brexit

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View eagleman13's Profile eagleman13 Flag On The Road To Hell & Alicante 04 Jul 19 11.51am Send a Private Message to eagleman13 Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add eagleman13 as a friend

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

At least they haven't blamed Brexit

. . . Yet

 


Is joining the 'Grumpy Old Gits' Club

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 04 Jul 19 12.02pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I'm not sure as to the precise details as it relates to gambling but I do have some observations to relate to the 'nanny state'.

Roughly about 15 percent of the population have an IQ under 90. This is obviously going to have a major impact on their lives in a sophisticated society that is geared to relieving a person from their hard earned cash.

As a government exists for everybody.....those low IQ individuals just as much as it exists for the average or genetically gifted it's important that at least some safe-guards exist for those that are easily fooled or addicted.

So, for me, a certain level of nanny state has some justification......Whether it's appropriate for this case I don't know.

But I will say that I regard regular gambling as a very risky activity.


Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jul 2019 10.58am)

There are probably a greater number pro rata of above 90 IQ who have taken the dark road to gambling.
Blame everyone but yourself when you screw up seems to be the norm nowadays.
I've stated in posts before that barring a very very small mentally challenged (in the nicest way)
Group of people.
The ultimate decision on everything you do is yours as the individual.
If you cant put the phone or PC away or walk past a bookies then it's your decision.
Sympathy has a certain length of road.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 04 Jul 19 12.06pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I agree. To put it bluntly. With the level of stupidity prevalent in society, the state must sometimes protect people from themselves. It is arguably part of the value of a civilized society.

I don't gamble but given that restriction on gambling being lifted was always going to cause problems, it seems inevitable that countermeasures would follow.

It's depressing really that allowing more freedom to gamble, specifically so the government can make more tax revenue, now leads to tokenistic safeguards to protect people from situations that the government allowed in the first place.

Bonkers.

I blame all those smokers who had the audacity to try and avoid dying by giving up cigarettes.

Cool I wont disappoint you by giving up and living forever then so costing the state money.
Although by smoking I do contribute some of the roughly 14 billion pounds towards the states coffers of which only about 50% is spent on any diseases caused.
No brainer to carry on really.
Happy pouting.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 04 Jul 19 12.33pm Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

William Hill is the first of many to announce closures, the fixed odds betting crackdown is just the excuse they are looking for.

Bookies in this country over expanded their high street operations especially in poorer areas. This happened before online gambling took off and the high street started closing down.

The market growth is now online and across all demographics. As a punter who uses bookies the demographics there is older men who are dying off and not being replaced.

This would have happened anyway but for the record I think the crackdown is a good idea those machines are addictive and destroy lives. I would go one step further and ban TV ads before the watershed and ban all bookies that are not registered in the UK and pay tax here.

This may make me a hypocrite but I can live with that. I have a friend who is an addict and has been in gaol several times to pay for his habit. Bookies are a leech on society and I never feel sorry for them.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mapletree's Profile Mapletree Flag Croydon 04 Jul 19 12.39pm Send a Private Message to Mapletree Add Mapletree as a friend

Gambling is a tax on people who in general tend to be poor.

It provides hope, generally where in truth there is very little.

It can so easily take over, especially using sophisticated marketing techniques

One of the more depressing times of my life was spent in Macau, there you can see what happens when gambling is allowed to rule lives.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 04 Jul 19 12.46pm Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend


In Las Vegas any slot machine win over 1200 dollars is taxed at 30% if you are American. The machine locks and you have to wait for someone to come and check your passport.
I donít understand the issue with FOB - donít bookies exist so people can gamble what they want?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag Wisbech, England 04 Jul 19 12.50pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

There are probably a greater number pro rata of above 90 IQ who have taken the dark road to gambling.
Blame everyone but yourself when you screw up seems to be the norm nowadays.
I've stated in posts before that barring a very very small mentally challenged (in the nicest way)
Group of people.
The ultimate decision on everything you do is yours as the individual.
If you cant put the phone or PC away or walk past a bookies then it's your decision.
Sympathy has a certain length of road.


I wouldn't say the number of mentally challenged is that small but certainly I'd agree with the general thrust of what you are saying.

It's all about what safeguards are in place for those who can't help themselves.

For example, it's against the law to continue to give pints to someone who's is clearly very drunk....it's not going to end well...I suppose It's about having sensible protections in place.

Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jul 2019 12.52pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 > Last Ľ

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > The nanny state