Eddie misrepresents pokies tax as a footy tax

[Daicos_35]

Wow, another Eddie bashing thread. There were another two presidents quoted both against the changes but no one has mentioned them.

I am hate the pokies and am 100% for the reforms. The AFL needs to ensure clubs don't need pokies to survive. Does anyone have a breakdown of how many machines each club runs?

 

[mediumsizered]

I do have to laugh at the way the pokies industry spokesmen always claim that this will be ineffective, it won't solve problem gambling...........so why are they so worried about it?

Because the casual gamblers, of which there is a significant number, will not be bothered to go through the hassle of registering to play the pokies. On the other hand, the problem gamblers will happily go through the process because there mental state precludes them from seeing what they are doing.

In other words, those who can afford to play the pokies & who contribute quite significantly to pub/club revenues, will reduce their spend, whilst those who can't afford to play the pokies will continue to play the pokies, but do not contribute enough to maintain the viability of some of these venues.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

I luv what Eddie's done for Collingwood, but that's where it ends. He's still suckling on the Packer teat.

Footy tax. FFS, that sounds like a grab from MTR

 

[Admiral Byng]

Wow, another Eddie bashing thread. There were another two presidents quoted both against the changes but no one has mentioned them.

Did they call it a "footy tax?" I think that's the part where Eddie is (quite rightly) being ridiculed.

 

[fairdinkum]

Because the casual gamblers, of which there is a significant number, will not be bothered to go through the hassle of registering to play the pokies. On the other hand, the problem gamblers will happily go through the process because there mental state precludes them from seeing what they are doing.

1) What evidence do you have to support your assertion that casual gamblers will be too lazy to take a few moments to do a one-off registration?

2) What percentage of pokies revenues come from casual gamblers?

 

[HardenUp]

The guy is a sanctimonious moral manipulator.

Hiow can you now take ANYTHING else he says seriously?

Next he'll be accusing anyone making ANY comments about a non-white player at Collingwood as "racist"...

Tool of the century.

 

[mediumsizered]

1) What evidence do you have to support your assertion that casual gamblers will be too lazy to take a few moments to do a one-off registration?

2) What percentage of pokies revenues come from casual gamblers?

http://theconversation.edu.au/pokies-punters-and-taxpayers-both-lose-when-govts-and-industry-get-too-cosy-2085

"Last year the Productivity Commission said that problem gamblers lost 40% of total pokies losses around the country."

Punish the majority, who don't have a problem, to protect the minority, who won't help themselves. How about we take all drivers off the road to make sure the minority of hoons don't injure the majority of responsible drivers?

 

[Truckasaurus]

So the proposed law means that gamblers who know they have a problem can choose to limit the amount of money they fork out on a pokies binge.

How is that even close to a tax?

Had a gutfull of this country's corporate elite crying poor all the time.

They all believe in free markets and freedom of choice so long as it makes them richer.

Guess gamblers don't have the freedom to be prudent with their money and set sensible limits that protect them from wiping out their finances.

It's pathetic

 

[fairdinkum]

http://theconversation.edu.au/pokie...ose-when-govts-and-industry-get-too-cosy-2085

"Last year the Productivity Commission said that problem gamblers lost 40% of total pokies losses around the country."

Cheers for the link.

If we go with 40% of an industry's revenues coming straight from people deemed 'problem gamblers' (i.e. people with impulse control disorders who are having a serious negative impact on not only their own lives but in many cases the lives of their families as well), do you honestly not see this as a problem which requires attention?

Honestly?

Punish the majority, who don't have a problem, to protect the minority, who won't help themselves. How about we take all drivers off the road to make sure the minority of hoons don't injure the majority of responsible drivers?

Another ridiculous analogy.

In case you weren't aware, we already do have a myriad of road regulations which apply to everybody although only a minority require the regulations to keep them from harming themselves and others. Seatbelts, BAC limits, compulsory RWC's, speed limits, licensing, registration, CTP insurance... the list goes on.

That's how modern liberal democracies work. Regulations are in place to protect people from themselves and each other because, even though you and I might not be dumb enough to get behind the wheel after 7 or 8 cups of goon, some people would be and you or I could die as a result.

Similarly, you or I might not be mentally disordered enough to blow a weeks' wage on a one-armed bandit, but some people are and their families suffer for it. If you'd ever known a problem gambler, you'd understand that.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

http://theconversation.edu.au/pokie...ose-when-govts-and-industry-get-too-cosy-2085

"Last year the Productivity Commission said that problem gamblers lost 40% of total pokies losses around the country."

Punish the majority, who don't have a problem, to protect the minority, who won't help themselves. How about we take all drivers off the road to make sure the minority of hoons don't injure the majority of responsible drivers?

Ridiculous analogy.

Cars are a form of transport, necessary for many.

Pokies are designed to make people lose money and to keep coming back to lose more money.

That 40% of the takings are from problem gamblers, screams out to me that this is an inherently dangerous product.

Let's stick with your ridiculous analogy for one moment. You need a license to drive a car. You'll need a pre-committment card to play pokies. If people can't be arsed doing that, then that tells me it's a crap product in terms of entertainment value.

 

[legend166]

If a one off registration would stop casual gamblers using the pokies, they wouldn't go to clubs in the first place. Most of them make you register as a guest or a member or some other annoying thing anyway.

 

[Rob]

http://theconversation.edu.au/pokies-punters-and-taxpayers-both-lose-when-govts-and-industry-get-too-cosy-2085

"Last year the Productivity Commission said that problem gamblers lost 40% of total pokies losses around the country."

Punish the majority, who don't have a problem, to protect the minority, who won't help themselves. How about we take all drivers off the road to make sure the minority of hoons don't injure the majority of responsible drivers?

Or how about some sort of licencing system where people that can't abide by the rules have their, well, let's call it a 'drivers licence', taken away?

 

[Kwality]

The Lefties of the political dynamic are into each other with Tim Costello describing the AFL/NRL alliance :
....the AFL and NRL were "shamelessly" misleading their fans.

"They will not go broke because of a pre-commitment card," Reverend Costello said, adding that the AFL had just scored a $1.2 billion TV rights deal.
"This is powerful vested interests against the public's welfare ... it's out of control.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/code...kie-reforms-20110925-1krf4.html#ixzz1YwnlF1l0

Lefties like Andy & Eddie wont like being called 'powerful vested interests' when we all know they are paragons of virtue, of all things good.​

 

[Eddie Dingle]

Pre-commitment?

Ok let's tell the alcoholic to only have a couple of beers a day or the drug addict to only have one hit a day. It's the same thing.

Stop problem gamblers from gambling and then the rest of us can be left alone. Nanny state mentality again, Wilkie is on a crusade for a heroin addict who lost everything gambling?? Give me a break.

 

[theflea]

i think at the end of the day entities going for different revenue streams end up at gambling. its a no brainer as its cash rich generally. just like in business governments impose taxes after the fact when bus models havent allowed for it. nothing new here. clubs will have invent new ways to make money or consolidate many including gambling profits.

 

[jonbe54]

Lol gr8 thread would read again.

The usual Muppet knee jerk, red necked hater suspects.

 

[Eddie Dingle]

The Lefties of the political dynamic are into each other with Tim Costello describing the AFL/NRL alliance :
....the AFL and NRL were "shamelessly" misleading their fans.

"They will not go broke because of a pre-commitment card," Reverend Costello said, adding that the AFL had just scored a $1.2 billion TV rights deal.
"This is powerful vested interests against the public's welfare ... it's out of control.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/code...kie-reforms-20110925-1krf4.html#ixzz1YwnlF1l0

Lefties like Andy & Eddie wont like being called 'powerful vested interests' when we all know they are paragons of virtue, of all things good.​

This is the same Reverend Tim Costello that takes a package of almost $300k per year from World Vision and he has the audacity to call McGuire and Kennett hypocrites?

 

[LT Smash]

Even if all AFL clubs did depend on pokies revenue, it still wouldn't be a 'footy tax'.

Not only are the pokies reforms not targetted at nor exclusive to footy clubs, but they do not involve any form of taxation.

Eddie's choice of words - and I doubt they were spur-of-the-moment - was utterly ridiculous. Lowest common denominator type stuff which is usually the domain of insipid major political party leaders like Tony Abbott.

In some ways I have a lot of respect for Eddie. In other ways I think the man is schmuck.

Echoing current political flashpoints - the carbon tax and mining tax, it seems that Eddie's choice of words here (footy tax) comes from the same lazy journalism school that places "gate" on the end of any form of political scandal.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Pre-commitment?

Ok let's tell the alcoholic to only have a couple of beers a day or the drug addict to only have one hit a day. It's the same thing.

How so?

Stop problem gamblers from gambling and then the rest of us can be left alone. Nanny state mentality again, Wilkie is on a crusade for a heroin addict who lost everything gambling?? Give me a break.

And how do you propose to do that?

 

[Beefcake_Dew]

Pre-commitment?

Ok let's tell the alcoholic to only have a couple of beers a day or the drug addict to only have one hit a day. It's the same thing.

Stop problem gamblers from gambling and then the rest of us can be left alone. Nanny state mentality again, Wilkie is on a crusade for a heroin addict who lost everything gambling?? Give me a break.

we do it's called methadone and it saves lives.

 

[Eddie Dingle]

And how do you propose to do that?

Through Education, Counselling services and other support services. The same way we stop alcoholics drinking etc...

 

[rayven]

I'm confused, regardless of what your views are in relation to pokies: who's interests would you expect the President of the Collingwood Football Club to represent?

I would expect him to represent his members and the communities they come from. I would not expect him to support the continuation of what is very bad social policy aimed to garner there income..

 

[rayven]

This is the same Reverend Tim Costello that takes a package of almost $300k per year from World Vision and he has the audacity to call McGuire and Kennett hypocrites?

Where would your club be without pokies?

 

[cammo78]

It is very difficult for a club like ours to make the moral statement alone.

What utter tripe.

North Melbourne's lack of pokie revenue has NOTHING to do with having made a moral decision.

It is completely due to the fact you purchased pokies to run in the Captain's Bar at Etihad, a venture you couldn't make profitable.

You then tried to transfer ownership of said pokies to Etihad as contra to wipe out a $2 million debt - which also failed.

Net result - your holier than thou organisation remains the proud owner of a significant number of pokie machines.

So take your moral high ground elsewhere.

 

[Eddie Dingle]

Where would your club be without pokies?

Same place we are with them...

Broke