Eddie misrepresents pokies tax as a footy tax

[Eddie Dingle]

Frightening lack of logic that you non do-gooders rely on.
(do we call you do-worsers, or do mediocres)

Anyway, progressive legislation has been very effective in lowering smoking rates.
And obviously the pokie industry is extremely concerned that this legislation will make it more difficult to proffit from the misery of gambling addicts.

But hey, If you think it is just a matter of do-gooders trying to interfere with peoples freedom of choice, I'm sure you'll be only to happy to pick up the medical bill for the harms done to themselves and others by smokers, given that you clearly feel that smoking does not cause any harm or costs to non smokers.

I'm fairly sure the Cancer Council would like some credit for their education programmes designed to make more people aware of the risks to your health associated with smoking. But maybe Government legislation has done all the work...

 

[Consolaçao]

Incredible that AFL clubs would claim that without the exploitation of their weakest-willed, usually poorest supporters, their business model falls apart.
Absolute bulls***.
I love a bet every now and again, but gambling in this country's completely out of control. The only people who like pokies are those who profit from them and those who are addicted to them. To everyone else, they are the absolute pits.

 

[Grin]

I'm fairly sure the Cancer Council would like some credit for their education programmes designed to make more people aware of the risks to your health associated with smoking. But maybe Government legislation has done all the work...

No argument from me that the success in reducing rates of smoking has been multifactorial.

 

[Dk#1]

I work in the pokies room at a hotel and i am 100% for this idea.
Yet I dont think that it will totally hit the real heart of the problem.
If the government where serious about combatting pokies they would introduce legislation stating that they will no longer renew the leases on pokies in pub and clubs.
That's my opinion anyway

 

[finders]

I hate most forms of betting but esp pokies and they have destroyed thousands of foolish people and the family and their friends lives.

Anything that can stop this happening should be given a go and as for moneybags Eddie squealing thats just a sick joke.

 

[Slattery_20]

I work in the pokies room at a hotel and i am 100% for this idea.
Yet I dont think that it will totally hit the real heart of the problem.
If the government where serious about combatting pokies they would introduce legislation stating that they will no longer renew the leases on pokies in pub and clubs.
That's my opinion anyway

It was certainly different before they came in, THANKS JEFFFFF.

 

[mediumsizered]

It was certainly different before they came in, THANKS JEFFFFF.

Certainly was. In those days Victorians used to head across the NSW border in busloads & pour their hard-earned into the NSW economy instead of the money staying in Victoria.

 

[Chief]

How is the planned pokie reforms involving pre committment a pokie tax? Wake up to yourself Eddie.

It's amazing that he'd try to reframe an attempt to reduce problem gambling - in essence leave money in the pockets of sick people - as a "tax".

The money is not going to the clubs, but nor is it going to the government.

 

[Galileo9]

hopefully when the Etihad stadium deals expire eastern state clubs wont need these poker machine "investments". maybe its because we dont have them in WA, but to hear club presidents talking about pokies as some sort of investments sounds wrong.

The legislation proposes to pre determine how much money you are willing to lose. To complain that you should be able to make money out of people addicted to gambling is wrong on many levels. Yes these guys have a choice but they also have an illness thats being taken advantage of.

I doubt any of these club presidents encourage their kids to go and play pokies. Why? because they know that what it can lead to and obviously that stinks of cynicism.

 

[Slattery_20]

Certainly was. In those days Victorians used to head across the NSW border in busloads & pour their hard-earned into the NSW economy instead of the money staying in Victoria.

Nowhere near as many, though.

I had & have oldish relatives up near the border; and the difference pre- and post- the pokies was literally a once every couple of months day bus trip over the border became a once or twice a week trip to the local club.

hopefully when the Etihad stadium deals expire eastern state clubs wont need these poker machine "investments". maybe its because we dont have them in WA, but to hear club presidents talking about pokies as some sort of investments sounds wrong.

You really don't need them either, they add NOTHING.

I doubt any of these club presidents encourage their kids to go and play pokies. Why? because they know that what it can lead to and obviously that stinks of cynicism.

That's exactly what it is.



I did LOL at the grab he had on SEN at the BL last night... "I speak firstly as a citizen of australia and second as a club president... and we need to keep our pokies"...
Who does he really think he's fooling?

 

[Daytripper]

I remember a quote from Richard Dreyfuss in that great racing movie called 'Let It Ride'.
When trying to explain to his wife that he had lost again.

"You don't have a problem with my gambling. Its the losing that bothers you."

This quote can be applied to pokies.
If it didn't have such a high takeout rate, then the losses would not be so great.

If government were really, truly serious about reducing the impact of pokies on peoples lives, they would cut the actual take-out rate to 3% or 4%, lower the spin rate and reduce the maximum bet to $5.00.

But they're not really that serious. They love the money too much.

 

[Chief]

Certainly was. In those days Victorians used to head across the NSW border in busloads & pour their hard-earned into the NSW economy instead of the money staying in Victoria.

Compare how much they'd pour into NSW clubs and how much they now pour into Vic clubs and government coffers.

Hard to get in a bus every week of the year just to blow your dole money in the pokies.

 

[dubber]

I like Tim's article on the issue ; I did not know that you could lose up to $1200 per hour on some of these machines. That is criminal

The age

I love my AFL, but with the $1.2 billion over five years in TV licence fees, the AFL does not need to depend on addiction and destroying lives to run the game. Remember, Eddie, that WA has no pokies outside Burswood Casino - none in suburbs and rural towns and it has plenty of clubs, community functions and footy teams. Footy and community clubs should not be hooked on pokies and their devastation.

The age

​

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Have a think about it champ

I've thought about it at more length than you, Champ.

How is it yours, the local pubs, the governments or anyone else's right to know what I am doing with my punting dollar?

I don't give a flyin' **** what you do with your punting dollar. However, if you wanna play pokies (and that is only the high loss machines) you'll need a card.

If I go to the pub and decide to lose $10, $100 or $10,000 that is my business and right is it not?

Yep, that is your business and right. Set your limit higher. Oh, that's right you don't play pokies.

If I choose to lose $100 this week and $10,000 next week why do I have to apply for a card to do so? And before you say set a high limit doesn't that defeat the purpose of the cards in the first place?

It's quite simple. Pokies are a dangerous product, it's called consumer protection.
As for "setting a higher limit defeats the purpose of the cards", you don't understand much about differing levels of motivation to change behaviour.

Some will set a higher limit and gamble excessively. That's their choice. However, if somebody wants to limit their losses they'll do so.

I suppose you were a great supporter of the Australia Card that was mooted in the 80's?[/

quote]

No, and it's a shithouse comparison.

I don't think that pre-commitment is the silver bullet in terms of pokie addiction.

However, I'm certain that a portion of those with pokie gambling issues will benefit from this policy.

If it saves the life of one person, it'll be worth more than your libertarian bullshit nanny-state whingeing, Champ

 

[mediumsizered]

Compare how much they'd pour into NSW clubs and how much they now pour into Vic clubs and government coffers.

Hard to get in a bus every week of the year just to blow your dole money in the pokies.

Not so hard when the NSW clubs would subsidise the cost of the bus, throw in morning or afternoon tea on the way up or back & handout free meal vouchers for use in the club. Made it viable for pensioners, the unemployed & low income earners alike.

So much Victorian money poured into the NSW economy. In fact, many Victorians who used to travel to Sydney for a weekend/a week were helping to financially support NSWRL clubs. I would much rather see Victorians helping to fund their own AFL clubs rather than NRL clubs & various, bowls, golf & services clubs in NSW.

 

[Slattery_20]

Not so hard when the NSW clubs would subsidise the cost of the bus, throw in morning or afternoon tea on the way up or back & handout free meal vouchers for use in the club. Made it viable for pensioners, the unemployed & low income earners alike.

So much Victorian money poured into the NSW economy. In fact, many Victorians who used to travel to Sydney for a weekend/a week were helping to financially support NSWRL clubs. I would much rather see Victorians helping to fund their own AFL clubs rather than NRL clubs & various, bowls, golf & services clubs in NSW.

And nanna heading down to the bowls club is helping...?

I would rather see all pokies limited, or actually blown up & dragged away.

 

[The_Wookie]

I've thought about it at more length than you, Champ.



I don't give a flyin' **** what you do with your punting dollar. However, if you wanna play pokies (and that is only the high loss machines) you'll need a card.



Yep, that is your business and right. Set your limit higher. Oh, that's right you don't play pokies.



It's quite simple. Pokies are a dangerous product, it's called consumer protection.
As for "setting a higher limit defeats the purpose of the cards", you don't understand much about differing levels of motivation to change behaviour.

Some will set a higher limit and gamble excessively. That's their choice. However, if somebody wants to limit their losses they'll do so.

quote]

No, and it's a shithouse comparison.

I don't think that pre-commitment is the silver bullet in terms of pokie addiction.

However, I'm certain that a portion of those with pokie gambling issues will benefit from this policy.

If it saves the life of one person, it'll be worth more than your libertarian bullshit nanny-state whingeing, Champ

Cant wait for the action on cigarette smoking, alocohol, fatty foods, abalone diving, and other dangerous past times which threaten lives.

 

[sherb]

Cant wait for the action on cigarette smoking, alocohol, fatty foods, abalone diving, and other dangerous past times which threaten lives.

Where have you been?

There's barely any action left to take.

 

[fairdinkum]

^ Throw alcohol into that mix, sherb. We are incredibly highly taxed and regulated in this country wrt alcohol purchasing/consumption.

Seriously, some of the arguments being made in this thread against pokies reforms are utter tripe. You'd think some people have no capacity for critical thought whatsoever.

 

[theflea]

Frightening lack of logic that you non do-gooders rely on.
(do we call you do-worsers, or do mediocres)

Anyway, progressive legislation has been very effective in lowering smoking rates.
And obviously the pokie industry is extremely concerned that this legislation will make it more difficult to proffit from the misery of gambling addicts.

But hey, If you think it is just a matter of do-gooders trying to interfere with peoples freedom of choice, I'm sure you'll be only to happy to pick up the medical bill for the harms done to themselves and others by smokers, given that you clearly feel that smoking does not cause any harm or costs to non smokers.

ah grin lack of logic. spare me. where did i say progressive legislation has not been effective in reducing smoking. show me where i stated this. wher e did i state that secong hand smoking is good for you. stop inferring rubbish to support your argument. what i said was that plain packaging would not work, by all means do somthing that does work but dont spend money on wasted programs that dont work. also your argument about medical costs apply to all of us as public health costs are across the board not just smoking ie drinking, obesity and the like. i for one contribute in this way by being in private health for nearly 30years. for me im all for platforms of progression just not bad platforms or ones that just dont work. by the way i couldnt care less if these reforms go thru and i gamble. i just wonder where were these types of gambling addiction programs when pokies wernt around. i know plenty of addits at the races and at the tab.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

ah grin lack of logic. spare me. where did i say progressive legislation has not been effective in reducing smoking. show me where i stated this. wher e did i state that secong hand smoking is good for you. stop inferring rubbish to support your argument. what i said was that plain packaging would not work, by all means do somthing that does work but dont spend money on wasted programs that dont work. also your argument about medical costs apply to all of us as public health costs are across the board not just smoking ie drinking, obesity and the like. i for one contribute in this way by being in private health for nearly 30years. for me im all for platforms of progression just not bad platforms or ones that just dont work. by the way i couldnt care less if these reforms go thru and i gamble. i just wonder where were these types of gambling addiction programs when pokies wernt around. i know plenty of addits at the races and at the tab.

Not enough customers

Electronic gaming is allowed but only at the Burswood Casino and even then only certain types of machines are allowed - only those where there is some patron decision-making and intervention.
The result – Western Australians spend less on gambling per capita than other states and territories ($184 in WA compared to $375 in Victoria in 2006).
In the 10 years from 1995-96 to 2005-06 the percentage of household income spent on gambling in WA actually decreased from 2.2 per cent to 1.3 per cent. We also know that WA has the lowest rate of problem gambling in the nation – estimated at 0.32 per cent by the WA government in its submission to the Productivity Commission Inquiry in 1998.


Read more: http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/politics/wa--the-nopokies-state-20110926-1kts3.html#ixzz1Z86vYvAR​

About 80% of those seeking help for gambling are pokies addicts

 

[Kwality]

Glad to see Andy rejecting AFL involvement in the ad campaign BUT object to him contacting Mr Wilkie - this is a club issue not an AFL issue.

Where were the AFL when Essendon cherrypicked the stadium deal at Etihad stitching up many Melbourne clubs. Same for the MCG & Collingwood.

The whole comp pays compo to the Melbourne clubs that get shafted week in week out by these deals when week in week out the Bombers & the Pies need to call an arnmoured car to take the money to the bank.

Yet again the AFL are acting to benefit some clubs, not the competition.

 

[Grin]

plain packaging would not work

Yes it will.

At least that's the clear opinion of the tobacco industry.
That's why they're fighting so hard against it.

Those who profit from the misery of gambling addicts are also very affraid that the proposed legislation wil be effective, hence their very aggressive campaign against it.

Also of interest: Clubs Australia didn't have a problem with the costs of retrofitting pokies when they themselves supported a voluntary system. Now they're claiming it will send them broke.

They must think we're all as gullible as you theflea.
Although in truth, and to give you some credit, I don't think for a minute that you, or the industry, or Eddie, or Kennett believe your own arguments. Like those who profited from manufacturing doubt about the dangers of cigarettes, you're just pushing a line for the sake of self interest or to follow the current spin by your political masters who stand to gain sponsorship dollars by putting the vested interests of the pokie industry above those of their fellow Australians.

 

[MickyG]

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.

Check this out:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...m-not-so-taxing-for-footy-20110926-1ktgx.html

Tim Costello telling the facts. After reading this I am disgusted at the media for the lack of quality information; at the Clubs for the misinformation they have been spreading; at Eddie for his misrepresentation; at the AFL for supporting stealing money from pokie addicts.

 

[mediumsizered]

Check this out:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...m-not-so-taxing-for-footy-20110926-1ktgx.html

Tim Costello telling the facts. After reading this I am disgusted at the media for the lack of quality information; at the Clubs for the misinformation they have been spreading; at Eddie for his misrepresentation; at the AFL for supporting stealing money from pokie addicts.

Don't take too much notice of what Tim 'bleeding heart' Costello has to say. He has had his snout in the charity trough for several years now (paid for out of donations by people who like to think their money is mostly going to those who need it most, rather than being swallowed by ever growing admin costs, including paying an extremely healthy salary to the likes of the aforementioned Tim Costello). He is probably more of a hypocrite than his brother.