The Pokie Debate - My Personal View

[RegHickeyStand]

Money doesn't talk,
it swears. -Bob Dylan

 

[stui magpie]

Great OP.

I was raised in NSW, just over the Murray and used to see the Victorians come up all the time on the pokie tours. I've played them a few times but they don't do much for me. Biggest win $60, biggest spend in one night, $50.

I have seen first hand evidence of people who can't control their compulsion but I still believe that the proposal to set a maximum spend is only going to help the minority who know they have a problem and are trying to cut down. It's a fair impost for a small percentage. I assume the proposal doesn't link directly to your bank accounts so if I want to say my max spend each night is $1,000,000 and I only have $400 in my account, whats stopping me from blowing my rent money?

The way gambling is foisted on us these days is ridiculous, but I don't think this initiative is viable.

 

[ThatsjustDappa]

I hate the things myself and I sympathise with you as I have had people close to me destroyed by gambling addiction. It's a horrible. However, the new legislation proposed by the government, will have massive, dire ramifications on football clubs, and will do nothing to deter problem gamblers.

People might take you seriously if you minimised the rhetoric and brought forward some actual robust projected figures of losses. Let me help you, say avg % of profit to club from pokies compared to overall club revenue followed by estimated decrease in profit from pokies compared to club revenue. I think you will find it stuff all in the grand scheme of things of the AFL with billion dollar TV rights et al wheeling and dealing....

As for will do nothing, please provide some measured explanation....

 

[neroblack]

From what i have read they are talking about putting a cap on the high end pokies, ie: from losing $1200 per hour to $120.

Cant for the life of me, see how this stops people playing.

Unless i misread the article, and they intend to ban all pokies from clubs.

I thought part of it was that you'd need to be registered to play at all? Can anyone explain that part?

 

[Giants FC]

I am a West Australian and what are these

I wish we didn't know what they were either. But sadly, the GWS area is the world home of the poker machine.
Nearly 10% of all the world's pokies are in Greater Western Sydney, and it's absolutely disgraceful the harm they are doing. The number of businesses being embezzled, the number of families being ripped apart, the number of neglected children as a direct result of poker machines is an absolute scandal.

Blow up the pokies.

 

[The_Panther]

I haven't read through the legislation, but i think it is a bit naive to write off it's merit just because the preidents of a couple of football clubs speak out against it due to their alterior motives.

The productivity commission endorsed these changes so there is clearly research behind the proposal.

Great OP good to hear that you've been able to remove yourself from such a habitual blight on society.

 

[jenny61_99]

The proposed change is like applying a band-aid to a bleeding artery. I don't think many realise just how indsidious these machines are. Small local pubs taking in over $1 million a week. A WEEK! Just on poker machines. That means a bunch of folk are losing over $1 million a week - and I'm talking ONE pub here! Government knows this is a form of revenue they just cannot replace, so instead of outlawing them all together, they apply a bandaid that will only make the addicted become more resourceful but will not reduce their (governments) bottom line. AFL/NRL are complicit and cry poor. Fact is it's regular mums and dads that are poor. It's families and society as a whole that suffers.

This proposal will be as effective as a carbon tax. Makes people feel like they are doing "something" without really achieving anything.

Congratulations to the OP for opening this can of worms. And to those who don't understand or appreciate the concept of addiction, I say consider yourselves lucky.

 

[newcastlefalcon]

It's a little strange for me to get personal on bigfooty, but I will just to get my point across very clearly.

My parents are addicted to the pokies, I'm 21 and It's frustrated me since I was a kid.

I remember being left at the children's play pin area with my sister when I was around 6-10 (until I was old enough to stay home) so my parents could gamble away their money in the adult section of the taberat.

Those play pins were bloody fun, they had Nintendo 64's installed (which were the bestest and coolest things on the planet at the time), they had slides, swings, pizza and soft drinks. This was the place to be, it was actually really fun. If I had of continued to be enthralled by that place, I may have become an addict myself, who's to say people aren't being influenced to gamble this way?

But what I didn't realise at the time was that it's pure intention was for it to be fun. Disguising stealing money as 'fun' is evil in my opinion. My parents must have felt the same in the next room, I mean...the bright lights just lure you into the joint. The vibrant sounds sooth you and make you feel like it's an adventure park, I'm sure half the people that got addicted to the place initially got addicted because of the vibe these places give you - that's the evil in it all, it's designed to look/feel like Disneyland except it takes away your money for absolutely no return (in the long run especially).

So my parents continue to gamble now, and whatever I say to sway them it just won't work, it's their hang out spot, they have been poisoned now, however we haven't been hit to hard financially - but is it right for some kids first memory to involve those stupid machines over football matches, festivals, the wiggles or even the library? Because my parents never took me to any of that.

Before someone decides to jump on my parents and begin calling them names, my mum almost died from ovarian cancel + breast cancer 15 years ago, coincidently...that's when the problem started, my father just supports her with anything she wants, we are lucky to have her and let me tell you how these changes would affect me.

It would put a limit on how often my parents can spend time there, once there is no option to continue gambling, they can actually come home. It would make a world of difference to my family and keep in mind, there are thousands of families it would affect greater than mine.

It may give my mum a shot to try out another hobby, it may discourage an individual just a TINY bit from going back frequently.

This is something no football club has a right to question, and it absolutely makes my blood boil that the fat cats of our land are making generalised statements that it won't affect anyone and they are pointless, because quite frankly I'm proof that it will affect me positively.

I praise the North Melbourne Football Club for no relying on this evil resource of money, and I'm happy that if these laws do pass, it won't make much of a difference to my own club's bank balance. But even if it did, my view on this matter wouldn't change because sometimes, things in life can be more important than football.

So to all the clubs from both codes, go **** yourselves and find a more dignified way to earn a buck, god help us you all already earn enough as it is, kill the greed.

I have posted a number of times about the rubbish that has been spouted by self interested individuals. This is the best piece of commentary on this subject that I have seen. Well done.

Perhaps you should consider standing for an AFL President as there is certainly a lack of insight, understanding and rational thought amongst that group!

 

[SugarHealey]

It's a little strange for me to get personal on bigfooty, but I will just to get my point across very clearly.

My parents are addicted to the pokies, I'm 21 and It's frustrated me since I was a kid.

I remember being left at the children's play pin area with my sister when I was around 6-10 (until I was old enough to stay home) so my parents could gamble away their money in the adult section of the taberat.

Those play pins were bloody fun, they had Nintendo 64's installed (which were the bestest and coolest things on the planet at the time), they had slides, swings, pizza and soft drinks. This was the place to be, it was actually really fun. If I had of continued to be enthralled by that place, I may have become an addict myself, who's to say people aren't being influenced to gamble this way?

But what I didn't realise at the time was that it's pure intention was for it to be fun. Disguising stealing money as 'fun' is evil in my opinion. My parents must have felt the same in the next room, I mean...the bright lights just lure you into the joint. The vibrant sounds sooth you and make you feel like it's an adventure park, I'm sure half the people that got addicted to the place initially got addicted because of the vibe these places give you - that's the evil in it all, it's designed to look/feel like Disneyland except it takes away your money for absolutely no return (in the long run especially).

So my parents continue to gamble now, and whatever I say to sway them it just won't work, it's their hang out spot, they have been poisoned now, however we haven't been hit to hard financially - but is it right for some kids first memory to involve those stupid machines over football matches, festivals, the wiggles or even the library? Because my parents never took me to any of that.

Before someone decides to jump on my parents and begin calling them names, my mum almost died from ovarian cancel + breast cancer 15 years ago, coincidently...that's when the problem started, my father just supports her with anything she wants, we are lucky to have her and let me tell you how these changes would affect me.

It would put a limit on how often my parents can spend time there, once there is no option to continue gambling, they can actually come home. It would make a world of difference to my family and keep in mind, there are thousands of families it would affect greater than mine.

It may give my mum a shot to try out another hobby, it may discourage an individual just a TINY bit from going back frequently.

This is something no football club has a right to question, and it absolutely makes my blood boil that the fat cats of our land are making generalised statements that it won't affect anyone and they are pointless, because quite frankly I'm proof that it will affect me positively.

I praise the North Melbourne Football Club for no relying on this evil resource of money, and I'm happy that if these laws do pass, it won't make much of a difference to my own club's bank balance. But even if it did, my view on this matter wouldn't change because sometimes, things in life can be more important than football.

So to all the clubs from both codes, go **** yourselves and find a more dignified way to earn a buck, god help us you all already earn enough as it is, kill the greed.

I'm with you CNB1990.

The AFL should Butt out. They get enough revenue, and the lost % would be spread roughly evenly across all clubs. So all clubs would lose similar amounts, unless their worried amount the cash component?

Put the punters ahead for Once AFL!

And stop bleeding the working person Dry.

 

[Grin]

I'm not an advocate though of the new reforms - the limit apparently is $100,000 - how does this then stop the problem gambler. At the end of the day this will only affect Mr and Mrs Joe Average out for dinner having a bit of a play on the pokies before heading home - they just won't bother with getting the licence. Thank god they are not in this state.

If they are betting a dollar or less a spin they wont need a "licence"

Honest and brave OP
Much appreciated.

 

[Tzatziki_Man]

I wish we didn't know what they were either. But sadly, the GWS area is the world home of the poker machine.
Nearly 10% of all the world's pokies are in Greater Western Sydney, and it's absolutely disgraceful the harm they are doing. The number of businesses being embezzled, the number of families being ripped apart, the number of neglected children as a direct result of poker machines is an absolute scandal.

Blow up the pokies.

Is it really 10%? Thats absolutely disgraceful.

There is one solution that would instantly have an impact.

1. Most Taberat's are open from 8-10am - 5am the next morning.

Honestly, who on god's earth needs to gamble at 9 in the morning? An addict that's who. If that joint opened at 5pm - 5am it would make far more sense and it would stop the depressive gamblers from waltzing into the pokies early in the morning on pay day.

It's as simple as that, I understand the social side of it all, and people can have that (from 5pm-5am), it's their choice to gamble but it's not fair for the depressed to feed their boredom by becoming an addicted gambler during the time of day where they should be contributing to society. but it's just like Lance Uppercut said, there is a tie between Depression & Gambling and there is no sadder atmosphere than picking up your mum from the tab at 1pm on Tuesday afternoon, most people there are miserable.

 

[mdizzle]

I agree that clubs shouldn’t be heavily reliant on poker machine revenue, but the fact is that some of them are. However it is evident that the proposed laws are a lazy piece of legislation.

Rather than address those with gambling problems directly, the new initiatives are more likely to discourage the average punter who puts in a few bucks for a laugh. The addicts will simply change machines, venues, use a friend’s card or bet on two flies running up a wall.

While Kennett and Eddie might support a campaign against the new laws for their own reasons, the fact remains that the legislation itself is poorly designed and will not address the core problem. Why should clubs sacrifice a significant proportion of their revenue for a proposition that is likely to have little impact on the social costs of problem gambling?

 

[Slattery_20]

That is one hell of an open, powerful post.

 

[Gaffanator]

If there is one piece of legislation that will better the country, this is it. Can't believe the people who are knocking it.

 

[mdizzle]

If there is one piece of legislation that will better the country, this is it. Can't believe the people who are knocking it.

The problem most knockers have isn't the methodology behind the legislation but the design of the legislation itself. Imposing limits stops addicts from losing more than a set amount, but the fact remains that they are still likely to lose money on a consistent basis. The proposed laws, like so much of this country's legislation is reactionary, ill-thought out and addresses superficial aspects rather than the underlying issue.

 

[Dan26]

By all means put things in place (like advertisements) that encourage people to stop gambling.

But never, EVER legislate against people's free will.

If someone loses their life savings on a poker machine in a casino, it is not casino's fault. It has nothing to do with the government. It is directly, solely and only the fault of the individial who exercised his own free will to put all his money into that poker machine. Being addicted isn't an excuse to blame others because the person wasn't originally addicted. They had to exercise their own free will to choose to play the poker machine before they became addicted.

Sure, discourage the practice. I'm all for discouragment. The "Quit" campaign for smoking has been a fabulously successful "discouragment" campaign. But don't legislate against people's right to smoke or gamble. We already have restrictions on gambling in place. You have to be over 18. That's enough. That's the only restriction you need.

If, in addition to the current age restriction which already exists, and in addition to some new "discouragment" ad campaign that shows the dangers, then people still choose to exercise their own free will and lose all their money - then stiff shit. That's their fault and theirs alone. It won't be me that is putting any money into the pokies that's for sure. This whole thing reeks or more nanny state crap, where the government decides what is best for the person. Typical big government, left-wing interventionist crap.

 

[philibuster]

eagles and dockers don't have pokies and they survive, maybe the east coast clubs could use them as an example

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Don't worry CNB1990, the libertarian, nanny-state crowd'll be howling you down, for taking away a persons right to punt.

They'll claim your parents are weak, and that they are using their free choice to gamble on the pokies.

Luckily those ********* are in the minority.

Hope your folks get the help that they and you need

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Should have read all the posts.

They've already started. Aaaaaaarrrrggghhh!

 

[Dan26]

Should have read all the posts.

They've already started. Aaaaaaarrrrggghhh!

Just because YOU want a nanny state doens't mean you should demean anyone else just because we think that people should be responsibe for exercising their own free will.

I'm not suggesting we do nothing about gambling. We already do. There is a restriction on being 18 year old befoe you can play. THAT is a restriction. Isn't that enough? If you put ad's all over the TV and people still choose to do it, then that is THEIR fault.

People, eventually, have to be responsible for their own actions. Call it tough love if you like.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Just because YOU want a nanny state doens't mean you should demean anyone else just because we think that people should be responsibe for exercising their own free will.

Where did I state that I wanna nanny state.
People can exercise their free will, they can play the low-loss machines, or if they want to play the high loss machines they can acquire a pre-commitment card.

I'm not suggesting we do nothing about gambling. We already do. There is a restriction on being 18 year old befoe you can play. THAT is a restriction. Isn't that enough? If you put ad's all over the TV and people still choose to do it, then that is THEIR fault.

Blame the victim.

Once you are behaviourally conditioned to play pokies, you're ability to make informed decisions about gambling become compromised.

People, eventually, have to be responsible for their own actions. Call it tough love if you like

Tough love is one thing, tough t***ies is another.

The pokies are designed to make people lose, and to come back and lose again. The policy of pre-commitment cards is consumer protection against what is an inherently dangerous product.

I'll support the victims of this scourge over the clubs' loss of revenue any day of the week.

You can bang on about your nanny state crap til your blue in the face, but if it saves even one life, then that's a success.

You can go rip one off all over your picture of Janet Albrechtsen, may make you feel better . . .

 

[sherb]

But never, EVER legislate against people's free will.

Government legislates against peoples' free will all the time.

 

[sherb]

The pokies are designed to make people lose, and to come back and lose again.

In a nutshell, they are designed to addict people. As are the environments they are housed in designed to addict people (or at least they were).

 

[Falchoon]

Great OP.

I was raised in NSW, just over the Murray and used to see the Victorians come up all the time on the pokie tours. I've played them a few times but they don't do much for me. Biggest win $60, biggest spend in one night, $50.

.

Those clubs on the Murray were and are fantastic, cheap golf, cheap bowls, cheap meals, bands etc all funded by the pokies, a real community asset.

In Melbourne we got the pokie but without the benefit.

 

[wowlace]

Its not a nanny state argument. Pokies have been foisted on society. Casinos are not naturally occurring objects. They are put in place to rip off the general public.

The idea is that there is a certain percentage of susceptible people, and they prey on them.

There needs to be controls.

Blow up the pokies.

Blow up Crown, it is the cancer of the city.