zlacker

>>jimbob+(OP)
The older I get the more I hate gambling. When i was younger I tended to think "hey it's their choice" but i've realized how unfair our society is in terms of things like this.

Food, gambling, etc. are all backed by hordes of brilliant well paid people trying to get you to ruin your life so they make money. On the other side is just regular people like us stressed out trying to survive.

This isn't some "freedom" issue, it's an incredibly huge power asymmetry and I think "we the people" need protection from these forces

>>snapca+0M2
This reminds me also of the huge difference between gambling and gambling. Some games are at least somewhat beatable (sports betting, poker) even though the house is most consistent winner.

Then there is junk like every slot machine ever, 98 % of online casinos, etc.

Lotteries would belong to that category if they weren't such a useful way to sell something few people can afford, or to finance projects with an opt-in taxation.

>>kqr+LU2
you are trying to say that there is a difference between pure random luck and 'skill' based gambling. However the both act in the brain the same way and both lead to bad ends to the vast majority.

>>sleepy+dV2
Sports was a mistake, a waste of the concern and attention of billions of people, ban sports.

>>card_z+gZ2
Assuming this isn't sarcasm... I would be very careful about banning or even dismissing anything that has been popular for thousands of years.

>>apitma+r73
Like gambling?

>>parine+P83
Yes. Consider the tradeoffs carefully. Try the experiments. Do the research. Then make a decision.

>>apitma+pb3
Haven't you already made a decision by saying "if the research finds X is true, we have a moral duty to ban gambling"? It's the is-ought problem.