zlacker

>>jimbob+(OP)
Unfortunately Brazil also legalized it in 2018, after Dilma was impeached using very sketchy arguments (many call it a legal coup).

It is spreading as a cancer. This month the central bank published a report saying that in August 20% of the Bolsa Família, the largest money transfer program for very poor Brazilians, was spent on these bets.

Out of the 20 million people that receive it, 5 million made bets during that month. This is 2 billion reais (about $450M) spent in a single month by the poorest Brazilians.

It's a cancer. Everywhere you go there are ads. The influencers, the biggest athletes and musicians are marketing it.

Although I tend to be liberal, this needs to be heavily regulated.

>>vitorb+UI1
The figures you state are misleading. Money bet is not money lost. For example, roulette payout is 97.3% and sports betting payout can be as high as 99% or even 100% (done to attract players so that they open an account).

>>erfgh+rZ1
I'm not sure I'd call them misleading because they didn't say the money was gone, just that it was spent (not implying it didn't come back). The fact that that much money was bet at all for an aid program is astonishing and unfortunate. Sure, not all of that money was lost, but I'd call any of those returned "winnings" an investment by the sports betting companies to secure clients for life.

>>jjice+OM2
I'm curious which statistic they actually used (spent vs lost). If you're playing a quick game with 99% payout, you could earn $1k of income in a month and "spend" $10k on gambling. It seems like money lost would be an easier figure to compare.