Talking Footy

I split this post off the NRL Pokie thread on the Fight Club in order to be able to respond to this on topic.

Raiderdave wrote:

why ?
its a legitimate legal form of gambling ....

That's not the point.

Raiderdave wrote:

the racing industry .. is it doomed to fail ?
it wrecks families too .. so who's looking to put reforms into that industry to " control " the amount people bet
its a hogwash piece of legislation that targets one form of gambling over another

This is what Raider doesn't understand. Poker machines grab large amounts of money in bits and pieces quickly and ferociously. Every time some one presses a button, money is gambled. At the races, it is only gambled per race. That is far more limited and reasonable for that reason.

Raiderdave wrote:

the clubs industry has become massive
a massive employer .. a massive contributor to their local communities
yes on the back of poker machine revenue.. but which is mainly raised by responsible people who have no problem controlling their gambling .. but won't wear being treated like " babies " & have to " register " to do something they've always done responsibly

If they are responsible, the cap will make absolutely no difference. Responsible gamblers will have their own cap anyway. To try and claim that the local community needs the poker machines to provide jobs is a massive double standard that needs to be corrected.

Raiderdave wrote:

to slash this revenue by a minimum of 30% " overnight" rather then phase in these changes overtime to allow clubs time to " diversify their revenue streams is brain dead poliltics
& with not even a guarantee it will work ... will cause clubs to close .. people to lose their jobs & community based organisations like rotary & the lions club & countless junior sports clubs in all sports .. to the wall.

The clubs should have diversified their revenue streams a long time ago. To concentrate any revenue stream on one thing is really brain dead business practice. Clubs that have done this deserve to close.

Raiderdave wrote:

good one Julia
you are a peanut .. & your incompetent minister .. Mrs Macklin
is one too

They have made the hard decision that was needed in order to make a number of irresponsible people pull their heads in. I approve of it.

Here is something else that I disagree with TLPG on. He seems to favour the limits of poker machines believing that it will assist in curbing gambling. I find this attitude to be as repugnant as the suggestion that harsh punishment on drugs is the answer so I would assume that TLPG holds a similar view to Mr Eliagh on the issue. Education is the real answer. Gamblers will simply look for another outlet and most likely it would be underground.

Which would be illegal and the police have the right to shut it down.

There would be too many for that to work, TLPG. Education works better in the long term. Welcome back, incidentally, and perhaps you can sort Mr Raider out once and for all as I have had no reply to my formal complaints about Mr Raider's behaviour.

The best thing to do with Raider is to do exactly what you are doing. Ignore him. He thrives on attention and will run stale without it. The trouble is Onions will keep him going.

But to the rest of what you said, I notice that you've pressed long term options as the only way to go. That's overly idealistic, because it does nothing short term. There are many families who are being hurt by gambling NOW. It requires a quick solution and what the government is doing will go a long way to achieving that.

No, it will not. It will merely press the gamblers elsewhere as I stated before. I would add that it would not just be the underground networks either. There are many other gambling options for the addicts.

No options are as addictive as the old fasioned one armed bandit (or the modern version thereof) or as hungry. Pokies each up more money faster than any gambling option in the history of the world. In fact I would call forcing the gamblers away a good thing if it's saves the lives of their families and saves marraiges and so forth.

(Note: Deleting baiting post and the follow up - and the off topic post)

I do take some offence to describing gambling as an addiction. It's a choice and will always remain a choice. That choice must be fully educated. Surely you would agree that if everyone was fully educated they would not gamble?

I do note with regret that you deleted Mr Eliagh's comment that further demonstrated his poor education. But as you are the moderator I must accept your decision.

Truthsayer wrote:

Surely you would agree that if everyone was fully educated they would not gamble?

No I don't agree and here's why. You'll find that a lot of people start gambling because they aren't earning enough money and can't. Not won't, can't. And there's no other way to make ends meet as far as they are concerned. The only way to resolve that is to smash CEO wages down to size to force the creation of more jobs, and raise the lower wages.

Edit - slanderous post below Truthsayer's removed.

One of the most important reasons education will work, Mr TLPG, is once potential gamblers realise the true chances of winning any money is so very low they will seek other sources. They do exist. There are always ways to improve one's qualifications to gain better jobs and better wages. I refuse to believe that anyone can really say that there is "no other way to make ends meet".

raider is only attacking the tax on pokes is because of his little raiders
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... 1xzpx.html
thats the corpate structure of how they operate
like all NRL clubs they are nothing with out their league clubs pokes and gaming income. all clubs own several of them

The Canberra Raiders have previously refused to publicly disclose details of their financial performance, but documents lodged with corporate regulator ASIC show the NRL club recorded a $226,000 loss in 2010-2011 despite netting almost $12 million from TV money, gate receipts, merchandising, sponsorship and match-day sales.
The club's income also includes $1.4 million in annual ''appearance fees'' from the ACT government, which also provides payroll tax concessions worth $500,000 each year.

included in that figure of the football clubs revenue will be the NRL grant what all clubs get of around 3 or 4 million each, which is not listed in the article

Bad example, LIC, because the Raiders haven't relied on the pokies for anywhere near as long as the New South Wales clubs have.

TLPG wrote:

Bad example, LIC, because the Raiders haven't relied on the pokies for anywhere near as long as the New South Wales clubs have.

for the raiders whole existence they have relied on pokies, they haven't been around for any near as long as many NSW nrl clubs.
its only an example on why raider is attacking the poke tax. as its the raiders, main form of business

Maybe he likes to go to a pub or club once in a while and put some money in a machine?

Fair enough, I don't play them much anymore and would rather put the money in my tab account instead, but if I want to spend my money, I should be able to spend as much or as little as I like and in saying that, (you can't even put a $1 coin in their machines these days, it's all notes, so who is making everyone spend more with that little trick?) it's my money to do with what I please. stuff the goody two shoes trying to run every little thing in our lives while they get fat from all the enforced taxes and whatnot.

Tax the machines as much as you like if you think it'll stop problem gamblers, but don't stop the people who have self control from enjoying themselves. Bloody Tyrants.