Essay On Pathological Gamblin
In addition to the overestimated chances, the lottery targets the poor in a very disconcerting manner. The economic hopelessness that entraps the poor is preyed upon by lottery ads, promising a chance of immediate financial success. Advertisements often show depictions of people transforming from tattered clothing to tailored suits, champagne, and expensive cars. Billboards and radio commercials focus on lower-income areas, while many ad campaigns coincide with the release of government benefit checks. By raising revenue through the lottery, public accountability is overlooked. Since the lottery is able to pay for itself effortlessly, the states exert close to no oversight in the process although the lottery is certainly not ignored by the states.
Evidence has begun to show that compulsive gamblers are not the only ones who have become addicted. State officials have come to depend on money brought in from lottery revenue, satisfying the anti-tax atmosphere of current society. Modern lottery games are a result of revamping of gambling revenue during periods of decline, including weekly drawings in the 1970s, instant games in the 1980s, and eventually video lottery in the 1990s. While the revenue has been relished by the state treasury, chronic gamblers have suffered. Pathological …show more content…
gambling has become its own addiction, even necessitating organizations such as Gamblers Anonymous, similar to the group Alcoholics Anonymous. Somewhere between one-fourth and two-thirds of all revenue come from pathological gamblers, but the more time spent gambling encourages the cycle by trying to recover the money lost. Despite the constant promotion of the lottery, no studies have ever been conducted by the states to determine the impact on the poor and unemployed. Interviewed state lottery official confirm that there is no recorded data on addiction rates and have no plans to conduct such a study, yet the defense remains that playing the lottery is voluntary.
The most convincing selling point of the lottery is the money supposedly funneled towards education. However, the results remain uncertain. While states such as Indiana and Idaho give several million dollars towards education, the plot behind these stories is more complicated. Comparatively, education receives much less than the states would have people think, and out of more than thirty-nine states, only twenty-two earmark portions of the revenue. Many people also assume that the money is a bonus towards the schools, added to the money they already receive. Unfortunately, the money schools receive from the lottery is a substitution, taking the place of the money they would have originally received. In Ohio, the proceeds actually caused overall state spending on schools to shrink, rather than grow. A study showed that, despite Ohio’s promise to devote all lottery revenue to public schools, state money spent on education dropped from 42% to 29% (Coeyman, para.14) of the total budget.
Likewise, not all lotteries are equal. Georgia, for one example, gave all proceeds to education, but restricted the areas of which the money could be used by the schools, rather than putting the money into a general fund. This seems to be the most effective way for education to receive genuine benefits, however. Other states, like California, are criticized after granting sizable amounts of money for inefficiency and poorly conceived restrictions.
Some Americans, notwithstanding critical thinking skills, are overwhelmingly blasé about the goings on of the lottery; openly agreeing that the lottery is a tax on the poor, yet believing that calling it a “commonly shared experience” excuses the previous fact. That is the biggest issue surrounding the lottery: not whose argument for or against the lottery is right, but that a majority of Americans are so bereft in understanding of the problems created by the lottery, despite the fact that these problems can be resolved. Other countries have, and if America cannot do this single-handedly, there are templates and examples to go on. Quebec, a close neighbor to the US, increased the prevalence of lifetime non-gamblers from 13.6% to 16.4% in three years, and past-year gambling participation decreased from 70.5% to 66.2% (Kairouz, para.38) in the same amount of time. For Quebec, gambling patterns are not contingent on demographics, decreasing evenly across the board. Problem or low-risk gamblers remained unchanged, whereas a decrease from 66.1% to 61.5% (Kairouz, para.42) occurred in non-problem gamblers. To coincide with the unchanged percentage of problem gamblers, secondary and primary prevention efforts were suggested for initiation or maintained to prevent gambling related harm. There are obviously ways of fixing societal gambling problems and, given America can free itself from too much pride, could find suggestions for where to begin change towards better regulating the lottery.
The United Kingdom’s amusement industry has a worldwide reputation for ensuring players are protected from gambling related harm. The British Amusement Catering Trade Association (BACTA), the principal trade association for the amusement and gaming industry in the UK, serves to regulate the industry to assure safety. BACTA manufactures, supplies, and operates amusement machines, while representing the interests of more than 500 companies and 1,000 individuals (“BACTA”, para.2). The trade association also has the Enhanced Social Responsibility Commitment for many reasons, including promoting socially responsible gambling. It also works to measure the effectiveness of Social Responsibility Gambling initiatives and reviews self-exclusion practice to make it even more effective, including increasing staff training, exploring ways of assisting customers and working with others to develop best practice. The UK works with product manufacturers to actively promote responsible gambling and harm minimization. They also work closely with the Responsible Gambling Trust, contributing to research and education to understand more about customers and the risk profile of games. If America learned anything about taking responsibility for citizens and keeping up to date on care, it would best be found in the UK. They have a lock-down on the most efficient and beneficial way to encourage responsibility in individuals, whether or not the focus is on gambling. There are no excuses for America to do as poorly as it does for a first world country. There are so many options and so many resources to amend the issues at hand. Nevertheless, Americans still pretend there are no problems, preferring to believe America remains faultless. There is no doubt that these problems exist and all that remains is for the US to rectify these mistakes. The lottery may currently do more harm than good, but it can still be amended, rather than eliminating it or ignoring the problem.
The impact on the lower-income players can be diminished, given the proper regulation, using the UK as an example. Being completely upfront and honest about the likelihood of winning and using less aggressive advertisement encourages people to grasp the true nature of gambling. The more responsible version of the current lottery can generate equally as much money. Whether or not that money goes to schools appropriately is another matter for regulation. However, the idea of the lottery is still feasible, even without causing damage to the American
population.
Evidence has begun to show that compulsive gamblers are not the only ones who have become addicted. State officials have come to depend on money brought in from lottery revenue, satisfying the anti-tax atmosphere of current society. Modern lottery games are a result of revamping of gambling revenue during periods of decline, including weekly drawings in the 1970s, instant games in the 1980s, and eventually video lottery in the 1990s. While the revenue has been relished by the state treasury, chronic gamblers have suffered. Pathological …show more content…
gambling has become its own addiction, even necessitating organizations such as Gamblers Anonymous, similar to the group Alcoholics Anonymous. Somewhere between one-fourth and two-thirds of all revenue come from pathological gamblers, but the more time spent gambling encourages the cycle by trying to recover the money lost. Despite the constant promotion of the lottery, no studies have ever been conducted by the states to determine the impact on the poor and unemployed. Interviewed state lottery official confirm that there is no recorded data on addiction rates and have no plans to conduct such a study, yet the defense remains that playing the lottery is voluntary.
The most convincing selling point of the lottery is the money supposedly funneled towards education. However, the results remain uncertain. While states such as Indiana and Idaho give several million dollars towards education, the plot behind these stories is more complicated. Comparatively, education receives much less than the states would have people think, and out of more than thirty-nine states, only twenty-two earmark portions of the revenue. Many people also assume that the money is a bonus towards the schools, added to the money they already receive. Unfortunately, the money schools receive from the lottery is a substitution, taking the place of the money they would have originally received. In Ohio, the proceeds actually caused overall state spending on schools to shrink, rather than grow. A study showed that, despite Ohio’s promise to devote all lottery revenue to public schools, state money spent on education dropped from 42% to 29% (Coeyman, para.14) of the total budget.
Likewise, not all lotteries are equal. Georgia, for one example, gave all proceeds to education, but restricted the areas of which the money could be used by the schools, rather than putting the money into a general fund. This seems to be the most effective way for education to receive genuine benefits, however. Other states, like California, are criticized after granting sizable amounts of money for inefficiency and poorly conceived restrictions.
Some Americans, notwithstanding critical thinking skills, are overwhelmingly blasé about the goings on of the lottery; openly agreeing that the lottery is a tax on the poor, yet believing that calling it a “commonly shared experience” excuses the previous fact. That is the biggest issue surrounding the lottery: not whose argument for or against the lottery is right, but that a majority of Americans are so bereft in understanding of the problems created by the lottery, despite the fact that these problems can be resolved. Other countries have, and if America cannot do this single-handedly, there are templates and examples to go on. Quebec, a close neighbor to the US, increased the prevalence of lifetime non-gamblers from 13.6% to 16.4% in three years, and past-year gambling participation decreased from 70.5% to 66.2% (Kairouz, para.38) in the same amount of time. For Quebec, gambling patterns are not contingent on demographics, decreasing evenly across the board. Problem or low-risk gamblers remained unchanged, whereas a decrease from 66.1% to 61.5% (Kairouz, para.42) occurred in non-problem gamblers. To coincide with the unchanged percentage of problem gamblers, secondary and primary prevention efforts were suggested for initiation or maintained to prevent gambling related harm. There are obviously ways of fixing societal gambling problems and, given America can free itself from too much pride, could find suggestions for where to begin change towards better regulating the lottery.
The United Kingdom’s amusement industry has a worldwide reputation for ensuring players are protected from gambling related harm. The British Amusement Catering Trade Association (BACTA), the principal trade association for the amusement and gaming industry in the UK, serves to regulate the industry to assure safety. BACTA manufactures, supplies, and operates amusement machines, while representing the interests of more than 500 companies and 1,000 individuals (“BACTA”, para.2). The trade association also has the Enhanced Social Responsibility Commitment for many reasons, including promoting socially responsible gambling. It also works to measure the effectiveness of Social Responsibility Gambling initiatives and reviews self-exclusion practice to make it even more effective, including increasing staff training, exploring ways of assisting customers and working with others to develop best practice. The UK works with product manufacturers to actively promote responsible gambling and harm minimization. They also work closely with the Responsible Gambling Trust, contributing to research and education to understand more about customers and the risk profile of games. If America learned anything about taking responsibility for citizens and keeping up to date on care, it would best be found in the UK. They have a lock-down on the most efficient and beneficial way to encourage responsibility in individuals, whether or not the focus is on gambling. There are no excuses for America to do as poorly as it does for a first world country. There are so many options and so many resources to amend the issues at hand. Nevertheless, Americans still pretend there are no problems, preferring to believe America remains faultless. There is no doubt that these problems exist and all that remains is for the US to rectify these mistakes. The lottery may currently do more harm than good, but it can still be amended, rather than eliminating it or ignoring the problem.
The impact on the lower-income players can be diminished, given the proper regulation, using the UK as an example. Being completely upfront and honest about the likelihood of winning and using less aggressive advertisement encourages people to grasp the true nature of gambling. The more responsible version of the current lottery can generate equally as much money. Whether or not that money goes to schools appropriately is another matter for regulation. However, the idea of the lottery is still feasible, even without causing damage to the American
population.