Essendon FC gives a shitload back to the community. Isn’t it better for pokies revenue to flow through an organisation like that than places like Crown who couldn’t give 2 ■■■■■ about anybody else? I hate the ■■■■■■■ things but they’re going to be there regardless. Just a thought, happy to be convinced otherwise.
2 Likes
Thats a very shaky argument. Saying that its ok for Essendon to perpetuate problem gambling and the financial distress just because we all love the club isn’t great. Hard to argue that pokies are going to be in existence regardless. But why bother spruiking about fundraising to help struggling farmers, when you’re part of the cause of people with gambling addiction struggling financially…
I didn’t say it’s because “we love the club” i said they put the money to better use than casinos etc. And comparing a farmer going broke due to drought to a compulsive gambler? Give me a ■■■■■■■ break man. Gambling addiction is terrible but gambling is legal. Alcohol addiction is terrible but alcohol is legal. Should the AFL stop selling beers at games? Or are you ok with that vice?
2 Likes
Your whole argument centres around the club using the money to help the community. The purpose wasn’t to equate gamblers and farmers being in the same group, rather that taking from one helpless group to fund another isn’t a solution.
Also, I’m not saying that gambling or alcohol should be illegal. But they do have a moral choice whether they perpetuate that behaviour. And pokies are computer generated odds that guarantee people using them will lose more than they win. Do you not have a problem with that?
Are not the number of pokies capped in Victoria?
1 Like
Just to be clear, i’m not a pro pokies weirdo. I’m just saying that they are going to be there anyway. I would rather football clubs take the revenue than casinos. That seems like a no brainer to me. i do unserstand the flipside to the argument though. And everybody is well aware that pokies are geared to make money, otherwise they wouldn’t exist. Just like people know the risks of other potentially addictive activities.
My only point is, at the end of the day the pokies revenue will be there. I’d rather it go to football clubs than companies like Crown. If you think Essendon pulling out of these licenses means that 10mil will stay in peoples pockets then that’s a little naive. The licenses will go to the highest bidder, and they will likely be a far more sinister group than Essendon.
1 Like
Good analogy.
Not naive. Your argument is a lesser of two evils scenario. If you can justify that, then more power to you.
1 Like
If it means lower membership costs.
I am fine with the club owning pokies.
I am pretty comfortable that the profits are actually being plowed back into the community instead of say crown shareholders/Jamie Packer’s pockets as an alternative.
3 Likes
if it means the club ditching pokies, put me down for a $50 increase in my membership.
2 Likes
You should keep the $50 a put it in an Essendon owned poker machine.
Same thing - but you might win a Jackpot.
7 Likes
Spot on.
They are not reducing pokie or license numbers. In SA Woolworths own about 60% of machines now I believe and rich hotel conglomerates own most of the rest. Most of their profits stays in their hands. The local footy and sports clubs that own pokies plow a heap back into the local community. I’d rather we have them than sell them to Woolies
6 Likes
That’s some interesting thinking right there.
Strong agree. The club ditching the licenses does not mean those licences disappear into the ether.
Living in a capitalist society means coming to terms with a lot of unethical things happening around you. This is just another one of those things.
3 Likes
There is nothing unethical about running pokies.
Talk about pokies being set-up for people to lose… no kidding. It isn’t a not-for-profit business.
Also agree with this.
1 Like
Shifting your morals to the lesser of two evils isn’t correct. But interesting to know that there are a lot of people who will accept compromising positions if they think it a) profits them or b) has a small positive flow on effect to the community.
And ‘capitalism’ does not imply or excuse unethical practice.
Like many things in life, there is no hard correct or incorrect stance to take here.
I don’t think it’s an amazing and wonderful thing that we have pokies revenue. But I also don’t think it’s absolutely disgraceful. My feelings lie somewhere in the middle of those and I don’t see a need to shift towards one end or the other.
Welllllllllllllllllllllllll there’s no such thing as ethical capitalism so I’m inclined to disagree with you here.
1 Like
Your statement that there is no such thing as ethical capitalism is complete garbage. Perhaps you should look up the definition of capitalism.
I accept that your views are your own. But profiting off the misfortune of others seems pretty difficult to justify personally.
Not all gambling is misery. What’s your stance on alcohol?
1 Like