~snip~
Can you consider something positive if you can clearly see that everyone who gets involved in it loses money? I don't think so, and that's why I don't blame society if they don't see gambling as a positive thing. I know that there are responsible gamblers as well, and there are those who gamble just for fun and don't spend a lot of money on it, but still, the percentage of people who are responsible and take gambling as an entertainment is too low compared to those who gamble to earn money.
However, I don't see why someone would think of a job differently when the person is simply doing their job and earning a salary. Even if they are serving cards at a table or giving out cash or chips to people, they are doing it so that they can earn a livelihood and I don't see anything bad in that.
Some gamblers can be responsible as long as they gamble and don't spend much money on gambling. It's okay if people can't see gambling as positive because everyone has their own opinion about gambling. So we will see various opinions from people in each environment in many places and positive and negative responses from many people.
Those who work in casinos may just work and make a living from it. And as long as they can keep themselves from gambling and only intend to work, they will be fine. But if a neighbor finds out that he works in gambling, maybe his neighbor will advise him to look for another job because he is worried that later he might join in gambling. But if he can explain that he really needs the job to earn a salary and take care of himself well, that will be okay. Well, that's how it is if we live in an environment, we will hear many positive and negative feedback about us.
~snip~
You should read more precisely what I have written and if there are any questions, why don't you ask me what I meant if you don't understand it?
Everything comes at a cost in life in various forms and having a big gambling industry can generate tax income for the state, which it most likely does. It would be interesting to have some numbers on the overall collateral damage that gambling produces as a cost the national society in that country has to bear.
Selling alcohol brings in tax money, but do you have an idea or a ball park about the financial collateral damage to the health and job industry that 100 dollar in tax money produce? If someone has an alcohol problem, does not go to work for four weeks per year because of getting wasted, that person does not produce any value or a product, which could be sold and also generate VAT, and the social systems have to bear the cost as they also have to get involved if that person needs treatment. Even worse, later in the future that person has a fatty liver and needs intensive medical treatment , surgeries included perhaps.
How much should that person drink to generate enough tax money that all the cost drinking entails on all aspects of life are covered? Do you now get my point?
Yes, I understand what you mean. Sorry if I didn't understand what you meant before.
And if that's what it means, you could check where the state generates tax money. With the state's many tax sources, the tax money is very large and can cover the costs you mentioned. Apart from that, the number of people suffering from the disease you mentioned is smaller than the total population in a country, so the country can still cover it, provided that no tax money is corrupted. But the problem is how much tax money has been corrupted by government officials and how much tax money is left, so it will likely be less than expected.
The assumption is like this. If one country has a population of 100 million people. Suppose that 10 million people gamble and 1 million experience problems related to gambling, so they have to get medical treatment, and it takes years to recover completely. While the tax money received by the state from all businesses is, say $4.9 trillion. The state will be able to cover the maintenance costs. However, if not, the government will look for other solutions not to burden the country too much.
But I am sorry. Perhaps I can't explain it clearly, so there are still mistakes. I am also not someone who understands tax and economic issues and only think of an ordinary person who doesn't know anything. Once again, I apologize if I was wrong.