Topic: Is gambling a weird way of weath redistribution? - page 4. (Read 1530 times)

Yesterday I was sorting my winnings tickets I put while watching the game, had quite a nice sum and while standing in line to cash them I thought about how money is moving around, got the idea it's pretty close to a wealth redistribution.

Might be a stupid theory but hear me out on this, we have the gamblers that bet on 1 million, half of them lose, half of them win, the casinos get their 5% share, from this share they pay wages and rent and other costs, cutting the part where the casino gets the money it's that basically gamblers pay the wages of the whole staff manning those, and they also shuffle money between them.
Assuming rich people have more to lose and their share of the losses is bigger, taking into account they support with this money a ton of jobs, 70 000 in Europe alone, is this a form of wealth redistribution?

It all boils down to why you do it, but the entertainment, in my opinion, should be the main goal, with the money you are okay to spend. Of course, usually, the odds aren't on your side, but it doesn't mean you should think that the whole world is against you.

Every business is sustained by the proceeds of that business, and the proceeds of a casino comes from the gamblers using the casino, do that's how it should be, the gamblers funds are used to service everyday activities of the casino and the casino still benefits from the excesses.

I also stand to believe that the casino investsa good percentage of the profits in some other profitable ventures to serve as a backup funds to support the casino in the events they have massive wins and available funds can't cover them all.

Might be a stupid theory but hear me out on this, we have the gamblers that bet on 1 million, half of them lose, half of them win, the casinos get their 5% share, from this share they pay wages and rent and other costs, cutting the part where the casino gets the money it's that basically gamblers pay the wages of the whole staff manning those, and they also shuffle money between them.

Yesterday I was sorting my winnings tickets I put while watching the game, had quite a nice sum and while standing in line to cash them I thought about how money is moving around, got the idea it's pretty close to a wealth redistribution.

Might be a stupid theory but hear me out on this, we have the gamblers that bet on 1 million, half of them lose, half of them win, the casinos get their 5% share, from this share they pay wages and rent and other costs, cutting the part where the casino gets the money it's that basically gamblers pay the wages of the whole staff manning those, and they also shuffle money between them.
Assuming rich people have more to lose and their share of the losses is bigger, taking into account they support with this money a ton of jobs, 70 000 in Europe alone, is this a form of wealth redistribution?

It doesn't matter who wins the house always wins, I took out my time to check 1x bet crash without playing, I was just carefully observing what the users are staking and how much the casino takes in each round, the cumulative stake from every user might be 2 million naira for a single round but the Total amount won for the round might just be 4 hundred thousand, you can see the amount difference.. i definitely agree with your point, indeed players 100 %... gambling is a rigged game you can only get lucky

You're not wrong about wealth redistribution but you got the numbers wrong.

Casino takes 100% (in the end) and Players lose 100%.

It's an addiction and they're selling the drug.

It always ends the same, that's why I never gambled in my life.

...Then why I'm in the "Gambling" zone ? just for fun.

 

The casinos will always make much more profits than the gamblers would .. mind you, they don't have to pay for whatever expenditures from their own pockets. Whatever interest they make is allocated to paying taxes, renewal of license, paying staffs and teams on operation etc...

Regardless of this fact, the house edge for any casino isn't that small for them to have 95% of the money like you said... Some curious researchers bought leaked data and analyzed this; casinos can go with 82% or less, the rest remains an opportunity for anyone that gets lucky. Remember, they won't have anymore patronage if nobody is winning.

Nope, you're wrong unless the probability of the game is 1/2 even it doesn't mean 50% of the people will win or lose.

Almost every business makes money from average joe either it's service-based or manufacturing based company so now we need to look how much employees will be required to operate a casino I am pretty much sure it won't even past 20 for most of the online casinos that deals with millions that sums it's not really the great idea from the perspective of encouraging people to gamble because it create job opportunities or wealth distribution as you describes.

Psychology, the urge for risk and reward, is key. Knowledge protects you. Without it, you chase dopamine and easy money. Gambling involves the dark side of human desire with the brutal fact of odds, not a game. It can trick anyone into seeing fortunes in emptiness. Take a skeptical stance and control your emotions. Accept that gambling involves losing as well as winning. Respect money and its psychological games. This is about mental resilience against the addictive cycle that can draw you in and spit you out, not just pocketbook protection

Yesterday I was sorting my winnings tickets I put while watching the game, had quite a nice sum and while standing in line to cash them I thought about how money is moving around, got the idea it's pretty close to a wealth redistribution.

Might be a stupid theory but hear me out on this, we have the gamblers that bet on 1 million, half of them lose, half of them win, the casinos get their 5% share, from this share they pay wages and rent and other costs, cutting the part where the casino gets the money it's that basically gamblers pay the wages of the whole staff manning those, and they also shuffle money between them.
Assuming rich people have more to lose and their share of the losses is bigger, taking into account they support with this money a ton of jobs, 70 000 in Europe alone, is this a form of wealth redistribution?

gamblers that bet on 1 million, half of them lose, half of them win,

gamblers pay the wages of the whole staff manning those, and they also shuffle money between them.
Assuming rich people have more to lose and their share of the losses is bigger, taking into account they support with this money a ton of jobs, 70 000 in Europe alone, is this a form of wealth redistribution?

[...]the casinos are winning most money. I will say casinos take 95% of the money.

       -     I get what you mean, Mate, which is that the more you really benefit from the casino, not the casino gamblers themselves. So it is true that the casino really benefits the gamblers.

Why did I say that? That's because the number of losses is more frequent than the gambling winner and the gambling platforms are more profitable.

Yes, because at first I was also a beginner who did misunderstand how gambling actually was so that in the end I experienced addiction, but thank God I managed to recover by using the methods I created myself, in conclusion, more or less I know enough about the various things experienced and felt by gamblers who have entered the addiction cycle, And one thing I will always advise all gamblers, especially those beginners, to first have the right understanding of how gambling is actually, because understanding is the main key to being able to stay safe in gambling, in the sense that by having the right understanding, it is less likely for a gambler to take various actions that are beyond his ability.

On the other hand, as you said, the initial mistake of beginners is thinking that they will be able to get a lot of money, or think that gambling can make them a rich man, when obviously it is nothing more than a delusion, because the reality is quite the opposite, simply put, instead of earning but what happens is that they lose money in the long run. In essence, there is nothing else I would say and suggest to beginners other than to first understand what gambling is really about, in the sense of understanding that gambling provides a winning opportunity to multiply their money but along with realizing that gambling can lose them even greater amounts of money. This is a neutral point of view that can prevent them from making impulsive actions and decisions.

I do not agree with this. Casinos are not having just 5% from their customers. That is why most gambling sites do not prefer gamblers to gamble between themselves but the gamblers to be gambling with the casinos and the casinos are winning most money. I will say casinos take 95% of the money.

About the money redistribution, I do not think that is worth talking about. I understood your point and you are correct. But redistribution is not correct about this because it is about sharing something (which is money here) among people. The money is not shared to the gamblers that are losing the money to the gambling sites.

That is the same with all businesses, you pay the salaries of the grocery staffs when you purchase a product, you pay the salaries of the airport workers when you book a flight, money you pay to services are used to keep the service running and leave a good enough profit margin for the business.

Gambling is not wealth redistribution, but involves transfer of money as does everything else we pay for.

- Jay -