Mate, I have to disagree with you because you approached the matter in perspective aspect and not wholistic. What do I mean? You alleged that gambling had made some people break through poverty. This is true and not whole true. In order to determine the overall impact of gambling, you have to compare the number of people gambling has made to be poor and the number of people it lifted from poverty.
If there's any data available for this, I'll like to have it posted here. Gambling has made more people poor, depressed, turn criminals etc than it has made people rich. So we judge from the overall performance if gambling and not from the success of a few people.
Oh. I think I got misunderstood. The point I was trying to make was that gambling is not a net-negative event. It's similar to every other endeavors in life. I will explain.
Even in trading, it is a zero-sum game where one person wins when another losses. Now, do we say that trading is a terrible venture or that it is net-negative? No.
Another instance, in any career, there are also winners and losers only difference is that you don't lose your money but time invested for the endeavor.
Most people on this thread have successfully painted gambling as a grave offense that nobody should take part in but that's not the case actually. Everything that gambling is about, is widely talked about — it's a high-risk, high-reward venture.