And as for this lady - she may be wealthy, but she is wealthy because she has emptied the pockets of many sad souls, this is not a good way to be rich .... not at all ..... if she was like Mark Zuckerberg - good for her, but getting rich like this - is quite despicable.
And getting rich like Mark Zuckerberg isn't morally questionable? He's getting rich by selling people's personal information to advertisers, totally disregarding their privacy, even sharing their freaking phone numbers gathered through their 2FA.
Facebook is also made to be very addictive. Social media can also ruin people's lives. Okay, maybe not to the same extent as gambling websites, but it's still morally questionable.
If gambling would be made illegal, there would still be casinos around. Only, they would not follow any regulations and people wouldn't be as protected as they are today (from bad practices).
That woman has every right to pay herself that kind of salary, she started a legitimate business and is making a profit from that.
Do you think every store owner is immoral, because they sell alcohol to possible addicts?
Nobody is saint in this world, and everybody got some skeletons, nobody's perfect.
So a store owner might sell alcohol to someone who should stay away from it - is it good? No, but how many incidents like this could occur? Definitely not a scale of $1,000,000 NET PROFIT per day, right?
I have no problem with her taking a salary, I have a problem with the HOW she makes it. For instance: tactics of delaying withdrawals, asking customers for more and more documents, freezing user accounts for "investigation" that takes over 1 year, and worse of all - getting main profit from addicts who cannot stop throwing away their money.
The way she's getting her salary is via unscrupulous means. Are these legitimate? They are legit but unscrupulous.
And forget about Facebook, would you say an average Joe, a teacher, is getting a salary for doing something less legitimate than this?
What about a construction builder?
An engineer?
Are these jobs just as good as hers? You don't see any difference?
Why does the scale of her daily wage matter?
I'm sorry, but there are enough people who are perfectly capable of gambling without getting addicted. She's just providing a service that has wide demand.
Anyone who is selling addictive products or services is just as "guilty" as her.
People are responsible for their own well-being. If you get addicted to gambling, it's your own responsibility to fix that.
Got any proof of these tactics that you mention? Are they delaying withdraws, asking for documents, freezing accounts etc because they want to make it as difficult as possible for customers to get money out - or are they required to do so by law?
Again, I don't see anything wrong with running a successful gambling website and getting huge profits from that.