Topic: You have to prove that you can take the loss - page 7. (Read 1632 times)
It's clearly stated that the government is trying to regulate even more the gambling casinos because some folks lost their jobs and must get a salary to spend, it's a weird situation and a weird move from the part of the gov but it is logical enough to be implemented. The gamblers should only bet what they only afford to lose and this is why the new rules are going to be implemented, to prevent peoples from risking their salaries, risking bigger amounts and losing all of their funds which is catastrophic.
Definitely, in the real online gambling, there is nothing to fear because it is safe and secure which is compared to a physical cockfight that during lockdown it is prohibited were much-updated news that many participants were caught in the act and they already paid about 35k but as gambling lovers, it is proven that it cannot really be shaken it still continues to be enjoyed without control In fact very immovable even incarcerated.
There is nothing to do with them. Even though how serious the government imposing such restrain and stop physical gambling, they are still hard-headed not to follow them instead of continuing it. They know that they can't be put in jail for their whole life and they can be freed soon if they can pay their bill. That makes them strongly decide to do illegal cockfighting. 
~
That's my money, my rule, this is the rule we like.
Hope our government will not follow the same law as gambling addiction is also high in our country.
Quote
If a person wanna gamble with their entire years salary, the government shouldn't have any say or order on it. They can advise although.
That's my money, my rule, this is the rule we like.
Hope our government will not follow the same law as gambling addiction is also high in our country.
Gambling addiction, as any other addiction, is a bad thing, and it can't be ignored, even if only from 5% to 10% of all gamblers in most countries can be called problem gamblers. But the regulations should not be harmful for 90%-95% of gamblers who gamble to relax from their hard work, and can work more effectively after that. The importance of relaxation is underestimated big time in economic terms. Deprive people of relaxation, and economy will collapse.
addiction must be faced immediately before it gets worst since addict don't usually accept they are.
they must be cured and must be helped.
There is no point in creating external restraints in order to contain human gambling addiction.
The solution created is not to totally cure gambling addiction, but to prevent people from getting addicted, but it's not 100% guaranteed it will work but this is the initiative of the government. People must change themselves, otherwise they will always find ways to get around the restrictions.
True, we need to learn from our mistakes, gambling addiction is could be similar to alcohol addiction, but there's no restriction on buying altcoin or limitation from consumers, so this law is quite absurd too but some people would appreciate it especially those who are not gamblers. In addition, such restrictions relieve people of responsibility for their actions, they begin to think that the reasons for their addictions are outside of them, while this is not so.
Not blaming themselves for gambling addiction when the are in control is a plain stupidity.
~
That's my money, my rule, this is the rule we like.
Hope our government will not follow the same law as gambling addiction is also high in our country.
Quote
If a person wanna gamble with their entire years salary, the government shouldn't have any say or order on it. They can advise although.
That's my money, my rule, this is the rule we like.
Hope our government will not follow the same law as gambling addiction is also high in our country.
Gambling addiction, as any other addiction, is a bad thing, and it can't be ignored, even if only from 5% to 10% of all gamblers in most countries can be called problem gamblers. But the regulations should not be harmful for 90%-95% of gamblers who gamble to relax from their hard work, and can work more effectively after that. The importance of relaxation is underestimated big time in economic terms. Deprive people of relaxation, and economy will collapse.
There is no point in creating external restraints in order to contain human gambling addiction. People must change themselves, otherwise they will always find ways to get around the restrictions.
In addition, such restrictions relieve people of responsibility for their actions, they begin to think that the reasons for their addictions are outside of them, while this is not so.
~
That's my money, my rule, this is the rule we like.
Hope our government will not follow the same law as gambling addiction is also high in our country.
Quote
If a person wanna gamble with their entire years salary, the government shouldn't have any say or order on it. They can advise although.
That's my money, my rule, this is the rule we like.
Hope our government will not follow the same law as gambling addiction is also high in our country.
Gambling addiction, as any other addiction, is a bad thing, and it can't be ignored, even if only from 5% to 10% of all gamblers in most countries can be called problem gamblers. But the regulations should not be harmful for 90%-95% of gamblers who gamble to relax from their hard work, and can work more effectively after that. The importance of relaxation is underestimated big time in economic terms. Deprive people of relaxation, and economy will collapse.
Atleast, it would still be allowed. This is a point that should still be appreciated. In other countrie,s, both offline and offline gambling are prohibited. So regulation will not be that much of a burden. The rule is to prove you can take a loss of €100 right? If you are wanting to continue, it should be fine to give the demand. Also this would somewhat help the gamblers especially if they do not have that much to gamble. They would be restricted to a certain point telling "this is enough for today", if you don't have that much money to gamble. Which is a good thing, why? Some gamblers are just greedy and frustrated to get that win not being aware of how much have they lose already. And also, if this will be negative to the gamblers, rules may still change for sure.
As practice shows, government agencies are absolutely indifferent to the effectiveness of their work - so you think about such details, but those who promote such regulation do not. That is why I am in favor of reducing government regulation in all areas (and in gambling too), since it is ineffective.
Of course the government can do it, but they dont want to change the rules they have made. Many rules from all lines of government must be changed, but who cares. People are those who have to comply with government regulation and anyone who violates them will be sanctioned. I would also argue that if thats for the best, reducing the rules might be a socially acceptable solution.This is the main problem of officials/bureaucracy in any country and system of government: in the end, they are only interested in people needing them. In fact, they are interested in creating problems that can be solved only with their help.
Well gamblers losing £100/month is going to make them useful when all those goes in to the right project that will also be useful for the people.
Nope, its not like your friends didn't get it. They just knew that talking politics always end up to an arguement and then possibly brawling or worse. I once talked to my in-laws about politics and after one of them shouted. I never engage to them again. Even avoid them anymore.
Definitely, in the real online gambling, there is nothing to fear because it is safe and secure which is compared to a physical cockfight that during lockdown it is prohibited were much-updated news that many participants were caught in the act and they already paid about 35k but as gambling lovers, it is proven that it cannot really be shaken it still continues to be enjoyed without control In fact very immovable even incarcerated.
As practice shows, government agencies are absolutely indifferent to the effectiveness of their work - so you think about such details, but those who promote such regulation do not. That is why I am in favor of reducing government regulation in all areas (and in gambling too), since it is ineffective.
Of course the government can do it, but they dont want to change the rules they have made. Many rules from all lines of government must be changed, but who cares. People are those who have to comply with government regulation and anyone who violates them will be sanctioned. I would also argue that if thats for the best, reducing the rules might be a socially acceptable solution.This is the main problem of officials/bureaucracy in any country and system of government: in the end, they are only interested in people needing them. In fact, they are interested in creating problems that can be solved only with their help.
Gamblers from UK are the one who should worry because this report is coming out from UK OP did not mentioned in his article whose government implemented this rule, gamblers operator should worry too because they will have less profit and many will not play frequently than they used to be, UK people are to much into gambling that the government have to intervene, and this is not a good intervention.
There are two sides that will be affected actually.
1-Gambling operation is going to reduce their profit significantly. (bad for operators, bad or good for government)
2-Gamblers (bad or good), bad for high roller gamblers, good for addicted gamblers.
They can't control but they can regulate as long as the business is legally operating, so it's still the same because if they will not follow the regulation, they will lose their license and they will operate illegally which is risky for them even if you say they are private.
I agree with you, they can do anything they want but they should also be ready in facing the consequences of their action as they will break the law.
Even in Vegas and other popular casinos, as long as the authorities are strictly enforcing the law, everyone is treated fairly.
Gamblers from UK are the one who should worry because this report is coming out from UK OP did not mentioned in his article whose government implemented this rule, gamblers operator should worry too because they will have less profit and many will not play frequently than they used to be, UK people are to much into gambling that the government have to intervene, and this is not a good intervention.
There are two sides that will be affected actually.
1-Gambling operation is going to reduce their profit significantly. (bad for operators, bad or good for government)
2-Gamblers (bad or good), bad for high roller gamblers, good for addicted gamblers.
They can't control but they can regulate as long as the business is legally operating, so it's still the same because if they will not follow the regulation, they will lose their license and they will operate illegally which is risky for them even if you say they are private.
It would really have its pro's and cons but in this case this will affect gambling industry on said country if they are just really concerned into its citizens then why they cant just banned it fully?
They are still giving a new rule or limits but it wont really be that enough.For gamblers who do live into this place will surely find up ways to gamble which is way more that on the amount that had
been restricted.
We know that there are lots of ways to do so.
They are still giving a new rule or limits but it wont really be that enough.For gamblers who do live into this place will surely find up ways to gamble which is way more that on the amount that had
been restricted.
We know that there are lots of ways to do so.
banning gambling is worster than creating a rule . i thought your concern about the rules ? pros and cons have an affect but there were good effects here not only bad .
rules can change , it will be enough or not yet enough depends on their observation but its dangerous if you will push your self outside thier rules .
They are still giving a new rule or limits but it wont really be that enough
In my observation, gambling in the UK is heavily demanded especially during the times of lockdown. With this, gambling will be a good source of the government's revenue and can also give jobs to their people.
But the concern is, some gamblers do wreck and as a result, they faced financial problems. So instead of the government fully banning the gambling industry completely, which surely they won't do, they want to implement rules so that people there will be controlled. A good initiative but difficult to implement. The law about this needs to be adjusted.
Gamblers from UK are the one who should worry because this report is coming out from UK OP did not mentioned in his article whose government implemented this rule, gamblers operator should worry too because they will have less profit and many will not play frequently than they used to be, UK people are to much into gambling that the government have to intervene, and this is not a good intervention.
There are two sides that will be affected actually.
1-Gambling operation is going to reduce their profit significantly. (bad for operators, bad or good for government)
2-Gamblers (bad or good), bad for high roller gamblers, good for addicted gamblers.
Gamblers from UK are the one who should worry because this report is coming out from UK OP did not mentioned in his article whose government implemented this rule, gamblers operator should worry too because they will have less profit and many will not play frequently than they used to be, UK people are to much into gambling that the government have to intervene, and this is not a good intervention.
There are two sides that will be affected actually.
1-Gambling operation is going to reduce their profit significantly. (bad for operators, bad or good for government)
2-Gamblers (bad or good), bad for high roller gamblers, good for addicted gamblers.
It would really have its pro's and cons but in this case this will affect gambling industry on said country if they are just really concerned into its citizens then why they cant just banned it fully?
They are still giving a new rule or limits but it wont really be that enough.For gamblers who do live into this place will surely find up ways to gamble which is way more that on the amount that had
been restricted.
We know that there are lots of ways to do so.
Gamblers from UK are the one who should worry because this report is coming out from UK OP did not mentioned in his article whose government implemented this rule, gamblers operator should worry too because they will have less profit and many will not play frequently than they used to be, UK people are to much into gambling that the government have to intervene, and this is not a good intervention.
There are two sides that will be affected actually.
1-Gambling operation is going to reduce their profit significantly. (bad for operators, bad or good for government)
2-Gamblers (bad or good), bad for high roller gamblers, good for addicted gamblers.
Gamblers from UK are the one who should worry because this report is coming out from UK OP did not mentioned in his article whose government implemented this rule, gamblers operator should worry too because they will have less profit and many will not play frequently than they used to be, UK people are to much into gambling that the government have to intervene, and this is not a good intervention.
What is good intervention?, any government that can't help the citizens to save for their future when things go worse like what is going on in the country. We'll know what the coronavirus pandemic has caused and still causing and for any government to make such decisions in order to control their citizens in my opinion is a fair treatment and it's a good intervention. legendary
Activity: 2884
Merit: 1115
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
...Addiction is the biggest enemy here...
No, it is not addiction, it is ourselves. Humans are natural sinners and greed is just a part of us. The biggest enemy here is ourselves, how we will be able to stop those losses, how to stop betting when we don't need to bet anymore, to decide correctly. If we will be able to control ourselves we don't need this cap to stop us from gambling, we can do that ourselves.
Yeah that what he is referring to, that because of addiction, someone might find it really hard to be well disciplined on managing our money.
Greed and addiction correlates with each other, and they can make you to lose money and eventually yourself.
So we must keep plans healthy when we are gambling and we must avoid being addicted where we cannot control ourselves anymore.
Addiction to something is always bad for our mental or physical health. If you go to a casino or a slot table then you will see a lot of different types of people there.
some people are going to casino after finishing their work, they just hang out with their friends and gamble. such type of gamblers is not addicted they spend a certain amount of money for gambling. They take gambling as an entertaining thing and as a result, their mental stress is reduced by going to casino.
On the other hand, there are some people who have not enough money for gambling. but they are badly addicted. they are involved in various social misdeeds to finance gambling. I wanna tell that, gambling is good until you addicted on it.
Gamblers from UK are the one who should worry because this report is coming out from UK OP did not mentioned in his article whose government implemented this rule, gamblers operator should worry too because they will have less profit and many will not play frequently than they used to be, UK people are to much into gambling that the government have to intervene, and this is not a good intervention.
Fact is there that heavy addictions bring this proposal.
Without any information about gambling addictions, we won't see this news, the government needs to take
actions in finding the right solution to lessen the case of this gambling problem. For now, gamblers from UK
are the subject but who knows after that if this proposal bring every government an idea to adopt and make
it as part of their rules.
Jump to: