Bolsanaro would have probably made it compulsory to have gambling apps on your phone
I'd not be surprised if he had some shady businesses behind some gambling businesses
The problem is that he's now trying to shift the narrative about it and claim that he was against it all the time and lula did it purely for marketing reasons. I'm hoping that our people aren't that dumb, but I'm unsure. The next elections will be a real gambling. Things are so uncertain...
Lula did mention wanting to do something about the situation long before, but yes we do have a strong tradition in brazil of politicians only ever doing anything near elections, sometimes even delaying campaign promises to attempt to fullfil them right before the election as part of their campaign
đ looks like... đ your gamble paid off
"Yyyyyyyeeeeeaaaahhhhh!"
Fuckers deserve it.
Theyâve spent millions on that expansion. Multiple brands were planned, already in the approval phase. Guess my former coworkers not getting a bonus this year đ¤ˇ
Clearly this was your doing, fonix.
Because existing is expensive?
Where I live, gambling requires or has the following:
Still a cancer
The smartest policy I have seen for gambling was in Singapore. I think it's S$150 per entry into the casino (or S$3000 annually) for Singaporeans to gamble. Foreign tourists don't pay this levy. It keeps the locals out who don't have the disposable income to gamble while bringing in money from foreigners.
I guess this one makes sense though, if you don't have the money to pay the entry fee, you should not be gambling anything at all.
I've seen more people from lower income trying out gambling to get out of poverty (or in hopes to have something to eat for the week). So it kinda makes sense in this situation, maybe?
Probably but it also restricts opportunities for lower class people like let's say you're building a business contact and want to take them to a casino. Now obviously you're being restricted just because of your current economic position. If anything lower classes should have fewer restrictions not more.
I don't think we need to babysit "the poor" but instead support people with social nets and provide opportunities for growth. The Singapore style of governing is oppression disguised as progress.
and can cause dependency on a state level on a problematic sector which can further entrech legal status
I thought that's how it worked where I have the misfortune of residing, in America, but apparently the people in charge are more worried about renaming bodies of water.
I see massive billboards on the highway advertising the casino we have nearby with straight up false claims like "the next win is just around the corner" or something and always wonder how they got away without a "TOBACCO IS CANCEROUS SMOKE AT YOUR OWN RISK" type label on their ads. It makes me so angry to see casinos literally promising wins when that isn't how casinos fucking work and everybody with two braincells to rub together knows that.
I hate it when people compare gambling to drugs. Drugs are so much cooler. No one ever made a genre-defining psychedelic rock album after spending a weekend gambling
Gambling songs are usually depressing or a lesson to be careful gambling. Gotta know when to hold em and all that.
Counterpoint: Poker face Lady GaGa
Lmao well played. 10/10 would hire you for my Gaga cult.
Ace of Spades is an interesting one. It has both the lines "The pleasure is to play" and "Gambling's for fools". It basically tells you not to spend more than you're willing to lose.
From what Iâve heard and kind of seen, gambling is worse. In a big discussion, all the people who had been in a relationship with a gambling addict were saying to throw them out full stop. Dealing with meth heads, etc was easier.
Huge W. Gambling is a massive cancer
It took me a second to realize this wasn't a name like John Q. Public.
"Huge W. Gambling" sounds like the name of someone
Gambling is fundamentally rigged. It's a mathematical tax on society and should be banned all together.
The only sound argument in favor of gambling I ever heard is the prediction market one where gambling inputs generate data on public census. I'm not particularly sold on that but other types of gambling like sports don't event have this leg to stand on.
Insurance is gambling. You pay more in premiums than you get back in repayments after crashing. The house always wins.
Yet without Insurance business doesn't function. Loss of expensive cargo or equipment wipes out the company.
No insurance is risk distribution. We all pay 5$ so none of us needs to pay 5,000,000$ which is not economically sustainable. What insurance companies get is administrative overhead fee. This has nothing to do with gambling.
Nah nah nah; Insurance is like preem gammbling.
For example insurance companies couldn't pay everyone back after Hurrican Katrina. First come first serve I guess. :P
To my understanding insurance companies isolate areas so if that area gets hit hard. The insurance company just files bankruptcy in the area and moves on..
You gamble with which bookie (insurance company) you choose. You gamble when you choose where to live. You gamble how fast you can make your insurance claim. This shit is gambling through and through. And we ("The Common Person") are getting fleeced.
From the buyers point of view it reduces risk, so it is not gambling for them.
However it is gambling from the point of view of the underwriters.
(I am assuming both sides play fair and pay out when they should)
The price of an insurance product is divided in 4 parts, the risk, the actuarial adjustment, administrative and distribution costs, and return of capital.
Aren't the risk and the actuarial adjustment the same thing?
Insurance may be its own type of evil, but it's not gambling. It serves me a financial purpose. It protects me from certain enormous and unexpected expenses which would otherwise cripple me financially for the rest of my life.
How aggressively insurance deny claims may be a symptom of the same problem to the ubiquity of online gambling apps and ads, unchecked greed, but they're not the same.
From the buyers point of view I agree it is risk reduction. But it is gambling from the sellers point of view.
IMHO we need peer to peer prediction markets, in which the insurance company is not the same party deciding who won the bet. Then your risk of denial would be more clear up front.
I don't even know that I should refuse jobs that offer insurance through UnitedHealthcare until Luigi.
You are correct, because literally every choice we make is a gamble. Even crossing the street is "gambling" on getting hit by a drunk driver. But of course most insurance companies add a level of scammery and greed that is completely beyond any necessary price to protect farmers from a bad crop year etc. so ppl will rain hatred on your comment.
The sound argument in favour of gambling is simple: it's fun, and people enjoy it.
It's not "rigged", everyone involved understands the game. I hand over money, the house takes some, in return I get an enjoyable experience.
Personally online casino is a bit of a mystery to me, but I enjoy a visit to a real casino once or twice a year; it's fun to sit at the roulette table pretending to be James Bond for an evening. An afternoon at a racecourse is a great day out, and betting on sports makes watching the event more fun. Hell, even Bingo can be fun with the right company.
I am capable of doing all those things without bankrupting myself because I am a perfectly normal person. That a few inadequates are not capable of that is not an argument for banning it for everyone, it's an argument for having a properly regulated industry that protects idiots from themselves while allowing the vast majority to make their own decisions.
Gambling is addictive and exploitative. A lot of effort goes into keeping players engaged, exploiting the pleasure response centers of the brain. Itâs not just refined folk betting on horses, but gacha games, loot boxes, slot machines, prediction markets. Gritty and sleazy.
If your lucked out with your genes just be happy, and donât call people with a high risk of addiction inadequate idiots.
"Exploiting the pleasure response centres of the brain" is pseudo-scientific twaddle for "a lot of effort goes into making it fun".
Yes, yes it does. That's a good thing.
And I didn't "luck out" with my genes. They're perfectly in line with the vast majority of people. That some people are cursed with inadequate faculties is a reason they should be protected (through regulation), not a reason for normal people to have their freedom curtailed.
We don't ban movies because some people are blind.
Woah ya'll chill. I'm pretty sure it's a widely studied topic that gambling (winning a bunch of money) and cocaine cause the same parts of the brain to fire.
Okay but the argument isn't that gambling is bad. It's that gambling ads and apps are. A gambling addict who gambles at a casino has to physically go to the casino and can only gamble as long as their body will allow them. Sure they can ruin their lives but there are physical unavoidable things that limit their gambling. To say nothing about the responsibility we've decided casinos have to address gambling addiction. A casino can kick a player out, sure they can go to another but that's time they don't spend gambling.
Gambling ads and apps are everywhere. They're inescapable. An addict doesn't have to physically go to a casino anymore. They can gamble wherever, whenever, on anything. If they try to pull themselves away the apps use push notifications to pull them in. Uninstall the apps, the ads are running everywhere all the time. Get banned, just make a new account. It takes minutes. The availability to gamble is just constant now.
If nothing else, ban gambling ads. It won't stop people but it'll let them escape the constant push to get back in.
Blind people listening to a movie doesn't destroy their life the way gambling does. Get your head out of the sand.
I love doing heroin, it's actually a wonderful and very safe drug if used responsibly. I like doing heroin once or twice per year and it's actually way cheaper than a night at the bar, it's definitely more enjoyable and it's healthier too!
I don't know why I, a responsible heroin user, should have to suffer just because a few loser degenerates can't handle the needle.
I mean, many would say that treating people with heroine addiction is indeed better accomplished by giving them safe spaces to wean them off rather than criminalising them, yes.
But the American War on Drugs has been an unvarnished success, of course, so that's obviously the best approach.
I do actually think that harm reduction is a better strategy than criminalization, so I'm not advocating for banning gambling outright. But I think that its dubious value as entertainment needs to be weighed against the harm that it causes, and that regulation should be put in place to address those harms efficiently.
You're being snarky but this is pretty much why drugs should legalized. Except without the Christian fundie judgy "loser degenerates" thing.
I think that your comment tracks unsarcastically. I could do without the name calling, but otherwise, do dope all you want and mind your own business.
Guy above is suggesting that gambling is a very harmful entertainment and that there are better ways to entertain yourself
The house must always win, and that's true as gambling empires have the games with "house edge" built in to make sure the odds are in their favor over the average gambler. This even includes online gambling where the odds aren't really random but rather calculatedly more difficult to win bigger prizes.
Of course the odds are in the favour of the house, that's how the house gets paid - that's why theres a 0 on the Roulette wheel, to take the obvious example. Everybody understands this.
And of course the odds of winning a big prize are longer than the odds of winning a small one... That's, well, obvious.
None of this is "rigged", it's the game. You haven't discovered some dark secret, you've just understood "how casinos work" and the players understand it perfectly well too. (In well regulated markets the pay tables are published, audited, and available for anyone to view.)
A lot Christian fundies in here downvoting you. If we scratch a little more we might see how they actually feel about gay people and Dungeons & Dragons.
Lemmy has a deeply fucking weird vibe tbh. It's like Karl Marx just stepped off the Mayflower. And I love the fact that it's A Truth Universally Acknowledged that children should be allowed to use social media unimpeded (because Age Verification Is The State Surveilling You And Stealing Your Precious Bodily Fluids), and teens should be allowed to change their gender and take permanently life-altering drugs or surgery to do it (Because They Know Their Choices And Anyone Suggesting Otherwise Is An Oppressive Bourgeois Traitor Probably Trying To Steal Their Precious Bodily Fluids) but grown-ass adults can't put a few quid on their team to win because They Are Vulnerable And Cannot Make Their Own Decisions Lest Their Precious Bodily Fluids Go To Waste Instead of the Collective. And God Forbid you suggest anyone with an entirely imagined Neurodivergent Condition ("OMG does anyone else go to sleep when they're tired? I only understood this when I self diagnosed as autistic, normies could never understand") be told what THEY are allowed to do because you're just Oppressing Them FFS.
It really is through the looking glass.
Now it makes more sense why the Donald and his asshole kids are so obsessed with Brazil.
brazil is extremely important for the USA strategicly, for raw resources first and fore most, from raw minerals (aluminium, iron, and rare earths) to oil, food, meat and some non raw but still commodities such as ethanol and sugar
one of the main things for the USA, is that simply being able to influence what is china's most important trade partner for food, and arguebly one of the most important trade partner to china in general as a supplier, is of extreme importance for their anti china efforts
Which do you think is more central to US interest in Donald and his asshole kids' minds?
All the stuff you listed... or their personal interests in gambling and crypto?
Trump doesnt make all decisions, some stuff gets delegated, ministry of foreign affairs is the biggest proponent of brazil's importance to USA strategical goals
All righty.
Wow... oh my god... online gambling is destroying latin america. Underage and young people spending everything they have or even getting loans to spend on this shit. It's the first time that i hear of any politician taking it's hands into the pile of shit. Well done lula.
It was illegal for many years to gamble outside of a casino or a horse racing track, and it should have stayed that way. Legislators knew this would happen and chose to enrich DraftKings et al at the expense of our society's youth who would inevitably develop gambling addictions.
I work in a in person gambling shop and honestly 100% in favour of banning online gambling. In person we can at least make sure those who are black out drunk cant gamble & at least try to mitigate the harms. Online gambling would fail countless safeguards we have to abide by.
Gambling apps are a big sourge in Australia including incessant advertising. Banning gambling is probably like banning alcohol or drugs. Wonât work but you can regulate it and at least ban apps and advertising.
It's a scourge everywhere where it is allowed.
A complete ban is probably not viable for the same reason why harm reduction is better than absolutism for drugs, but I think it would make very good sense to regulate the hell out of it (strict limits on session length, delays between fund transfers, absolutely no advertising, all proceeds to charity et.c.).
Yeah regulation would help. There's records of gamblers trying to quit, but then given free credit to gamble with. That, and kids growing up with the ads that make them think that having a flutter is a normal tradition while you watch your team
Some of these gambling apps let you bet on military and election outcomes, legislation, etc. People in the U.S. government have been caught doing this shit. Clearly illustrating a direct pathway for corruption and/or sabotage, clearly a national threat. Thatâs aside from the high rate of suicide and bankruptcy that will probably create a systemic crisis. Look at the car loan and credit card debt for Christ sake.
The "gambling apps" you speak of - Kalshi and Polymarkets - are the direct result of prohibition. They exist because the US prohibited gaming for so long (thanks to PASPA etc.), but the demand was still there, so providers came up with alternatives like fantasy betting and "it's not betting, honest, it's financial derivatives".
That sort of bullshit is illegal in markets like the UK precisely because they regulate gambling rather than trying to prohibit it.
Not really, no.
The repeal of PASPA essentially made it no longer a federal offence (this was great for existing black market operators, tbf) and left it to the States to regulate - some did, with varying degrees of competence, most did not, and that left the window open.
Prohibition created the environment, lack of regulation poured fuel on the fire.
Gambling is for losers, you are a loser and that's why they let you return. Congrats.
I think there are different levels of gambling. Slot machines? Addicts and losers. Table games? That's just spending a bit of money to play some cards or whatever. Still, not for me, but I love card and board games so I can get it. Even slots I could kinda understand when they were mechanical, but now that they're all digital there just isn't any theatre.
I've also gambled with friends and family for low stakes and it kinda makes it more fun to watch your jar of quarters (or even just rocks if we're camping) fill up or empty over the course of a week of playing in the evenings. Also, in those cases, the games aren't rigged so the house gets any, you're just as likely to win it back the next day as you were to loose it that night.
if the gambling apps don't ban you, you are a loser. they literally ban people who win consistently. so yes, you are mathematically a gambling loser if you are not banned by the apps.
Putting up penny's isn't risk, therefore it's not gambling. Putting up your house or bill money, now that's gambling.
No your take is entire worse you're missing the point. It's like saying "I'm not drunk I had a couple beers." The act is the same but the outcome is very different. Bet over games water see how that feels. To say gamble isn't relative is actually a brain dead take. That opinion is made by someone who can't see another PoV.
better late than never
Iâm ok with that.
Dammit. Lost my bet.
Wonât everyone who wants to online gamble just use a VPN?
I think adding that barrier to entry, as well as taking an official stance against the practice, goes far enough without having to be draconian about it.
People are going to find ways around anything.
Iâd imagine this will come alongside banning the advertisement of online gambling as well, which might be even more effective than the ban itself.
Iâd be happy enough if they banned advertising of gambling. At least itâs something.
Unlikely to happen though as one of our politicians has a vested interest.
Most people who did online gambling don't even know what a vpn is. Also, it's not so easy to move money to companies from other countries, and the ones who will do all that are a minority that can't numerically fuck our economy
Oh, and all gambling ads are banned from now on too!
Good. Get that shit out of the football pitches.
I live in a state that made porn illegal, and suddenly every adult man knew exactly what a VPN is. Where thereâs a will, thereâs a way.
So, Iâd presume if youâre an online gambler in Brazil who wants to continue, youâd be googling âhow do I gamble in Brazil nowâ and the answer would be delivered immediately.
Theyâre growing like crazy. Normie YouTubers shill them all the time.
moving the cash around will be a lot harder
Man, I had to transfer money out of America (to buy a main board for an OpenMower but that's a different story) recently and it fucking sucked. My bank doesn't support international bank transfers so I had to use some third party thing. The first one I tried banned my account for no discernable reason, so I had to use a different one. It should not be that difficult to pay someone, damn. Importing robotic mower components from Germany sure was a learning experience. Kinda fun, really expensive.
Legit online casinos need to KYC (Know Your Customer) before you can start betting. I don't know what the legal framework is for identifying users from a country where the casino isn't allowed to run, but I'd imagine if it falls in some legal gray area casinos would be far more likely to reject potential customers rather than risk losing their license. In that case a VPN ain't saving anyone.
Illegal or "legally not gambling" gambling probably doesn't care about the ban in the first place and those sites will continue business as usual.
That's what a lot of people did before the apps were legalized.
But this will probably have a good short term impact. And the presidency will be able to negotiate much better terms in 3 months when that rule expires than if he did nothing.
Yes, yes they will. There are plenty of black market gambling operators making a lot of money out of countries with prohibition - and VPNs and taking payments are absolutely no barrier to entry. Anyone who thinks they are is talking out of their ass.
The other thing those operators have is absolutely no interest in player protection whatsoever. They will operate every dark pattern and deceptive practice they possibly can to take every penny they can - and don't expect their sites to offer loss limits or self exclusion.
All bans like this do is push vulnerable people into the hands of black market operators. Every example around the world has shown it... (A ban on advertising I'd be all in favour of, incidentally.)
The real story here is that the Brazilian regulator was hopelessly incompetent and deeply corrupt. But given that's likely true of every branch of the Brazilian state, I suspect they think that banning it is easier, and better for headlines.
Cool.
Been hating the sports gambling commercials everywhere I look. Especially with Kevin Hart going on about going to all 50 states to gamble or something like that.
Cause, I'm not against gambling, if there are rules and regulations to protect the innocent and the fools. No one deserves to lose everything on a bet.
But what pisses me off is Kevin, who the fuck, has that kind of money to travel to all 50 states, where some of them are bigger than whole countries.
The hotel prices, the car repair, the food, the gas flux, the losing a bet, all of that. It just urks me to no end. Like go fuck yourself Kevin, you rich sheep twat.
Won't the gamblers just use a VPN? Why not tax it, instead?
Very few will indeed. They will also use crypto currency too in order to circumvent the banking system. But ads will disappear and the majority won't circumvent this.
That is not the evidence of every other market that has tried prohibition (or unduly burdensome regulation.)
The most vulnerable are the most likely to circumvent. Except now it's criminals they are dealing with, and they have no recourse and no support for their problems.
But hey, you'll feel better, so that's what's important right?
Illegal gambling already exists on Brazil, is called "o jogo do bicho", but is low scale with local small crime boss ruling it. Legalization of the Bets let it scale, use the Brazilian financial services, sponsor the world cup and more. It let people bet from the conform of their house in a normalized way, that the bicho game never had.
Trust me, there were more illegal gaming opportunities in Brazil than bicho. And now there are going to be A LOT more.
But even if we take what you say as gospel, answer me two questions:
Brazil's problem is not people playing regulated casino games. It's that you can't walk in the fucking street at night without an armed guard; this will NOT improve that one iota.
it is already taxxed, in facf it has been the fastest growing income source for goverment, if we don't do something we gonna start depending on it on a state level
Banning things has never worked. Just look back at history, it just drives things underground.
It does work. It objectively reduces whatever is banned. Just because enforcement cannot be 100%, that does not mean outlawing certain activities is a failure. Prohibition, for example, reduced alcohol consumption by 70%.
No it didn't. Alcohol sales increased during prohibition. A lot of people got rich through the sale of alcohol flooding through from Canada.
Alcohol sales did not increase, though it did make a small number of people rich, that is true. That doesn't change the fact prohibition was successful in greatly reducing alcohol consumption.
I mean the difference would be banking no? Maybe I'm being naive but I imagine hopping on pornhub with a VPN is harder than gambling based on the added addition of money needing to be involved. Again might be crazy ignorant here
Plenty of ways to circumvent banking restrictions. Crypto is one. Some online casinos will actually sell you things and give you credits as a "bonus" so it looks like a normal credit card transaction. You have exchange systems where people trade credits between themselves and no transactions are actually made with the gambling site itself. There are other ways to get the money out of casino as well. People that want to gamble will find a way.
Having to go out of your way AND not being faced with ads everywhere for gambling will mean less people having to deal with the effects. How is this supposed to be a bad thing?
You're essentially saying "because there are ways to circumvent the law, let's not improve the law at all".
one of the reasons that allowed gambling to grow fast is PIX, a very simple, very easy to use, very easy to get in, instantanous, payment system which made the barrier of entry into gambling much lower and convienent for even very busy and poor people
easy of acccess, is very important for the growth of this market, and this will hit it hard
And same thing applies to other bans but a lot of people on lemmy seem to think only bans they personally support can ever work. Bans they don't support will never work because VPN and such.
Great, here we go again.
what next Brazil? Prohibition? There is a cancer in the world, he's right about that. It's nanny state feel-good moves like this, you can't ban human nature. And humans like to get wrecked, gamble, and have sex, and you can't ever stop it, no matter how much you want to.
People don't live their lives for the state, but for themselves. Worthless.
p.s. if you pretend to be "pro-democracy" and support this blatantly fascist ban, well, you're a hypocrite, and disgusting.
You said it brother. Recently I heard about some nanny state criminalizing the act of taking another man's life! We've been killing since the time of cain and abel, for crying out loud! What's next, a fine for breathing AIR?
I think banning advertising would have been a better, long term move, kinda like smoking had been reduced by a good margin.
Advertisement also got prohibited.
There's a somewhat blurry line between freedom and responsibility, but allowing for the exploitation of your fellow humans is clearly not a freedom we need. This is not a ban on gambling, it's a ban on gambling websites that only exist to exploit people. If you want to gamble in the bar in front of your house with your mates, you're free to do it.
and here class, we have the lone libertarian. someone who would have sex with their own mother just to prove they have the freedom to do so.
thanks for using Leebra!
go to feed...
Fantastic!
Having a predator in your pocket that has been carefully engineered to extract money from people is horrific
Bolsanaro would have probably made it compulsory to have gambling apps on your phone
save