Gambling has been constantly persistent within society for as long as man has been able to risk an item in hopes of a reward. It has taken on many forms from rolling dice, to playing cards, to casinos, and even virtually over the internet; However, with many other forms existing. All of which hold true to the idea of wagering something, with a goal to win something in return. As with anything, there are both benefits and drawbacks especially when associated with gambling. This poses the question, what should be the state’s policy on gambling. In this essay I will argue that the state’s policy on gambling should be that it is completely legal being under state control. Proving that gambling is beneficial to the economy of the state. As well as that it holds social and personal benefits stemmed from both gains and losses, which in turn emphasizes the idea of gambling being legal.
One of the benefits of gambling is the effect it has on a state’s economy. With large amounts of money being spent on gambling every year, governments generate large revenues. Said revenues are put towards improving the economy of the state. Take Victoria, Australia for example, during the 2000/01 financial year gambling tax generated $1.2 billion dollars of revenue and was projected to hit $1.4 billion dollars. If the target was met that would mean that 17.2% of state revenue was generated through gambling. Representing almost one fifth of state generated revenue makes gambling significant to the economy, and cases of high revenue generation do not just lay in Australia. The U.S. also sees high revenue figures because of gambling. In 2002, nearly 50% of the $34 billion dollars generated off of lottery sales in the U.S. was attributed to state revenue. Building on which $3.5 billion dollars of revenue was generated from casinos in 11 U.S. states; however the benefits don’t just stop at money as the casinos in these states employed 370,207 people in 2001. As can be seen gambling proves to be a very beneficial booster to a state’s economy, by creating jobs and generating tax revenue. Both of which are vital parts of a well working economy and would pose extreme detriment if state policy was against the gambling.
Although gambling does contribute to the economy in many beneficial ways such as generating revenue and creating jobs, it does hold some detrimental properties. For instance, the use of new online gaming and poker websites has found ways around owing tax to the state they operate in. The UK in particular faced this problem as online gambling sites were finding ways to avoid the duties imposed within the borders. Instead of operating a company within the UK many sites would move offshore and operate out of low-tax or tax-free locations such as Malta. When the gambling tax is taken out of state hands, it can only mean the state’s economy is affected negatively, as money is only leaving the country and the state is collecting none of it. The company is also affected due to the loss of disposable income from households. Australia exhibits this, as $14.38 billion dollars of household income was lost to gambling throughout the country. A daunting figure which represents 3.4% of all disposable income in Australia. With the loss of income due to gambling, this means money is not being contributed to other aspects of the economy; Especially in the case of video poker machines, and online gambling, where none of the money wagered is received by the state. Therefore, meaning all money leaving the country is just tossed revenue on the governmental and personal ends which benefits no one.
With the question at hand of what should be the states policy on gambling? The benefits and costs need to be weighed. In particular on the economic standpoint I believe that gambling benefits the state, when it is under state control. As seen gambling generates huge revenue yields for the state which in turn can be put towards the state’s infrastructure. Two provinces in Canada, Ontario and Alberta can be taken as examples for the benefits from economic yields. Alberta in particular puts its gambling revenue to use in funding state run entities such as transportation and health care amongst others. Proving that the economy is benefited in situations where state controls the gambling policy. In cases where gambling is out of state control such as in video poker is where it can be argued that it is not beneficial to the state’s economy. As state duties and taxes are taken out of the equation and no jobs are being created within the country, as companies are moving offshore. Which is why I argue that gambling should be legal as it poses benefits, but only when it is operating under state control. With removal of the state from the equation, those once beneficial aspects of gambling that were being reaped by the state and government are forced into burdens and are non-beneficial to all. In turn concluding that if the state imposes policies on gambling that restrict it to state controlled mediums only it proves to be beneficial.
The benefits of gambling are not just economic, but they can also extend into social and personal benefits for the citizens of the state. The social aspect being that governments give back to its citizens through programs and infrastructure, which can be perceived as personal benefits also. For example, in Ontario, Canada money received from gambling is given back to society in funding for programs that the select few population need to help overcome their addiction. During the years 2003/04 the Ontario government invested $75 million dollars into programs that facilitate education and treatment for those suffering from gambling addictions or problems. This funding provides personal benefits to those who may suffer from addictions or problems, as well as those socially connected to the third parties that may also be affected by someone with a problem. The U.S. also employs educational programs to help those suffering an at risk with 33 states contributing $21.5 million in 1998 to state run programs and education on the risks associated with problem gambling. There is also the idea of being rewarded from winning gambling games, or lotteries and other associated gambling means. For example in 1998 approximately $13 billion dollars was bet on internet sites, and in that same year the amount that these gambling sites retained was only $651 million, leaving a large margin of money that was paid back to players. Also, given that about 70% of the UK’s adult population partook in gambling during 2007, shows that there must be benefits to individuals with states that have accessible gambling. With such a large majority taking part in gambling, the opportunity for winning is also enlarged, as more that play the more that will be payed out in the end to the winner.. Overall suggesting that in a state where gambling is legalized, benefits on social and personal levels will be accompany the policy.
Given all the benefits that gambling provides there are still some social and personal risk that can be associated with it. The biggest most prevailing one is the idea of problem gambling or gambling addictions. With an addiction comes vast amounts of spending and the normal result of loss. Also, associated are mental health effects as well as effects on third parties involved. In Ontario, in 2006 it is estimated that 3.4% of Ontario residents suffered from gambling problems; However, in 2013 the number was vastly reduced to only 2.5% of Ontario residences having a gambling addiction. The figures also extend nationwide in Canada, with approximately 2% of citizens that are fifteen years of age and older being victims to gambling issues and addiction. Those that suffer from gambling addictions, tend to face problems on financial levels, such as betting to much or going in debt to be able to help support their gambling addiction. Gambling can also result in negative mental health effects that can become presented through signs such as anxiety, stress, and strong feelings of guilt. Such problems associated with problem gambling will have effect on families and third parties involved in the addict’s life. With money needed to continue an addiction it can often be sought out or stolen from family members or friends. In scenarios where money is borrowed, or stolen stress and duress can be placed on those loaning or losing the money and it can tear apart relationships once present and families. The numbers for those effected begin to stack up with approximately one third of Canadians being linked to problem gambling in one way or another. A rather large figure that suggests that the social and personal risks associated with gambling play a big impact within a state.
Much like on the economical side of gambling, the social side holds both benefits and costs. The state maximizes the revenues received and puts them to good use whether it be rewarding winners or investing in infrastructure that improves the social life of its citizens. Although there is a portion of citizens in any state that suffer from problem gambling, the state combats them with invest revenues into programs to alleviate the harm they cause to themselves or others. As logical would dictate as the number of people noted as problem gamblers decreases then the third parties effected by such would decrease as well. Ontario can be used as an example for the influence state programs have had on reducing the issue of problem gamblers as they are known to invest into programs. The change can be seen in the drop to 2.5% of Ontarian’s affected in 2013 from 3.4% in 2006. Proving that if the state is able to be in full control of legalized gambling that they can minimize the risks that are associated. Overall implying that gambling within a state can have social and personal benefits that exceed the costs and should be legal.
Leaving it all to chance and facing the odds are the core ideas of gambling. When referring to gambling policy that the state should administer the odds are all in favor of legalization. The benefits received from the state being in control of legalized gambling outweigh the costs that are associated. For instance, from an economics standpoint the state is better off from revenues generated due to gambling, in turn making its citizen better off. Also, gambling benefits the peoples of the state socially and personally, whether that be due to personal gain of winnings, or socially implemented programs that better off society. When the odds are stacked up a final answer can be given to the question of “What should be the state’s policy on gambling?”. The policy of the state should be that gambling is legal while under state control.