I've been wondering about how many lives are being destroyed by online gambling and the accessability. I'm also curious now about your issues with Bill Simmons.
I think it's also worth noting that the Draftkings and FanDuels have entered the content creation space as a more passive means of marketing. I love the Dan LeBatard Show, but it is "Brought to you by DraftKings." FanDuel is the lifeline of Pat McAfee. There will be more.
And, speaking as a frequent small stakes mobile gambler, I've stopped. As you noted, I was in the app more than I was present for the sporting event. The chase stopped being worth it.
Same with my love of The Right Time with Bomani Jones, which is a Wave Sports & Entertainment Production. And given the job market in sports media and journalism these days, gambling sites are ones with money actually hiring.
The Atlantic article is pretty binary and makes some really odd points without addressing something that really must be brought to any discussion. Gambling addiction, in almost every recorded instance, is a ‘comorbidity’. It’s a symptom of something else going to shit. This is why gambling addiction affects people with lower incomes more - would they have the addiction without battling poverty? Would they even be gambling if they had money to spare?
Did you know that one of the main drivers for gambling addiction in women is domestic abuse? They’re trying to regain some form of control, to also have escape, and some kind of hope. You can treat the addictions all you want but without dealing with the underlying causes (be it poverty, substance abuse, domestic abuse) it’s pissing in the wind.
I’m not excusing the industry - some behaviour is just insane and shocking - I’m just saying that this is an incomplete conversation.
Oh, and as for the article’s point about tax, that’s dead right - but the blame there should be on the regulators that drafted the codes and made marketing promos a tax write off in some states. That’s just plain stupid.
Matty Yglesias had a piece on this where he recommended establishments (like bars) could get sports gambling licenses so that people would have to go there to make bets, adding that barrier to entry. I like sports betting and approve of that message.
This story is 100% accurate. But it does a beg a question I’ve wondered thinking about it:
Human beings are, inherently, more adverse to losses than they are to the risk/reward aspect of gaining. I believe this is called loss aversion?
So it makes me wonder where this plays into gambling which is in essence, problematic when most “chase the high” or spend time chasing losses.
The access is definitely the issue in the socioeconomic impact. I’ve been guilty of chasing large parlays with the hopes of a large payout from a small wager (almost scored a 12 team NFL parlay when I was on vacation years ago when near Atlantic City before it was legal in NY and ironically lost the parlay when the Jets lost by 1 respective to the spread and the Giants lost in OT…both teams playing in the state I placed the wager …eyeroll inserted… and it was a $10 bet that would have netted me over $1,200).
This is the equivalent of the tax on the stupid…er… the lottery. Where the small hopes of a large jackpot equates to bleeding the customers slowly vs all at once.
Where does it all go from here?
Nowhere. Because capitalism. And general lack of regulatory give-a-shits.
I've been wondering about how many lives are being destroyed by online gambling and the accessability. I'm also curious now about your issues with Bill Simmons.
Issues is probably too strong a word, Brian. He’s an easy mark to pick on a lot of the times is all.
I think it's also worth noting that the Draftkings and FanDuels have entered the content creation space as a more passive means of marketing. I love the Dan LeBatard Show, but it is "Brought to you by DraftKings." FanDuel is the lifeline of Pat McAfee. There will be more.
And, speaking as a frequent small stakes mobile gambler, I've stopped. As you noted, I was in the app more than I was present for the sporting event. The chase stopped being worth it.
Same with my love of The Right Time with Bomani Jones, which is a Wave Sports & Entertainment Production. And given the job market in sports media and journalism these days, gambling sites are ones with money actually hiring.
The Atlantic article is pretty binary and makes some really odd points without addressing something that really must be brought to any discussion. Gambling addiction, in almost every recorded instance, is a ‘comorbidity’. It’s a symptom of something else going to shit. This is why gambling addiction affects people with lower incomes more - would they have the addiction without battling poverty? Would they even be gambling if they had money to spare?
Did you know that one of the main drivers for gambling addiction in women is domestic abuse? They’re trying to regain some form of control, to also have escape, and some kind of hope. You can treat the addictions all you want but without dealing with the underlying causes (be it poverty, substance abuse, domestic abuse) it’s pissing in the wind.
I’m not excusing the industry - some behaviour is just insane and shocking - I’m just saying that this is an incomplete conversation.
Oh, and as for the article’s point about tax, that’s dead right - but the blame there should be on the regulators that drafted the codes and made marketing promos a tax write off in some states. That’s just plain stupid.
Matty Yglesias had a piece on this where he recommended establishments (like bars) could get sports gambling licenses so that people would have to go there to make bets, adding that barrier to entry. I like sports betting and approve of that message.
This story is 100% accurate. But it does a beg a question I’ve wondered thinking about it:
Human beings are, inherently, more adverse to losses than they are to the risk/reward aspect of gaining. I believe this is called loss aversion?
So it makes me wonder where this plays into gambling which is in essence, problematic when most “chase the high” or spend time chasing losses.
The access is definitely the issue in the socioeconomic impact. I’ve been guilty of chasing large parlays with the hopes of a large payout from a small wager (almost scored a 12 team NFL parlay when I was on vacation years ago when near Atlantic City before it was legal in NY and ironically lost the parlay when the Jets lost by 1 respective to the spread and the Giants lost in OT…both teams playing in the state I placed the wager …eyeroll inserted… and it was a $10 bet that would have netted me over $1,200).
This is the equivalent of the tax on the stupid…er… the lottery. Where the small hopes of a large jackpot equates to bleeding the customers slowly vs all at once.
Where does it all go from here?
Nowhere. Because capitalism. And general lack of regulatory give-a-shits.