Swedish Double Standard (Gambling)
Roger Andersson
In Sweden it's illegal to run gambling related business.
In the early seventies the Swedish government totally banned slot machines.
Casinos are very regulated and maximum bet on roulettes is 2 kroner (about
35 cents). Even arcade-games are heavely regulated.
The intention of the state is probably to decrease these activities,
which they consider harmful (I won't argue with this, it makes sense to
me too). So far so good, but then the state figures it can make money
on this. People show tendencies to be addicted to these sort of things.
Now there are dozens of gambling games owned by the state: Lotto,
V65 (horses), Penninglotteriet, Bellmanlotteriet, Triss, L}ngen,
M}ltipset, Stryktipset, V5 ... The list seems to be infinite
They also have several commercials on cable TV (btw commercials
are illegal on the state owned tv) and you can see ads everywere
(in newspapers and the subway etc) so it must surely make a lots
of money. Maybe this is because the win ratio is about 45%. I've
heard the minimum win ratio in Las Vegas is 95%.
What do you think about this. Is it not contradictive to both
want to decrease gambling and then run gambling commercials ?
--
***************************************************************
*Roger Andersson *Und also sprach das alte Weiblein:*
*University of Stockholm *Du gehst zu Frauen? *
*alias: *Vergiss die Peitsche nicht! *
*nv91...@nada.kth.se * /Nietzsche*
***************************************************************
*Yappie: Young Ambitious Pervert *
***************************************************************
Wolfgang Diestelkamp
> I would like to know your opinions on this:
> In Sweden it's illegal to run gambling related business.
> In the early seventies the Swedish government totally banned slot machines.
> Casinos are very regulated and maximum bet on roulettes is 2 kroner (about
> 35 cents). Even arcade-games are heavely regulated.
> The intention of the state is probably to decrease these activities,
> which they consider harmful (I won't argue with this, it makes sense to
> me too). So far so good, but then the state figures it can make money
> on this. People show tendencies to be addicted to these sort of things.
> Now there are dozens of gambling games owned by the state: Lotto,
> V65 (horses), Penninglotteriet, Bellmanlotteriet, Triss, L}ngen,
> M}ltipset, Stryktipset, V5 ... The list seems to be infinite
> They also have several commercials on cable TV (btw commercials
> are illegal on the state owned tv) and you can see ads everywere
> (in newspapers and the subway etc) so it must surely make a lots
> of money. Maybe this is because the win ratio is about 45%. I've
> heard the minimum win ratio in Las Vegas is 95%.
> What do you think about this. Is it not contradictive to both
> want to decrease gambling and then run gambling commercials ?
Of course it is contradictive, though the official
reason for this is, they want to control it if they have
to let it happen anyway.
It's the same situation in Germany (though not quite as strict).
But isn't it this situation whenever it comes to collecting
taxes ? Just think of alcohol and tobacco taxes; the
"official" reason is to keep it's use low, but then why
where alcohol taxes in Germany raised just when the
government was looking for new ways to collect more taxes ?
--
Wolfgang Diestelkamp
wolf...@prosun.first.gmd.de
diest...@kmx.gmd.dbp.de
Marcus Gustavsson
Contradictive, yes.
However I think that some madmen bureaucrats really believe
that a state owned lottery is better than a private. The state tries
to behave nicely, in that it gives a small amount of the profit to sports.
That amount is sadly pretty small.
Mof
--
Chalmers | I didn't know killing Druss could be this easy -rogue
University | (sounds of terrible carnage)
of | Easy boy, easy, nothing in life is ever easy -Druss
Technology | Has gone some years, but I still fancy the Axe. -Mof
Janne M. Kivel{
> However I think that some madmen bureaucrats really believe
>that a state owned lottery is better than a private. The state tries
>to behave nicely, in that it gives a small amount of the profit to sports.
>That amount is sadly pretty small.
>
> Mof
I believe the government gambling monopoly has little to do with prevention
of gambling as such, but it's just another way of collecting money from
people. It's a lot easier when there are no competitors around.
The same applies for monopoly of alcoholic beverages. Nobody seriously
believes that the Scandinavians would drink themselves to death if the
state monopoly were removed. The government just can't do without the money
it gets by selling alcoholic beverages.
The recent price increase in Finland had nothing to do with social issues.
If the price is too high, people just start making alcohole at home.
I agree with you that there are such madmen bureaucrats you mentioned. The
question is, why do we allow government to think for ourselves. There's
always gonna be those who think that protecting people from themselves is
what government should be doing.
Janne Kivel"a
Fredrik.Ostman
>> However I think that some madmen bureaucrats really believe
>>that a state owned lottery is better than a private.
>I believe the government gambling monopoly has little to do with prevention
>of gambling as such, but it's just another way of collecting money from
>people. It's a lot easier when there are no competitors around.
>The same applies for monopoly of alcoholic beverages. Nobody seriously
>believes that the Scandinavians would drink themselves to death if the
>state monopoly were removed. The government just can't do without the money
>it gets by selling alcoholic beverages.
This seems to apply to a lot of welfare socialism. You raise taxes for
moralist or ideological reasons, e.g. luxury taxes, alcohol taxes,
arvsskatt, f|rm|genhetsskatt, arbetsgivaravgift. Then when you want to
get rid of these taxes, you find that you can't afford it!
>The recent price increase in Finland had nothing to do with social issues.
>If the price is too high, people just start making alcohole at home.
*START* making alcohol at home? Are you kidding! Anyway, alcohol made at
home is no alcohol when it comes to WHO statistics, so the government
doesn't have to care shit about it. Swedes who spend six months of their
lifes in the queue at Systemet should consider the fact that they *live*
six months longer than the strange people abroad who do less well without
regulations and interference.
>I agree with you that there are such madmen bureaucrats you mentioned. The
>question is, why do we allow government to think for ourselves. There's
>always gonna be those who think that protecting people from themselves is
>what government should be doing.
Now that's defaitism -- cheer up Janne, maybe some day we *will* get rid
of these patronizing, moralizing humbugs :-) ?
--
______ _~
(_/_ _ _ _/) _ . /) / ) , _/) _
__/ _/(_(/_(/__/(_/_/Z_ (_/_/)_/__/))_(I_/)_