Now do the rest of the football league !
Premier league bans gambling sponsors
71–80 of 129 posts
Re: Premier league bans gambling sponsors
#72Fantastic news!
Re: Premier league bans gambling sponsors
#73I am surprised. Why? well The Uk has two main parties, one of which runs gambling as a way to raise funds... https://lottery.conservatives.com
I'm british. The way that gambling companies target the poorest of society feels disgustingly predatory. You can often tell the average income of an area based on how many betfreds and paddy powers there are on the high street.
Before leaving Britain, I lived in an area that had a ~50% poverty rate. The number of betting shops, small and large brands, just on the local high street alone was ridiculous. It reduced somewhat as gambling has moved online, however there is clearly still money to be made in bricks and mortar gambling.
Re: Premier league bans gambling sponsors
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The 18th amendment proves that were are not that individualistic. And did the 13th Amendment prove that there was no racism in America? Does the 2nd Amendment prove that all Americans love guns? The US is one of the most individualistic societies in the world. There is a significant amount of qualitative and quantitative research about this. Hofstede's cultural dimensions is probably the most popular "scoring" of t…
Most individualist yes. However it isn't perfect 100%
So then you're arguing that "the US isn't that individualistic, as compared to a society that doesn't exist."
Re: Premier league bans gambling sponsors
#75Re: Premier league bans gambling sponsors
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most individualist yes. However it isn't perfect 100%
So then you're arguing that "the US isn't that individualistic, as compared to a society that doesn't exist."
The original argument was the USA is that society that we have now agreed doesn't exist.
Re: Premier league bans gambling sponsors
#77Gambling on sports is the only field in which you can make money by having people think the opposite of what you think and you have a deadline by which the market has to resolve so you can avoid going bankrupt in the long wait for market to reconcile with reality as it happens in the stock market .
Bookies are bad they find ways to avoid paying all the times, exchanges are good
And the act itself , meaning wagering on athletes competing is almost as old as sex and prostitution and all the hopes to regulate it into submission are just as idiotic.
Re: Premier league bans gambling sponsors
#78I am surprised. Why? well The Uk has two main parties, one of which runs gambling as a way to raise funds... https://lottery.conservatives.com
Not surprising. Brits loooove lotteries. On every scale. My year abroad in the UK, in every social event I attended organized by a student society there would inevitably be left-over budget, which would be taken care of by.. a raffle. Some of these raffles could take 30 min (on an event that lasted ~3 hours). And people would be incredibly excited about it.. Really boggles my mind
I would be wary of generalising from British student society culture to wider British culture.
But we would (IMO correctly) observe that while raffles and lotteries are both technically a form of gambling, a raffle is not really a lottery in the conventional sense; it tends to form a more specific social function because there's usually an array of cheap, fun, often slightly absurd prizes from local donors, the prize is not money or a truly high-value thing, they aren't rolling, weekly events, they tend to be all-ages etc.
It largely emerges out of British church fête culture. British churches are usually poor, not rich, so a raffle was a way for the vicar to gently shake down local businesses for a set of cheap prizes in return for some gentle advertising and showing off, and a way to get more local small donors and word-of-mouth because you're gently socially shamed into taking and distributing a book of raffle tickets. School communities do it — for much the same reason — just substitute head teacher for vicar.
Also the raffle is at the end of the event, so people stay to the end (when Britishness would otherwise see us leaving early)!
You have to understand that the naffness of a raffle is very distinct from the brassy, brash idea of a lottery. People groan at the naffness and then take part anyway because it's harmless. Raffles are crap, but they are community crap.
(Like the old-fashioned "Beetle drive" fundraiser which is essentially a form of bingo.)
You can't really draw a line from the typical social raffle to lottery participation or gambling. Lotteries, raffles, bingo halls, sports betting, online game gambling, all look superficially similar but they aren't (despite the gambling companies' efforts) really the same constituencies.
Apart from that, I don't think we're any different to the USA or European countries; we got our National Lottery tradition from the USA and some of our smaller prize lottery companies have been European.
Re: Premier league bans gambling sponsors
#79Re: Premier league bans gambling sponsors
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 18th amendment disagrees. While there is a large "your own fault" for things like this, there is also a large "you shouldn't be allowed to do some stupid things".
While your assessment may be true, I don’t think the mere ratification of the amendment makes the argument. It’s much more complicated. The passing of the 18th was done through a highly organized and motivated cross-party political bloc that would throw an election to punish anyone that did not align with the dry agenda. This stacked the representative government in their favor, even if it did not match actual sentim…
By your numbers 27% did not. Already that is a significant minority. There are an unknown number in your 73% that support things like the amendment, but not that particular one.
Speaking as an American only a tiny number are really the hard core individualists that OP is trying to reduce is to. The majority have inclinations that way but their beliefs are much more complex and cannot be reduced that far.