Live data from Hacker News

Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

grogsgamut.blogspot.com

81–83 of 83 posts

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#81
> [...] pokies users at risk of addiction (this groups makes up one-third of users).

> [...] According to the Productivity Commission, 88% of players restrict themselves to less than $1 for each bet. Problem and at-risk gamblers don’t.

These fractions of problem users are higher than I expected. Previous reading in the area (A World of Chance; Brenner, Brenner, and Brown) had led me to believe problem gambling is about as prevalent among gamblers as problem drinking is among drinkers.

What makes up the discrepancy? Does the commission have a looser definition of problem use than Brenner and Brenner? Or are drinking problems also more widespread than I believe?

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a non-addicted, casual gambler (I recreationally play 1-2 no limit poker at casinos once in a blue moon), I'd hate to see casinos simply disappear, but yea they tend to be kind of sad places full of the people who can least afford to lose the money in their pocket. Don't know what the solution is. If you outlaw it, you're getting rid of a benign source of casual fun for folks like me who can keep it under control,…

Society pays a pretty high price for that casual fun for people like you. Maybe go see a movie instead.

You could say the same about alcohol but banning that also didn't work out.

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#83
post #22

what is it with Australians and having the cheesiest names for everything? pokies. electricians are sparkies. bikkie. spewie. budgie. brekky. it's like a bunch of babytalk only it's said by literally everyone.

Maybe an equallly interesting question to ask yourself is why you associated those with "babytalk".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminutives_in_Australian_Engl...
Post reply on HN