|
|
Post by dave on Jan 17, 2014 8:17:09 GMT -5
Yes, I think America has learned you don't reform a people by limiting their choice of addictions. In fact, you don't reform an individual person by limiting his access to addictions. On the other hand, while the government is opening up access to gambling, marijuana, etc., we need to stay aware of how it might be affecting us as a nation. For a very good reason. The government will be a patron of gambling and getting high (if only at the state level now) solely for enhanced revenues from taxing it. If it turns out a less restrictive environment will increase our societal troubles, it will be extremely difficult to put the toothpaste back in the tube and get the budgeteers to give up all that revenue. (I believe I read Colorado plans what will amount to a 25% sales tax on weed.)
|
|
|
|
Post by clarencebunsen on Jan 17, 2014 11:58:49 GMT -5
I have no hard data on hand but I think limiting the range and availability of choice on addictions has at least some impact on addictions. The rate of smoking in the US has decreased over the last couple decades and I believe t least part of that decline can be attributed to the combination of higher taxes (prices), restrictions on availability, enforcement and education.
In Minnesota before I moved here there were few opportunities for gambling: no lotteries, no casinos, one harness track in the state. As a rather sheltered person, if I had wanted to place a bet I wouldn't have known where to do it. One of the culture shocks moving here was the easy availability of gambling, lottery tickets wherever I bought gas or milk, an OTB within walking distance of where I worked. Government advertising encouraged me to spend buying lottery tickets. Since then we've added casinos, video lottery games in bars, more advertising. (Minnesota has also changed and now has lotteries and Native American casinos).
At the risk of sounding like a grumpy old man, thirty years ago I don't recall reading about company or government bookkeepers going to jail for stealing to support a gambling addiction. Now it seems fairly common.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jan 17, 2014 12:38:46 GMT -5
The only legal gambling I encountered when I lived in Minnesota was pull tab tickets sold in bars in West Duluth and they were licensed only to benefit a charity with the proceeds.
|
|
|
|
Post by dave on Jan 17, 2014 20:20:53 GMT -5
CB, I think what you assume about an increase in trouble accompanying the increased ease of access to gambling must be pretty well documented. And as I mentioned before, we need quality studies of the effects. Many of us don't see the negative effects in their own families or experience, and assume things are great all over. It's only when we view the entire picture that we can see the effects on the wider population, which can also warn us it might someday happen to our friends and associates.
But we'll still face the question of what we should do about it. If for example, we were to find the rate of gambling addiction zooming up after Proposition 1, we still have to decide whether we should restrict it or leave it up to the fates.
However, a dramatic finding of increased addiction would hopefully at least cause the government to institute some programs to help alleviate the problem. It will be interesting to see what happens if addiction does rise and what the government decides to do about it.
|
|
