If anything, a club will find it much more easier to implement, as the majority of patrons require membership to the club anyway. Just means the casual visitors who live outside of the 5km will either join up the club to get a pokie card, or don't play on that visit. It's pubs that will be impacted more.
This is a good idea in theory, but most people will not join a club if they don't have to. And what is it 'easier' to implement? There is very little detail about how these cards will work - is it all going to be the one card? How is the information stored? Who maintains security of the information? Will this be the club's role? If so, guess what - more cost to the club with less revenue coming in.
Who says this won't work, obviously the clubs realise it will work in reducing how much they can get from each patron, which is why they are fighting so hard to stop it.
Because it is restricting it from people who don't have gambling problems. It is the equivalent of limiting amount of alcohol that can be bought from a bottleshop - it's not going to stop alcoholics... But it will mean bottleshops will lose a lot of business.
It just means clubs need to diversy there income streams a little more, and allow for the drop off in reliance on pokie machine income. In clubs that don't react, they will cause people to lose jobs, but you can't just put some people's livehood ahead of others because you think it's too hard.
Most clubs have already diversified due to increases in pokie taxes, the new smoking laws, etc. This is another downward pressure on the club industry. You argue you can't just put someone's livelihood ahead of others - but then what is the point of this policy? Putting the issues of the VAST minority of Australian ahead of everyone else.
I think jobs are important as a reduced socio-economic status generally leads to higher drug and alcohol abuse as well as - guess what? - gambling.
Ah, so the point of clubs to benefit the community will be the first to go. Are you really using that argument to justify your position? Clubs just need to work out how to get more money off these ex-problem gamblers when they enter the premises by providing more varied entertainment to draw the patrons in.
My point was that the funding to the community would be the first to go to ensure clubs have more time to make any changes.
Perhaps we should be aiming to mean that problem gamblers don't go into any establishment.
Have you been into any club recently? What more varied entertainment do you want? Most clubs offer an abundance of entertainment - but on top of the pokie card patrons have a limit of $250 at an ATM... That's great for other areas of the business too!
Not quite the truth their. Most pokie problem gamblers have been shown not to go to other gambling forms (obviously there are others than have a gambling problem that is more far reaching). Maybe you might want to do some research into problem gambling and the effects on family units, or even individuals.
I am well aware of the affects of problem gambling, and have had this issue in the family. Do not dictate to me that this will work when it clearly won't. Problem gamblers will find their way around this sad excuse for policy quite easily - because they need to gamble to satisfy their urges. It is the equivalent of a 2 drink max at a bar to prevent alcoholism - it is a dumb idea.
The old ladies will probably just participate in Bingo and other forms of entertainment, entertainment which is much more sociable, and would provide them with a better level of living. And still spend there money down the club, just on different things.
Bingo is still gambling - and then again clubs already run these and don't make money from it. So then it is likely that they raise the costs, meaning these old ladies are gambling even more of their money.
Most clubs offer all of this alternative entertainment - to claim they don't is naive and daft.
Hmm, getting money out before you go to a club is too hard?
Because there is always an ATM on the way to a local club - or if you forget, you will need to leave the club and find an ATM else where to return to the club? Most people aren't that desperate...
... But then again problem gamblers are!
I think any obstacles that can be put in the way of problem gamblers, and more importantly, POTENTIAL problem gamblers, is a good thing. Current options do not work.
And neither will this one. But I bet you support limiting alcoholic beverages to 2 per person, and banning smoking anywhere, and limiting car engines to 60kmh, etc. At what point are people going to be responsible for themselves.
Homework assignment for you tonight, have a look at when Gamblers Anonymous sessions are on.
Have a look at what hours gambling counsellors work.
Ring the gambling hotline and have a discussion with these guys (pretend you are a problem gambler), and see what horrible suggestions they give you.
Go down to a pub and request you be banned from the pokie machines, and then go down a week later and play them and see what happens.
I have dealt with these groups before as previously mentioned due to a family member. The only thing to stop a problem gambler is themselves - no one else. I know for a fact Club's work hard at their self exclusion policies and actively monitor it and refusing entry to persons on it.
At that point you will understand why something like this needs to be in place. The current ones are just not practical or available to the majority of people in this position.
That is absolute nonsense! Not available? Are you kidding me?
As an expert on problem gambling you would know that the only person who can stop a problem gambler is themselves!
