Problem Gambling: Another problem that Toronto doesn’t need

March 29, 2007 · By Aaron Unruh

The Toronto Star:

Legalize all forms of gambling, including Internet wagering, and let the governments simply tax the proceeds.

It will mean far more money into the public purse, in the long run…

And far more money taken out to deal with the social problems that flow from large-scale gambling, as Alberta’s shameful experience with VLTs demonstrates:

A recent conclusion from eight studies re: the impact of gambling and VLTs presented to the city of Edmonton in response to a city counsellor’s request for this information (reported in the Edmonton Journal, 2-14-97) confirms other studies about the high social cost of gambling. It is estimated that in Edmonton alone, there are 3700 pathological gamblers, and another 10,000 problem gamblers. The social cost is estimated somewhere between $66M and $200M. Studies both in Alberta and outside estimate the social cost at between $2 and $5 for every $1 of gambling revenue. Furthermore, what kind of dollar figure can really be attached to a broken home or life?

The social costs don’t end there. With addiction and desperation comes crime.

AADAC studies show that each problem gambler affects eight to 15 other people — spouse, children, family, friends, employer, employees…Some people are demanding the “Freedom of Choice” and about an “individual’s rights and freedoms to gamble.” The problem is that when individuals mess up, the family and the community has to pick up the pieces and pay for the damages. The gambler’s money is gone.

Here’s a clue for the Toronto Star: Toronto is already a hellhole. Don’t introduce another aggravating factor.

h/t

Comments

3 Responses to “Problem Gambling: Another problem that Toronto doesn’t need”

  1. Les on March 29th, 2007 11:24 am [#]

    How about we keep offering aggravating factors until the engine seizes.

  2. Ken on March 29th, 2007 2:10 pm [#]

    I guess freedom doesn’t count for anything?

  3. Aaron Unruh on March 29th, 2007 2:27 pm [#]

    Yeah, guess not, eh?

Got something to say?