Forums
There are currently 2 people viewing this thread.
These 97 comments are related to the topic:
Labour want to tax gambling out of existence

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 2 of 3  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 97
By:
1st time poster
When: 27 Aug 26 14:57
MAJ of people thinking gambling on £2 a spin casino game/FOBT,s isnt goode for you would be correct, you,d have to ask racing and bookmakers why they hitched themelves to the casino game bandwagon, every horseracing punter over 50 can tell you horse racing is now a niche marker hardly ever mentioned at work,between non punting friends,family
By:
Cider
When: 27 Aug 26 15:05
It's irrelevant now. But my understanding is that Labour themselves deregulated gambling and allowed the proliferation of gaming and slots in shops.

90%+ shops have no life beyond gaming. Technology is not reversible.
By:
longbridge
When: 27 Aug 26 15:06
I do not think the HR betting decline has anything to do with FOBTs.  I think it is about more attractive sport betting options.

When I was getting into betting in the 80s, pretty much the only real things offered in shops were horses and dogs.  So I learned about horseracing so I could have a bet.

But now the bookies offer betting on football and tennis and cricket and golf - sports young people already know and are passionate about.

So when they come to want to start betting, they bet on what they know, not learn an alien sport to start betting on.

As for the shops - no different to any thing else on the high street imo - almost everyone has moved their spending online and the high street is dying.
By:
Mr Spock
When: 27 Aug 26 15:07
When you increase taxes your actual tax take decreases. They did this in Germany a couple of years ago with online gambling and the tax take reduced by around 40% because the operators increased the edge on the games and people stopped playing.Labour have never understood this and always think they can carry on raising funds just simply by increasing taxes. Its never worked.
By:
Cider
When: 27 Aug 26 15:11
It's not really about increasing the amount of tax raised, it's ideology driven. They aren't that stupid. This daft mansion tax will cost more to operate than it collects. But the policy of punishing people with paper wealth will make the feel warm and fuzzy.
By:
Mr Spock
When: 27 Aug 26 15:14
And control Cider, they want to control every aspect of your life and slowly but surely its happening.
By:
Cider
When: 27 Aug 26 15:15
The best way to sell their ideology driven policies is to claim that the proceeds will be put to 'good' causes. Everything they do is deliberately packaged to make anyone arguing against them to appear evil and uncaring (Tories and Labour + greens and liberals).
By:
Cider
When: 27 Aug 26 15:18
Most people will recall that tactic, adding tax to education means that there would be more teachers. Only, there aren't.
By:
Mr Spock
When: 27 Aug 26 15:38
Sugar tax (Tories) made no difference to consumption.
By:
Trident
When: 27 Aug 26 15:53
No longer BETTING shops. Just slot aracde. Tax them Heavy
By:
Trident
When: 27 Aug 26 15:56
Went to my local bookies/casino the other day. Regulary go there Saturday peak times. 4 people on machines 1 even waiting! Nobody interesting in the Horse Racing, really sad.

They have done it themselves the big giants will now need to PAY UP. They had it so good for too long IMO
By:
N-east Correspondent
When: 27 Aug 26 16:01
thought they had already doubled the remote gaming duty to 40% but kept horse racing at the same level

so they want to go in for more... is that right?
By:
Mr Spock
When: 27 Aug 26 16:18
Yes gaming duty up to 40% on online casinos but don’t think it applied to FOBTs yet. Don't forget general sports gaming duty goes up to 25% next April (excluding horse racing) so all those extra place races will soon disappear (the books will claw it back somewhere) and will BF put up commission?
By:
impossible123
When: 27 Aug 26 16:29
Singapore outlawed gambling except in (2) casinos. They even put their only and once premier horseracing racecourse, Kranji, to bed, why? Their citizens were indulging too much; losing too much; productivity dropped, family aggravation increased; etc.

The Singaporeans play the Stock Markets and Cryptos.
By:
1st time poster
When: 27 Aug 26 16:40
SUGAR TAX tory made no different to consumption ?
REALLY ?????

off cousre it made a big difference , big companies reduced the  sugar in sugary drinks to below the  level where they would be taxed,so eople buying the  same drink were consuming less ugar,which is what the tax was designed to do
By:
Trident
When: 27 Aug 26 16:45
The only way I know to make these Corporations change their reprehensible behaviour, is to hit them so hard in the pocket they are Forced to change. Either that or I would drive them out of business completely. They do not care about You.
By:
penzance
When: 27 Aug 26 16:51
Thought Kranji shut to build on it.
By:
Mr Spock
When: 27 Aug 26 16:53
1TP Ordinary Coke (probably the most popular soft drink in the UK) contains 10.6 of sugar per 100ml. How has the sugar tax changed the consumption of that?
By:
1st time poster
When: 27 Aug 26 16:56
i didnt name a brand or drink,but the fact is lots of companies reduced sugar level,s in drink to avoid the tax ,ergo lots of people consumed less sugar so the tax worked as designed,you said it failed
By:
1st time poster
When: 27 Aug 26 16:59
increased TAXES on ciggie,s have helped cut smoking rates but no one,s saying you cant still buy ciggies/moke if you chooe to
By:
The Management
When: 27 Aug 26 17:03
Mr Spock - go to your local supermarket. If you can find any (several major retailers don't even stock it now) look at the price of regular/original Coca Cola - then compare it with the price of the 48 other (low sugar or sugar free) varieties that they now produce. Also compare the shelf space given to each.

I'd guess the "sugar tax" has completely decimated sales of the original (very high sugar) version and the shelf space now given to it, confirms that opinion imo.
By:
longbridge
When: 27 Aug 26 17:29
@Trident

"Either that or I would drive them out of business completely."

If your intent is to save the great British public from their "reprehensible behaviour", then leaving that public with no alternative but the unregulated market seems to me unlikely to achieve that?  Same as the US and Prohibition - people still buy what they want, they just turn to buying it from gangsters.
By:
Cider
When: 27 Aug 26 17:37
it's quite amusing now in fact that bookmaker advertising now seems to be about encouraging people not to have a bet.
By:
1st time poster
When: 27 Aug 26 17:40
well of course you wont stop everyone,if someone,s willing to pay £16 for 2o ciggs you wont stop them,

same as you wont stop to everyone from  finding a FOBT/casino game to gamble on

same as if punting went underground me and plenty of other,s just wouldnt bother but others would
By:
1st time poster
When: 27 Aug 26 17:42
if you see 100 bookmaker adverts a day,99 of them will be about sports punting, bet builders, football acca,s, slots, casino game no sign of horse racing
By:
Cider
When: 27 Aug 26 17:47
there's nothing wrong with gambling with your own funds, why are you comparing it to smoking tobacco.
By:
1st time poster
When: 27 Aug 26 17:59
i,m not just applying your human behaviour examples to sugary drink,casino games,smoking, etc etc
By:
1st time poster
When: 27 Aug 26 18:00
your the one telling us all its gov policy/those with the means to make all punting/gambling  illegal
By:
Mr Spock
When: 27 Aug 26 18:05
That's my perception and I'm entitled to it. I wouldn't trust any government to have my best interests at heart as they are all career politicians who don't give two f00ks for the man (or woman) in the street.
By:
Cider
When: 27 Aug 26 18:06
yes so it's nothing to do with raising more tax.

but we must be clear (those on the freedom side if the argument), that there is a much much better argument for nudging people off of tobacco. though I am not attracted to a total ban or their brutally stupid idea to ban people based on the year you were born if you're already an adult.
By:
Mr Spock
When: 27 Aug 26 18:16
It depends if you smoke (or have ever) or not. I'm biased as both my parents were heavy smokers and both died of lung related diseases. I'm quite happy for people to smoke so long as I don’t have to breath what they are exhaling, its their choice. But once you start to ban things and the population accept it, the government will move on to the next thing.
By:
Mr Spock
When: 27 Aug 26 18:18
Drinking kills thousands of people every year but currently no one wants to stop it, is it because most of the politicians drink as well?
By:
Cider
When: 27 Aug 26 18:24
Both my parents were heavy smokers but breathing in smoke never appealed to me as something to choose to do for pleasure. I'm fine with making it difficult.

But the relevancy is that the establishments strategy is to make gambling on sports especially hr as it involves animals, as socially unacceptable as they've made smoking. There was a compelling reason to do that for smoking, not so, gambling.
By:
impossible123
When: 27 Aug 26 18:26
The present number of bookies does not justify to be represented in the high streets. The betting / punting numbers are too insignificant to warrant the present number. Unlike the past 4 or 5 decades present high street bookies do not provide a service eg a social meeting place or a safe and warm environment that online bookies cannot.

The present high street bookies are in the high streets for one reason only ie to offer fobt to the fobt addicts,  and to entice the general public to play fobt.

Fobt is the most addictive and problematic gambling ever introduced to the high streets of the UK. Fobt is not allowed in Ireland, Australia, Canada, France or even the USA.

I firmly believe fobt should be outlawed in the streets of the UK.
By:
ronnie rails
When: 27 Aug 26 18:42
Impossible.
Sad to say not many left in Darlo when i started they was 5 Hills and 5 Corals know only one of each .
Hope you are well.
Ronnie.
By:
ronnie rails
When: 27 Aug 26 18:55
And 4 Lads gone.
Ronnie.
By:
1st time poster
When: 27 Aug 26 19:00
i cant keep up
so although we,re told 24/7 on social media/MSM that its  LAB TAX rises that are closing X amount of pubs a week,mr pock now admits MP,s /the gov arnt trying to close pubs becausenthey like a drink
By:
CagliariG
When: 27 Aug 26 19:06
All this stemming from a comment made by the Son Of The Manse who is not even an elected MP, the mind boggles what will happen on here if an actual member of Government made an actual reference to taxing gambling other than what has already been passed. Raising capital to fund new Nuclear Weapons perhaps? lol
By:
Mr Spock
When: 27 Aug 26 19:13
1TP yes you do need to keep up as I never said that, it was just a question not a statement of fact. Cag its well touted that the PM doesnt run the government and others behind the scenes do. It was obvious when Starmer was PM he wasn't making half of the decisions.
By:
impossible123
When: 27 Aug 26 19:18
'ronnie rails', not many left nevertheless, still one too many. Most managers are not friendly either to an unknown face. I'd have thought an opportunity for a new customer; the Paddy next to Ganley's in Morden would try and con you on payout citing a rule 4. Most are clueless eg unable even to calculate a win treble. They are merely custodians of fobt.

You're the exception. You're the old school manager. You know your stuff ie a proper bookie, and a manager. The old high street bookies were once known as the 5th core public service. Not now.

You've a good evening.
Page 2 of 3  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com