←back to thread

Addiction Markets

(www.thebignewsletter.com)
383 points toomuchtodo | 1 comments | 31 Oct 25 17:42 UTC | HN request time: 0.237s | source
Show context
shipman05 ◴[01 Nov 25 00:43 UTC] No.45778266[source]▶
It feels like banning advertising for gambling would be a sweet spot between harm reduction and maintaining individual liberty.

Sports gambling ads have ruined sports media. State lottery ads are even worse. The government should not spend money to encourage its own citizens to partake in harmful activities.

replies(11): >>45778585 #>>45779037 #>>45779401 #>>45779688 #>>45779694 #>>45780698 #>>45780860 #>>45781031 #>>45781055 #>>45781172 #>>45782629 #
rufus_foreman ◴[01 Nov 25 01:41 UTC] No.45778585[source]▶
>> It feels like banning advertising for gambling would be a sweet spot between harm reduction and maintaining individual liberty

No.

If you want restrictions on gambling, on advertising it, on participating in it, on making money from it, you want to restrict individual liberty.

I want to restrict individual liberty, I have voted against gambling when it has come up for a vote in my state over and over.

You want to appear to be the type of person who wants to maintain individual liberty, but you in fact are not. You want to restrict individual liberty in the area of gambling.

I would also like to appear to be the type of person who wants to maintain individual liberty, and I will vote against gambling every single time it comes up.

No gambling.

replies(4): >>45778625 #>>45778711 #>>45778749 #>>45778941 #
1. derektank ◴[01 Nov 25 02:20 UTC] No.45778749[source]▶
As with many things, the degree matters. It is both an imposition on your liberty to require identification when boarding an airplane and an imposition on your liberty to ban everyone from flying altogether. But one clearly restricts your liberty more than another. I think when choosing between different solutions to a problem, choosing the one that limits your freedom the least is a reasonable rule of thumb.