Poker machines, the money, and Labor

Great article Skid, one of the best I’ve ever seen on here.

For those with short attention spans – nobody is forcing you to read every submission here.

Pokies are evil, evil things and should be destroyed en masse.

Pommy bastard said :

Poker machines are a voluntary stupidity tax.

I’ve no problem with d*mb*ss*s who want to pay money to see bright flashing lights and spinning wheels go around, it’s their choice. The fact that this income for the clubs is double taxed is a good thing, the fact that the money is directed into worthwhile activities for people with lives is a good thing.

“Problem gambling” or “gambling addiction” or whatever the PC term is for p!ssing good money down the drain, are at best psychological addictions, ones which you choose to develop, and have to work hard to get, well done them for achieving their goals and for paying for my kid’s basketball court. If it wasn’t gambling it may be sex, drugs, alcohol, or rollerblading they would get themselves hooked on, at least we get to spend some of their cash in a fruitful way from this

Poker machines are designed to induce players to continue playing and to addict some people. For the sake of benefit to you and your family you are prepared to take advantage of the misfortune of others. Because in your mind it is self induced? Lucky you not to be afflicted by a gambling problem. A gambling problem is not all you lack.

Playing the pokies is a mugs game, I know someone who gambled $230.000.00, what a fool.

Skidbladnir: I’m sure it was all worth it so you could slip in that WarGames reference.

You lost me at the 187th paragraph…

housebound said :

Maybe government should revert to looking after people (you know, housing the disabled, buying cots for ICU babies etc), and let the clubs fund roadside sculptures and football games.

That would make more sense, wouldn’t it.

.. and people need to get lives.

Skid I may have missed it – but do the contributions to the Labor Party count as Community Contributions?

Because maybe that’s all we need here – is a tightening up of what constitutes a “community contribution”….

Thanks Skid, very interesting.

“and those who do already own sporting facilities, so can improve their own assets and get a free ride, relative to their peers”

From that PDF, Gungahlin Lakes: $1,776,760 total eligible contributions; $1,692,835 on sports and recreation. I wonder how much of that is maintenance of the golf course.

“ClubsACT claim the typical Club returns 90% of turnover to players”

That’s revolting. I had no idea it was so low — the house edge on roulette at the casino is half that.

Caf:
Doing a rundown by NGMR gets convoluted, in that sports clubs and facilities with clubhouses (ie: golf courses) get to declare any money spent on ‘sporting facilities available to the public, whether generally available or only for limited periods’.
As example, Federal Golf Club only received $41k from the pokies, but spent $588k on ‘eligible activities’, so gets a “Community Contribution” of a whopping 1888%.

It gets wierder if you want me to use ‘adjusted’ vs ‘real’ figures for contributions into the bonus categories of Women’s Sport or Problem Gambling or for calculating a totals (there are $150k worth of ‘adjustments’), or if you want it by Club Group.

For a summary, read bolded bits and indented bits, or just stop at where the “click for more” entry is when you view it on the frontpage.
I had originally asked Jb if he wanted it broken into seperate sets or all in one article, I went with Jb’s choice. He still overruled about half of my formatting in favour for making me look like a double-spaceing loon, though.

(And providing a brief version in addition to this? How much time do you think I have? I did this one gratis… :P)

I personally place far more value on independent figures and statements which can be easily checked via references

Just as well this article was full of just the things you mention there.

This article is amoung the best, if not THE best, I’ve read on RA. I found it enthralling and the story indeed unfolded like a rose that shone pure amazify from every petal.

I may be embellishing my appreciation just a little. You get the idea.

Skid thanks for this informative piece. I liked that all your facts had references that I could follow up if I want to know more. There was a good amount of facts and figures to back up the overall feel and opinion of this article. You provided a lot of reliable information about the workings of Clubs in Canb – things I have never thought much about before because I don’t play pokies or go to clubs.

For readers who wanted a summary – it was right there in the title “Poker machines, the money and Labor”. Skid gave you the entire jist of the article in those 6 words. Would love to see more quality articles like this so prospective writers do not feel discouraged by some of the responses here. There ARE people who read this, are interested and learn something. The others could simply limit their reading to the headlines.

Skidbladnir said :

Richer persons tend not to play the pokies (so have a smaller proportion of population playing pokies).
Richer people also have higher Household disposable Income (HDI), so dollar for dollar richer people who do play the pokies contribute far less portion of their HDI as tax revenue than poorer people who play the pokies.

I suspect that poorer people will, generally speaking, have less education than richer people also, leading to this group having less understanding about the real odds of winning and thus making them more vulnerable to pokie related gambling problems.

I put the occasional $5 into a pokie (perhaps 2 or 3 times a year), and it concerns me when you see people with desperate looks on their faces feeding $20 notes into these things.

Poker machines are a voluntary stupidity tax.

I’ve no problem with d*mb*ss*s who want to pay money to see bright flashing lights and spinning wheels go around, it’s their choice. The fact that this income for the clubs is double taxed is a good thing, the fact that the money is directed into worthwhile activities for people with lives is a good thing.

“Problem gambling” or “gambling addiction” or whatever the PC term is for p!ssing good money down the drain, are at best psychological addictions, ones which you choose to develop, and have to work hard to get, well done them for achieving their goals and for paying for my kid’s basketball court. If it wasn’t gambling it may be sex, drugs, alcohol, or rollerblading they would get themselves hooked on, at least we get to spend some of their cash in a fruitful way from this

Stateline did a story on August 7th.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/08/10/2650968.htm

I’ve got to agree that a summarised version would be easier to digest – if we want all the figures we can go to the source ourselves. It would be interesting to see the “community contribution” league tables broken up into sports clubs (that presumably spend it on themselves) and non-sports clubs.

Homer: Marge, we need to talk. You’re spending too much time at the
casino and I think you may have a problem.
Marge: I won sixty dollars last night!
Homer: Woo-hoo! Problem solved.

Hells_Bells74 said :

I liked reading it. Thanks 🙂

Thanks. 🙂

I realise poker machines aren’t the most exciting topic in the world.
The reasons I decided to do it were:
1) I was sick for a week, and then so was the LadySkid. I had far too much time on my hands, and nothing to do with it.
2) There isn’t any plain English good-quality coverage of ACT Gaming other than ClubsACT, who clearly have a vested interest.
3) After the ACT Treasury turns over its report into the poliy shift to the Assembly (October), there’s a Federal Productivity Commission into Gambling for November. Its not going off the radar in a hurry.

Hells_Bells74 said :

I wonder though about the labor club having 272 pokies but claiming only 3000 dollars more than the club next on the list with 155 pokies. Is that just the way it averaged out or something?

That is an average annual income per machine.

Canberra Labor Club: 272 machines @ $55,337 = $15,051,661pa
CSCC Tuggeranong: 155 machines @ $52,060 = $8,069,300pa

The Labor Club works their machines hard

Actually GB, if you read what I had to say it was that the article and it’s point should have been clear, concise, and easy to read, with links to support their point of view should someone what to fact check what they have said.

I personally place far more value on independent figures and statements which can be easily checked via references rather than a jumbled collection of facts, figures, personal opinion with a few links thrown in at random.

Also Skidbladnir, why don’t you want to rewrite to satisfy short attention spans? Why not provide a summary of what you want to discuss, with a link to a larger article for those people who want to find out more?

You also have to remember that some of us on here don’t have time to digest huge amounts of information, however we can still provide input and ideas. Also by providing an executive summary it may encourage more people to read what you have had to say. You’ve obviously spent some time writing it, surely you want as many people as possible to read it.

Jim Jones said :

I’d be interested in some more clarification about the hazy definition of ‘contributing NGMR back into the community’. I understand that upgrade and maintenance of club sporting facilities is viewed in this category, but what other activities/facilities/building/etc. comes under this umbrella?

http://www.gamblingandracing.act.gov.au/Documents/Community%20Contributions%20Report%202007-08.pdf
Attachment B (Pg15).

For others:
c9: In my view, pokies are a voluntary form of taxation…
Yes, they are a form of consumption tax.
Richer persons tend not to play the pokies (so have a smaller proportion of population playing pokies).
Richer people also have higher Household disposable Income (HDI), so dollar for dollar richer people who do play the pokies contribute far less portion of their HDI as tax revenue than poorer people who play the pokies.
IE: The tax (and political donation) burden is falling hardest on individual ‘working families’ that Labor claim to defend, and that the CFMEU claim to be acting in the interests of. Also, there are more of the lower-income persons playing the machines.

ghughes: Gambling is a tax on people who failed math.
GregW: (Poker machines are) Well understood, especially when it comes to expected returns.
Yes, but the odds are fixed against players and they do provide signs for poeple who don’t catch on so quickly, while it doesn’t take advanced maths to know that $0.87 return on a $1.00 is a loss, the signs that actually explain that on the machines are brassy labels with small print, next to BIG FLASHING IMAGES and value of the current jackpot.

Probabilty and outcomes of chance aren’t typically taught in vocational education courses, and the greatest concentrations of machines, and spending per capita are highest in other States are in disadvantaged SEIFA(Economic Disadvantage) municipalities, home to a relatively greater portion of vocationally and remedially-educated persons.(Link)
SEIFA is the SocioEconomic Indexes For Australia.

Friska:Have you thought about the local community with disabilities who have been able to live a life because of ACT Clubs purchasing special needs equipment?

Have you thought how much of that funding was received from disadvantaged people who are addicts, or how much of the “We give special needs equipment to disadvantaged people” line they sing so loudly about is a brand-relations exercise?
They have after all, taken money from a whole lot of people, taken their cut from it, then passed on a trickle to a community segment which they look nice for doing, and it classes as a Charitable Contribution, so can count towards their mandatory 7% (or a discretionary bonus payment if they have already met quota), in accordance with the law.
(Yes, some money returned to the community is good, but possibly not as good as letting the community have more in their own wallet to contribute to causes they support.)

c9: What’s the point of this post? I read the first few lines
harvyk: What’s the point of the article??? If someone could rewrite it in 50 words or less please, I have no desire to read…

If your attention span is only long enough to read 50 words or a few lines, you guys aren’t the audience the bit is targetted at. Not everything that gets published on RA is here for your pleasure, just as not all of the Canberra times interests everybody.
Its a pick-and-mix kind of thing.
(And no, I won’t rewrite to satisfy short attention spans.)

Good post skid. Sure it’s longer than the attention span of a goldfish, but it’s good to stretch attention spans. Thanks for putting all this in one place. It’s not my special interest, but that makes it all the more intersting and useful because I’ll NEVER do that research myself.

As for those pokies supporters, if you want to justify exploitative, commercialised gambling dens on the basis of a few dispensations thrown out to some disadvantaged, please realise there are better ways to do it. Oh, hang on – that’s what taxes are for.

Maybe government should revert to looking after people (you know, housing the disabled, buying cots for ICU babies etc), and let the clubs fund roadside sculptures and football games.

So, rather than digesting information and thinking about it, Friska reckons we should listen to people like Friska who write short sentences with no information. Backed up by harvyk1, speaking up for shock-jock survivors.

And we should apparently form our views based on those of people who work in clubs, rather than people who want to look at the informatiom, think about outcomes etc.

“How many people are in jobs because of these Clubs” — oh, hang on, that might need a figure, or even a percentage! Can’t be having that.

Let’s keep information and debate out of this.

And use short sentences.

Thought is bad.

BB knows.

I liked reading it. Thanks 🙂

I wonder though about the labor club having 272 pokies but claiming only 3000 dollars more than the club next on the list with 155 pokies. Is that just the way it averaged out or something?

I have worked for a number of clubs mentioned in the article. Yes they employ a lot of people. Yes they provide legislated returns to the community. Yes they provide some social amenity in our community.

However their power and dominance of business and Government in the ACT and the relatively cheap taxation regime they enjoy should be questioned.

Mega clubs will never go broke. They cried foul when anti smoking laws were brought in. They said it will be the end of their community grants. What crap. If anything they have prospered – with more non-smokers now playing the pokies.

Look at the very favourable deal the Cross club did with the gov in Woden. We’ll fix up that intersection – and in return the taxpayers can give us a huge chunk of land that we can develop, make a tidy profit from and then use that cash to further expand and refurbish our premises. Once again taxpayers lose out in the ‘deal’.

And anyone that thinks the ‘board’ of the Labor Club actually makes the decisions in the best interest of its members is dreaming. It makes decisions based on what the labor party needs – not what the pokie playing, food eating, bingo playing and raffle ticket buying punter wants.

Friska said :

Figures, charts, percentages, who really cares.

Who cares about the facts? You’d rather be involved in debate and discussion that consciously ignores reality? Are you serious?

Someone goes to the trouble of sorting out the details, facts and stats involved in an issue, and — precisely because of this — a bunch of people complain that it’s too long and complicated and can’t be bothered reading it. But they’re still convinced that their point of view is really important and has to be heard.

Here’s a harsh truth: unless you care enough to do some basic research and analysis, your opinion is worthless.

Best you stop reading articles and talk to real people that work for and in clubs.
Figures, charts, percentages, who really cares. Its the members choice if they want to put their cash into the machines or hope to win the meat raffle. Should we be banning cigarettes and alcohol because they ruin lives too? No-one puts a gun to your head and make you walk into clubs and spend money. I’d rather see someone put money towards a raffle or on bingo then spend it on drugs.

Skid, have you thought about how many people are in jobs because of these Clubs?
Have you thought about the local community with disabilities who have been able to live a life because of ACT Clubs purchasing special needs equipment? Seeing a disadvantaged person smile and laugh because they now have appropiate access to society is priceless.

I have put maybe a few hundred dollars into pokies since I was 18 (I am 26 now), I just don’t see how antisocially wagering on the outcome of random number generators with odds fixed in favour of the house are more entertaining than say, live performance.

When the largest Club in town is run for the benefit of the local governing ALP (so get to write the rules as well as play the game), the Canberra Labor Clubs themselves make up more than 50% of the asset base of the national ALP, and their fellow supporters in the CFMEU movement are also running one of the largest gaming operations in town (“A stronger Union… means a stronger Labor Party.” : Latest Message from CFMEU National Secretary), and they get to operate under the most lenient gaming tax system in the country…

Well, the system may not be broken, but it certainly shouldn’t be beyond scrutiny.

I am not sure I agree with the implicit assumption that pokies are a bad thing. I assume the point of this article is, as c9 said, an interest group piece.

To me pokies are the following things:
– Well understood, especially when it comes to expected returns.
– Entertainment.
– A form of economic Darwinism.
– An economic stimulant.
– The recovery of unnecessary disposable income provided through the social welfare system.

Why are these bad things?

I think Skid must of been an ex pokie player and lost some cash over the years. All I read from you Skid is Club’s do this and Club’s do that. You seem a bit frustrated with ACT Club’s. You seem to have a comment about everything when it comes to pokies nd clubs. I can see you have done alot of research but really I dont care. I love ACT Clubs and I will continue to work with them and for them.

Get a life, call lifeline and tell them your petty BS about clubs and pokies. YAWN.

Thanks Skid for an excellent article, raising the stanbdard of debate with some actual content!

c9 said :

What’s the point of this post? I read the first few lines , realised how long it was

Oh noes! All the wordz! Thinking is difcult!

I really disagree with having pokies, because the people who use them are often those who really can’t afford to, and really don’t know any better. Then there are those who are addicted to gambling and lose everything over and over.

As a society, I think we’d be better off without them.

Absolutely outstanding post Skid. Thanks so much for that – it’s great to see the actual stats alongside some thoughtful asides.

I’d be interested in some more clarification about the hazy definition of ‘contributing NGMR back into the community’. I understand that upgrade and maintenance of club sporting facilities is viewed in this category, but what other activities/facilities/building/etc. comes under this umbrella?

Pretty graphs…

What’s the point of the article??? If someone could rewrite itin 50 words or less please, I have no desire to read through all of it…

OK lets get down to what I think the point might have been

Yes, we all know that your probably going to lose if you gamble. Yes we all know that pokies are a big revenue stream for clubs and gov’t. Yes we all know that pokies are annoying loud and detract from the place. (Seriously the lack of pokies in bars \ clubs is one of the really nice thing about WA)

You’ve also thrown in some big numbers, good for you… We like numbers… It shows exactly how much pokies are contributing to the bottom line of clubs \ gov’ts….

So in conclusion I haven’t really understood what the point the OP was trying to make, because it is long winded and confusing for the 5 second skim reader… Maybe they should make one or two clear concise points and then link to further evidence supporting their particular view for people who don’t want to take it at face value…

just my 2c rounded up to $10 after my pokie win…

I’m sure if the libs had got their asses into gear years ago they’d have their own club(/s) too, not sure what this has to do with Labor directly, laws are passed by GOVERNMENT

gr8 news article – I thank you for having the guts to say something (unline the old media).

I was wondering if there are any studies on how much the average Canberran spends on Grog while playing pokies/betting?

Also there is a missing bit of data – that of assult/police call outs that occur after a big win or becuase of a big loss? 40k a year claimed as a profit (I think the cost to the public of 40k is BS – Instead; I would of liked to see how many lives each machine is worth).

The statement of “If you are affected by problem gambling or would like more information about problem gambling, call Lifeline – their Gambling Care service can provide free financial counselling” provides little confort when you have your life shortened by drunks that are permitted to assult people who could only legaly defend them selves after being attacked.

John Hargreaves should ban them!

As hard as it may be to believe, ghughes, some people like spending money on entertainment that doesn’t give them money back. As long as they’re gambling with eyes open, realising that they will probably never see that money again, then why insult them?

Problem gamblers, like any kind of addict, don’t fall into this category and probably need help to stop. That’s a different issue, however.

So ACT Labor were the recipients of huge ‘donations’ from the Labor Clubs.

How are we to know that the Club managements were not ‘directed’ to appropriate this money to the Party?

An enquiry/investigation, coming years down the track from when this practise probably originated, could well uncover some evidence of a paper trail of this ‘direction’, as the probability of detection waned.

c9 said :

In my view, pokies are a voluntary form of taxation and if we got rid of them we’d all be paying more compulsory taxation to make up the shortfall. You choose to play, you’ll probably lose, but that’s your choice. There are plenty of services out there for problem gamblers to seek help. I enjoy playing them somtimes and consider the pokies reasoanble value for money as far as entertainment value goes.

The problem as I see it c9 is that the majority of the revenue from pokies comes from a small minority of problem gamblers. It is therefore more a tax on people with mental health problems.

Gambling is a tax on people who failed math.

the post has too much google research to be anyone from the Canberra Liberals – they are not up to it

So well done Skidblainer. Just quit gambling and quit the ALP – both prove you failed math.

Katie? Any response?

I think it’s a great article and believe that it’s an abomination that the Labor party benefit so directly from it.

I personally know of at least two local suicides directly related to pokie gambling.

What’s the point of this post? I read the first few lines , realised how long it was an that it was an interest group piece and didn’t waste my time reading it.

In my view, pokies are a voluntary form of taxation and if we got rid of them we’d all be paying more compulsory taxation to make up the shortfall. You choose to play, you’ll probably lose, but that’s your choice. There are plenty of services out there for problem gamblers to seek help. I enjoy playing them somtimes and consider the pokies reasoanble value for money as far as entertainment value goes.

A couple of weeks ago I put a dollar into a poker machine and won seven! I quit, a winner.