Astro Hacker News - Legal sports betting linked to sharp increases in violent crime

hallole |next [-]

> Assaults see the largest jump — up to 93% after unexpected home team outcomes.

Insane that assaults nearly double. And this is just sports betting. The real-world betting sites (like Kalshi) haven't taken off too quickly, but what about if/when they eventually do?

potato3732842 |root |parent [-]

This has been a factoid as long as the super bowl. It's just now it's every game day. People are pissed about losing money so they've got a shorter fuse than everyone else in their household is used to them having on any given day.

meesles |next |previous [-]

Sports betting also makes a mockery of sport as a concept. There has yet to be a version that doesn't end up impacting the integrity of the sport.

Lapsa |root |parent [-]

issue is - what's the product of sport? does the good example of being in shape translates directly to cash necessary to run the sport? sports betting is the one and only natural fit as the source of income

meesles |root |parent |next [-]

What do you _mean_? Advertisers pay tons of money because tons of people watch sports. Countries provide resources to teams because they are a source of national pride. Not to mention half of teams are bankrolled by insanely rich people in order to build their reputation and prestige.

So how can betting be the only natural fit as a source of income? The argument does not make sense.

hshdhdhj4444 |root |parent |previous [-]

Entertainment?

Loyalty?

Community?

It’s amazing to me that within a few years people seem to have forgotten that team sports existed, and thrived, for decades and centuries before.

willparks |next |previous [-]

From a libertarian perspective, I always thought betting should be legal. Trust people to know their limits and remove the organized crime aspect. People will find a way even if it is illegal. Turns out there may have been a reason this was illegal in the first place.

troad |root |parent |next [-]

I tend towards libertarian defaults on social issues, but this completely breaks down for compulsive behaviours with severe externalities - gambling, smoking, etc.

And naturally there's no such thing as "libertarianism except for the addictive stuff", because then someone in power gets to decide what is addictive and therefore regulated, and in short order everything is defined in those terms.

This problem is the Achilles' Heel of libertarianism. It's still a better set of starting assumptions than the alternatives, but it's no comprehensive solution to politics in the way smart young people often want it to be.

MichaelZuo |root |parent [-]

It seems nonsensical then?

You would have to pretend non-linear negative externalities don’t exist, or can be waved away with some magic wand.

devilbunny |root |parent [-]

Don’t reduce it to the simplest, weakest version. Pure, untrammeled libertarianism has its weaknesses, but “unless it hurts others directly, you should be allowed to do what you like with yourself” isn’t a bad starting point.

OgsyedIE |root |parent |next |previous [-]

Libertarianism works better than any other economic system for abstract agents. When you replace the abstract agents with mammals, however...

dpe82 |root |parent |next [-]

Whenever I hear libertarian economic theory I always picture my physics professor prefacing every problem with "assume a perfectly uniform sphere..."

araes |root |parent [-]

Milk production at a dairy farm was low, so the farmer wrote to the local university, asking for help from academia. After investigation, the physicist returned to the farm, saying to the farmer, "I have the solution, but it works only in the case of spherical cows in a vacuum."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow

awakeasleep |root |parent |previous [-]

Libertarianism has no answer for how to deal with finite resources (for example land) that will be snapped up by the first agents.

amomchilov |root |parent |previous [-]

The industry assures us they’re just filling demand that already existed, that used to be fulfilled by a black market anyway. So now it’s all above board and taxed and hunky dory.

It’s a bit odd they spend a lot of money on advertising to stimulate demand though, hmmmmmmmm /s

animitronix |previous [-]

Tax the ever loving shit out of DraftKings and FanDuel

freeone3000 |root |parent [-]

I don’t agree that the risk is okay as long as we make enough money from it. I don’t think that prop bets should be legal.