Is Gambling a Moral or Ethical subject?
Five States in the U.S. have the lottery banned
I just read an article that informed me that 5 states in the "United States of America" have made it illegal to play the lotto: Alabama, Alaska, Hawaii, Nevada, and Utah. Of those five, I think Nevada is the most hypocritical about it. Nevada, really? Did they forget that Las Vegas is the gambling capital of the world? Or is it simply because they don't want the lotto to compete with their casinos? Oy ve.
Typically, I don't spend much time thinking about gambling. I've known gamblers. There were a few high rolling gamblers in my family when I was growing up including my own mother. We both worked at the casino - my mother was a poker dealer, and I was a black jack dealer. That was a long time ago. My family often worried about my mother's gambling "problem" because though she worked very hard and made very good money, she was often "broke" due to her "gambling problem". I chose a different path, but I do understand gamblers and I don't even think of it as a problem unless it interferes with "promises" or "deals" or "commitments".
Alabama doesn't particulary care for gambling which is why they have banned the lotto. Their history includes Mormon faith and "religiously" they believe that "gambling" is "sinful". I won't argue with them, but since I was raised Catholic and went to many Catholic churches that funded their charitable causes with Bingo games held on Church properties, I can not call "gambling" sinful. I've seen much worse than gambling and I guess I see it as a "if the means justifies the ends" kind of thing. "Pragmatism" is considered a philosophy, not a religion, but maybe philosophy should be a religion. Let me not get derailed here.
People play games all the time. They play sports, they play video games, they play board games, they even play psychological games. Sometimes money enters the game, not just as a bet on which Football team is going to win, but as the price of the tickets to see the game, or in the price of purchasing the game just to play it. Back in the early 90's, my best friend Colleen and I decided we were not interested in playing the lotto. The slogan for the Florida lottery at the time was "You can't win, if you don't play." We mocked the slogan and changed it to, "You can't lose, if you don't play." I still think we were comical geniuses.
Yet sometimes I do buy a scratch off ticket. I gave up on the big lottery games because I have absolutely no proof that anyone has ever won those millions. But I have won on a scratch ticket. Yes, I have. About ten years ago, I won about $1000. It's an amazing feeling. It's the kind of shock that feels really good. I didn't get addicted to gambling because of that win. Some people do. They win and they get addicted to that good shock feeling. Then they can't stop themselves. It's like a drug to the gamblers we say have a "problem". So I guess the 5 states that have banned the lottery are doing so to avoid creating gambling addicts or because they are like me and don't believe that anyone has actually won millions.
It's only a moral or ethical subject (the lotto, banning it or keeping it, or gambling in general) if the supplier is deceiving the buyer/gambler. If a poker player cheats at a poker table, all hell breaks loose. We've seen that in many western cowboy movies. But there is no difference regarding morality on the flip side. If the lotto supplier or the casino is "cheating" --- all hell will break loose just as if a player is caught. If the lotto is not actually awarding millions to a winner, that fraudulent activity is going to cause quite a stink. False advertising might not be the crime of the century, but it could anger people much more than overpriced car insurance.
Still, thinking about it "rationally" 5 states is a small number regarding the ban of lotto playing. Most of the states have continued to keep that aspect of gambling legal, probably for pragmatic economical reasons -- the same way that some Catholic churches still play Bingo. Fundraisers are not always easy to come up with, and while there may be some states that are like Robert Cormier's "Jerry" (refusing to sell the chocolates), they may have a valid point in regards to public safety.
I don't think it's an ethical or moral subject. I think it's an economical and safety subject.
About the Creator
Shanon Angermeyer Norman
Gold, Published Poet at allpoetry.com since 2010. USF Grad, Class 2001.
Currently focusing here in VIVA and Challenges having been ECLECTIC in various communities. Upcoming explorations: ART, BOOK CLUB, FILTHY, PHOTOGRAPHY, and HORROR.
Keep reading
More stories from Shanon Angermeyer Norman and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
Horrific Humans
(Dim lighting upon the "congregation" room where there are enough couches and chairs for the whole cast to sit.) Wendy: Good morning everyone. Today's Monday and as usual we will go over the rules of the "Lost and Found" homeless shelter and your responsibilities as a member and resident here. Ethan has made plenty of coffee, so grab a cup and take a seat please.
By Shanon Angermeyer NormanExclusive • about a year ago
How the UK Ended Up Building the World’s Most Expensive Railway
When people talk about ambitious infrastructure projects, the United Kingdom’s new high-speed rail network often tops the list—not for speed, but for cost. What began as a bold vision to modernize the nation’s rail system has become controversial for its massive price tag, complex delays, and shifting political support. Today, as the UK builds what critics have dubbed the world’s most expensive railway, it’s worth asking: how did the UK get here? The Vision: A Modern Railway for the 21st Century The story begins in the early 2000s, when Britain’s rail network was facing growing pains. Congestion on the West Coast Main Line and other key routes was worsening, freight capacity was limited, and there was little room for growth. Passengers faced overcrowded trains and slow journey times, especially compared with high-speed services in France, Spain, and Japan. The idea of a high-speed rail link between major cities wasn’t new, but it gained real momentum after the success of continental projects like France’s TGVs. A national network promised faster journeys, increased capacity, and economic growth outside the capital—especially in regions long waiting for infrastructure investment. HS2: Promise and Purpose The centerpiece of the UK’s grand plan became High Speed 2 (HS2), intended to connect London with Birmingham, Manchester, and eventually Leeds. Promoters said trains would cut travel times in half, boost regional economies, and take pressure off crowded commuter lines. HS2 was pitched as more than just a railway: a catalyst for regional development a greener alternative to domestic flights a long-term investment in the UK’s economic future The plan certainly struck a chord. In theory, a high-speed network could transform connectivity across Britain—reducing travel times, encouraging investment outside London, and knitting together major cities in a modern transport web. Why the Costs Ballooned But ambitious infrastructure rarely comes cheap, and HS2’s projected price tag has grown dramatically. Several key factors contributed: 1. Changing Scope and Political Shifts HS2 didn’t emerge fully formed. Its route, phases, and design changed multiple times as governments of different political stripes revised priorities. These revisions added design complexity and contractual overhead, meaning early cost estimates quickly proved optimistic. 2. Construction Complexity Unlike flat plains where high-speed rail thrives, much of the UK is built up, with dense urban areas, protected landscapes, and ancient infrastructure. Building through these environments requires thousands of bridges, tunnels, and engineered embankments, each one adding millions to the tally. 3. Inflation and Supply Costs Rising inflation, especially in the wake of global supply chain disruptions and pandemic recovery spending, boosted material and labor costs. What might have been affordable a decade ago became significantly more expensive mid-project. 4. Contract and Project Management Challenges HS2’s scale required complex contracting across multiple regions and suppliers. Coordinating these elements proved difficult, and disagreements over timelines and specifications led to disputes, delays, and cost escalation. 5. Political Controversy and Delays HS2 has never lacked critics. Community groups, environmental activists, and political opponents argued that costs outweighed benefits—citing damage to woodlands, uncertain economic impacts, and questions over whether better upgrades to existing lines might be smarter. Prolonged debate and legal challenges delayed progress and, in turn, drove costs up further. Comparing Costs: Not Just Construction When analysts describe HS2 as the world’s most expensive railway, they are not just talking about track miles. The total figure includes: land acquisition in high-value areas environmental mitigation and restoration compensation for affected homeowners and businesses the technological systems that support high-speed safety and operations High-speed rail is expensive everywhere—but HS2’s integrated approach to social and environmental issues adds layers of cost that projects in other countries sometimes ignore. Has It Been Worth It? Supporters of HS2 argue that cost alone doesn’t capture the long-term value: faster connections create economic opportunities jobs are generated in construction and related industries rail shifts travelers from cars and planes, reducing emissions Early sections of the project are on track to open sooner than later, offering a hint of the benefits to come. Yet sceptics point out that the business case depends on sufficiently high passenger numbers, sustained economic growth outside London, and timely completion of later phases. The Broader Legacy Whatever HS2’s final cost and impact, the project has already reshaped how Britain thinks about infrastructure. It sparked: debates about regional inequality discussions about public investment versus austerity renewed focus on how to build large-scale projects responsibly HS2 is forcing policymakers to ask tough questions about how the UK balances cost, community impact, climate goals, and economic ambition. Conclusion: A Pricey Path Forward The UK’s journey to build the world’s most expensive railway reflects both the promise and pitfalls of modern infrastructure. What started as a bold answer to a crowded rail network has become a symbol of complexity in the age of political polarization, regional demands, and rising costs. As the first trains begin service in the coming years, HS2 will finally put its benefits to the test. But the lessons learned—about planning, priorities, and public support—will continue to shape Britain’s transport policy for generations.
By Fiazahmedbrohi about 19 hours ago in The Swamp
Comments (1)
This is definitely interesting. When you think about the "Addiction" aspect, I think there is an argument that pushing gambling as an economic tool is a "Psychologically Abusive" way to raise money by the government. Not everyone would agree with that, but it is a perspective that I think has some validity to it. This doesn't mean that these states are making this choice for the people - I have too little faith in politicians to believe that. I wouldn't be surprised if the laws that are passed around this have other aspects involved that have nothing to do with lotteries.