alt Hacker NewsIt was never more virtuous to be options-trading GME shares on Robinhood than gambling at the dog track or betting on basketball games. The only reason some regulators are going after Kalshi or Polymarket is that the casino owners are lining these particular politicians' pockets more than the futures trading companies are.
I actually am not opinionated on it other than all kinds of gambling are basically the same -- and that includes a lot of the ways stock market is used in practice.
I do admit gambling addiction is a real thing and that this new super convenient and easy and legal option incrementally brings more people into that world of pain. But I also think it's stupid to ban gambling like they did with alcohol in the last century. It'll just put more control in the hands of the mob.
The mob. There's an organization that I bet is also eagerly lining the pockets of these "kill Kalshi" regulators.
Replies
I agree with you that gambling on options via Robinhood is not great, but it at least theoretically has value to society and has a long history of being used by slightly more responsible entities which makes it harder to just, say, ban it out right.
Betting on the superbowl winner is none of that.
Wrong. Totally. Options on GME and win/loss bets on basketball and dog racing are not the same as the level of prop bets and betting on things occuring.
Totally completely wrong.
I think you are right that it's all gambling. Kalshi seems more predatory in how it targets people. Perhaps advertising gambling in any way should be outlawed.