As one who once once had the misfortune of having to share a house with a problem gambler, I say physically rip out every last poker machine in the country and turn them into scrap metal.

If they could do it in the Netherlands, they can do it here.

It is true that it is not easy to create an equal society for all but I think we are so used to having a welfare system that pays out cash to those in need that we think anything else is paternalistic. If welfare or financial assistance was paid in the form of rent/electricity/food vouchers and a nominal amount of cash for other needs why is that paternalistic. It is a society caring for its people who are most in need. What people do with the balance of their financial assistance is a choice they will make. I am a single Mum and I would be happy to receive my welfare in the form of rent/electricty and food can't say there is much left after that anyway but at least I know the society I live in would be providing for my basic needs. I do not see what is paternalistic about this, it is what I believe welfare means. A society looking after their most vulnerable. As far as poker machines go, I think they are a means not only for revenue collecting by Government and business but also a way of controlling the working class. Arguing for the right to have poker machines in any community is like arguing for the right to have plutonium in the drinking water. Plutonium is very useful to some people but not in a towns drinking water. Poker machines may have their uses, but keep them in the safety of a casino. I don't see that as paternal I see that as responsible Government.

It is like the NRA debate.

Its not the fault of the gun, it’s the fault of the people who use them.

Its not the fault of the pokie machine, it’s the fault of the people who use them.

But pokies are different to guns.

No third party is even remotely likely to be injured by someone recklessly using a pokie machine.

Paternalism is a form of dictatorship.

The role of government is to represent the will of the electorate, not to dictate it and not to dictate to the electorate.

Sure some seem doomed to squander their life’s resources on stupid pursuits, pokies, loose women, drugs, smoking and alcohol.

Temperance movements represent the aspirations of both the righteous, the self righteous, as well as the dull, envious and meddlesome.

Gambling is not addictive in any physical sense. There are no ‘cold turkey sweats’ or cardiac arrests from suddenly not gambling.

There is no good reason to ban pokies. There is however, a need for people to take responsibility for their own actions.

My “gambling of choice” is poker among friends, tax free.

On a selfish note, I would far sooner see people like me benefit through government spending of their cut of pokie machine income than wait until the pokie players contributed it in some other way.

Good to see the author makes a note of the adverse consequence of marijuana use. I quite literally got back my brother a couple of years ago when he stopped smoking it every day. Thankfully, he didn't end up drug-fu__ed like a lot of people in the Croydon-Ringwood-Lilydale area.

However, the author underestimates the impact of the occasional joint smoked by the university-educated middle class- its effects are just as detrimental to society. It turns already obnoxious, self-righteous, brainwashed douche-bags into complete wan_ers who believe it their sacred duty to impart to you the knowledge they have gleaned from their noxious weed. They become as fanatical as a Mormon going door-to-door, trying to convince you that until you partake in their disgusting habit, you will not know self fulfillment or spiritual enlightenment.

Complete bunch of toss-pots.