Forum. While it is currently being discussed to privatise – partially – la Française des jeux (FDJ), the government does not seem to have the intention of questioning its monopoly. However, it is taught, especially at the expense of low-income populations, the most affected by gambling addiction.
The State has an ambiguous role in the gaming sector : the direct beneficiary of the monopoly, he is both judge and party. It prides itself in wanting to prevent risks related to the addiction, but it enjoys much greater financial resources as there are players.
In total, between samples on the stakes of the punters, corporate income tax and dividend payments through its participation in the FDJ, the State collects more than 3 billion euros each year. The public company, goes so far as to dip into its reserves to continue to pay generous dividends even when it makes losses.
More disturbing still, a number of small shareholders (to the tune of 23 %, with the State owning 72 % of the FDJ and its employees 5 %), become owners at the discretion of the turbulent history of the public company, also enjoy this windfall colossal. Admiral Henri Lacaille, president of an association of war veterans, recalled that the French games [offers] “the best performance on the Paris, juicier than anything we found elsewhere” ? Is it not problematic that a small group of individuals (which is shrinking year by year, the veterans are not immortal…) takes advantage of the largesse immense as a public monopoly at the expense of players who can’t turn to any other system less pernicious ?
Concept surprising
However, there is a path that no one seems to know in France, given the general silence (deliberate ?) on the subject. In November 2017, the Texas became the 26th u.s. State to allow…
