[giantg2]

If you know you're getting it all back, what's the point? At least the way you word it, it sounds like an equal distribution, which means no payout. Even if it's not an equal distribution like your example, you're still going to have people loose.

The money does go back to the gamblers... and other service members and dependents. It's in the form of MWR programs. That's why you can get a tennis lesson with a pro who has played in the Open for $10, have free access to the rec hall, cheap bowling, cheap pool access, hobby shop access, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if it goes to towards lodging like the Hale Koa, or other services like space-a flights.

[runnerup]

> If you know you're getting it all back, what's the point?

I meant to word it like "They could make it so that 99.9999% of gamblers lose all their bets, but one gambler per year wins $100 million". Just as long as the military isn't taking that a % of that money to use lieu of money they should have budgeted properly for creature comforts.

[giantg2]

"money to use lieu of money they should have budgeted properly for creature comforts."

I mean, the MWR budgeting is a completely different conversation. The way that budgeting works now, they wouldn't replace that $100M.

On that subject, the exchanges shouldn't mark up items above cost, nor should the commissary charge that 5% fee, etc. In the grand scheme of things, voluntary gambling is the least exploitive, since the others have been imposed manditorily over time. And we still have some military families on food stamps... so there's a lot to discuss and would probably benefit from a complete compensation/benefits system restructuring.