1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:03,000
Good arguments on both sides, or the arts from a good point of view.

2
00:00:03,000 --> 00:00:07,000
If art doesn't exist, art services are accessible, and like anyone, they can't do it.

3
00:00:07,000 --> 00:00:13,000
But we've shown that art needs to do nothing, and it needs to reach content to satisfy their needs.

4
00:00:13,000 --> 00:00:17,000
Because if you don't create, you have to go to the museum and see if it's because they have an addiction.

5
00:00:17,000 --> 00:00:21,000
Also, they said that they didn't increase their addiction.

6
00:00:21,000 --> 00:00:26,000
Nonetheless, a counter-argument that online museums cause too much addiction,

7
00:00:26,000 --> 00:00:28,000
that's because of what it is, so there's a point in that.

8
00:00:28,000 --> 00:00:39,000
Finally, we also claim that there is a lack of security, but we established that you need enemies for entering casinos, so in the end, you have to get away from the only casino.

9
00:00:39,000 --> 00:00:46,000
Let me also remind you that we were going to ask a question to the other team, but they were too afraid to take it because we had only two minutes left.

10
00:00:46,000 --> 00:00:50,000
We've also responded to your criticism, and we've clearly shown why our points are more compelling.

11
00:00:50,000 --> 00:00:57,000
First, the mitigation of harm can only pitch you through regulation. Regulations might not be perfect, but they do achieve the objective they are aiming for.

12
00:00:57,000 --> 00:01:00,500
they are aiming for, protecting the consumer, not taking advantage of them.

13
00:01:00,500 --> 00:01:04,000
If online gambling were banned, we would have to restore it to a legal status.

14
00:01:04,000 --> 00:01:08,500
We would be of easier access for compulsive gamblers, but still unsafe against scams.

15
00:01:08,500 --> 00:01:14,000
We have exemplified this through how the US prohibition didn't work in opposition to current regulations.

16
00:01:14,000 --> 00:01:16,000
Second, the progress of the state.

17
00:01:16,000 --> 00:01:20,500
There is a huge difference between the arrangements of the state for physical and online gambling,

18
00:01:20,500 --> 00:01:22,500
the first one being more profitable.

19
00:01:22,500 --> 00:01:29,620
Money would mean nothing but another group that the state is only aiming to help serve with more money, not carrying a huge increase in online gambling on the way.

20
00:01:30,500 --> 00:01:32,420
And finally, less money for the state.

21
00:01:32,980 --> 00:01:36,579
Despite the government's intentions, it will have a huge impact on our economy.

22
00:01:37,200 --> 00:01:47,019
Online gambling makes up around 2% of GDP in taxes, and taking that quantity of money away is no benefit, especially now that Spain is entering a huge crisis.

23
00:01:47,019 --> 00:01:52,019
Even if we should focus on stopping addiction, our economy is not able to take that short

24
00:01:52,019 --> 00:01:57,019
of funds all at once, and instead we should focus our efforts into regulating gaming better.

25
00:01:57,019 --> 00:02:01,019
Both our economy and our composite gamers will appreciate it.

26
00:02:01,019 --> 00:02:05,019
So, to the motion, our answer is definitely not.

27
00:02:05,019 --> 00:02:09,020
We have further crossed that by talking about the mitigation of harm that can only be achieved

28
00:02:09,020 --> 00:02:13,020
through regulation, the hypocrisy of the state, and also the loss of money for the government

29
00:02:13,020 --> 00:02:15,020
and therefore to the society.

30
00:02:15,020 --> 00:02:20,400
But the online gaming may or may not come from a noble objective, but it will undoubtedly

31
00:02:20,400 --> 00:02:23,400
release all the cover society is trying to eliminate.

32
00:02:23,400 --> 00:02:24,400
Thank you.