The dire risks of taking a gamble
Amid the current gloom and doom about the impact of US tariffs on our economy, there is one sector where they couldn't care less, because they're laughing all the way to the bank.
But, as we report today, the multibillion-rand gambling industry also has the potential to ruin lives when having a flutter becomes an addiction.
The South African Responsible Gambling Foundation (SARGF) – which is funded by the industry and provides free counselling to gamblers struggling to break their habit – raised the alarm as the year-on-year treatment figures took a considerable jump.
ALSO READ: The ANC's fall from grace and the danger in its decline
SARGF executive director Sibongile Simelane-Quntana said the number of patients being referred for gambling-related treatment rose 40% in the past 12 months.
She noted that men are more susceptible to gambling addiction than women, but what is worrying is that most patients are employed full-time.
For many, gambling is not a harmless pastime – it is a way out of financial trouble or a road to riches.
The multiple online gambling platforms, as well as credit and debit card payments on the internet, make it far easier for a wager to be placed than it ever has been.
What, then, to do? You can't ban gambling and you can't change human nature.
NOW READ: Here's how to convince Trump of BEE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
13 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
As Trump slaps 30% tariffs on SA, Africa's trade reckoning has arrived
The revival of sweeping US tariffs under President Donald Trump's administration has once again placed developing economies — particularly those in Africa — on the frontlines of a trade war not of their own making. Trump's latest imposition of tariffs on more than 90 countries is not just a reordering of the global trade hierarchy — it's a jarring signal that developing countries can no longer rely on the goodwill of powerful economies to access international markets without political strings attached. Although Africa is not a direct target of the tariffs, South Africa now stands as an explicit casualty. As of 7 August, a 30% tariff on all South African goods entering the US was in effect — two days after President Cyril Ramaphosa reportedly called Trump in a last-minute effort to negotiate. The Presidency issued a statement highlighting ongoing trade dialogue, but the timing of the enforcement — just hours later — laid bare the limitations of diplomatic overtures in an era of economic unilateralism. Make no mistake: this is not just a diplomatic skirmish. It is the opening salvo in a trade war that threatens to destabilise Africa's economic recovery. While Ramaphosa has demonstrated admirable restraint and commitment to dialogue, the Trump administration has chosen economic unilateralism over bilateral engagement. The tariff trap and global trade reordering These tariffs are more than mere economic tools — they are a form of political signalling with deep global consequences. Trump's protectionism undercuts decades of progress in trade liberalisation and reveals a worrying disregard for the multilateral trading system. For South Africa, this represents not just a blow to exports — especially in automotive parts, citrus and wine — but a broader signal of how vulnerable even middle-income African economies remain in global trade diplomacy. Sadly, African states are still rule takers, not rule makers, in international trade talks. The risk of dumping and trade distortion The fallout from this tariff will not be contained within US-SA trade flows. African markets, which often lack robust anti-dumping laws, are likely to face a surge in cheap goods — steel, textiles, electronics — originally destined for the US. Dumping will devastate local industries that are already fragile and undercapitalised. It will also widen Africa's trade deficit and increase unemployment, especially in the manufacturing sector. In some cases, these distortions may trigger retaliatory actions or increased subsidies, raising the spectre of full-blown trade wars among developing economies that can least afford them. It can be argued that many of the support programmes to soften the US tariffs and targeting exporters or specific sectors (automotive, agriculture) may make them 'specific' subsidies, particularly if the support is contingent on export performance or import substitution — and hence not subject to World Trade Organization rules on prohibited or actionable subsidies. In the short term, the South African support strategy is probably permissible, especially under the public interest and development exceptions in World Trade Organization rules — and considering the retaliatory nature of the US tariffs (which itself may breach World Trade Organization norms). But the risk for countervailing measures by countries like the US increases, especially if support remains narrowly targeted to exporters with major price impact in other countries' domestic markets, and if South Africa succeeds in replacing US markets with World Trade Organization members like the EU, Japan, or China. This is a form of economic suffocation that will not be televised, but it will be felt. Ramaphosa's tariff gamble and strategic misalignment Ramaphosa's attempt at quiet diplomacy — both during his May visit to the US and again in the last-minute phone call — reflects South Africa's preference for stability and negotiation. However, such strategies appear tragically mismatched against Trump's zero-sum, populist economics. In the absence of a coherent and reciprocal response from Washington, South Africa's strategy may need to shift from engagement to economic repositioning. To date, Pretoria has pursued selective sectoral lobbying, winning small concessions on seasonal fruit exports, but this has done little to protect the broader economy. It is time South Africa recognises that trade diplomacy with Trump's America may no longer be conducted on traditional terms. Interestingly, Pretoria has condemned the US tariffs as unjust and economically incoherent. Government officials argue the move ignores South Africa's complementary role in US supply chains and the fact that more than 75% of American goods enter South Africa duty free. Ramaphosa's administration had even offered investments and LNG purchases under a proposed bilateral framework agreement, which remains unacknowledged by Washington. In response, South Africa has launched a comprehensive, multi-pronged support strategy aimed at cushioning the economic blow: An export support desk has been created to help South African firms explore new international markets. A competitiveness support programme offers financial aid and equipment to manufacturers hit by tariffs. A Local Production Support Fund has been deployed to incentivise import substitution and protect local industry. Competition law exemptions now allow exporters to collaborate on logistics and cost sharing. Additionally, the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) has been activated to absorb job losses, estimated at up to 100,000, especially in the automotive and agricultural sectors. Unemployment was already at a staggering 32.9% before the tariffs. Automotive exports to the US have since collapsed by more than 80%, with ripple effects expected across the citrus, wine and table grape industries. South Africa's rapid-response strategy is laudable in ambition, but its long-term sustainability remains in question. Globally, such programmes — emergency subsidies, market reorientation initiatives, and support funds — have shown mixed success. Similar export pivot efforts in Latin America and Southeast Asia have often struggled under the weight of slow bureaucratic implementation, limited state capacity to disburse funds efficiently, and over-reliance on uncertain new markets South Africa's response hinges on three critical variables: the agility of state agencies; the effectiveness of business uptake; and the readiness of alternative markets to absorb redirected exports. Any slippage in these areas could render the response insufficient and deepen the crisis. Moreover, such trade support frameworks are financially intensive. Without new revenue streams or international financing, Pretoria's ability to sustain these programmes over the medium term may falter, especially in a fiscally constrained environment. China: Opportunistic ally or economic colonist? Meanwhile, China has wasted no time in offering African nations softer loan terms, lower tariffs and increased trade lines. But we must not romanticise this pivot. As some scholars have warned, China's Belt and Road incentives often come entangled with opaque loan conditions and regulatory conditionalities and debt entanglements. While Beijing may offer a short-term trade parachute, the long-term cost may be strategic dependency. In this geopolitical chessboard, African economies are too often pawns, never players. Geopolitically, South Africa's BRICS+ alignment may also be shaping Washington's posture. Trump's recent remarks at the BRICS+ summit in Rio warned of consequences for countries backing 'anti-American' initiatives. This, combined with ideological differences over racial justice and Israel-Palestine legal disputes, is adding friction to an already fragile diplomatic relationship. AfCFTA: No longer a dream, but an urgent necessity If there's a silver lining to this tariff tsunami, it is the wake-up call it offers to the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). The World Bank has made it clear: AfCFTA has the potential to lift 30 million people out of poverty and increase intra-African trade by more than 80%. Yet, implementation remains painfully slow, stalled by bureaucratic inefficiencies, political inertia and infrastructural gaps. The Trump tariffs must now serve as an economic alarm. Africa can no longer afford to rely on goodwill from the West, nor can it keep putting off the structural integration that AfCFTA promises. It is time to move from intention to execution. A new doctrine for African trade The 30% tariff imposed on South Africa is not an isolated event — it is a glimpse into a future where the Global South must fend for itself. Ramaphosa's call to Trump may have bought a sliver of diplomatic capital, but it also exposed the limits of soft power when faced with hard tariffs. Africa's path forward is clear. It must diversify its trading partners, strengthen intra-African markets, develop robust trade remedy frameworks and reduce its vulnerability to the whims of any single superpower. If Trump's tariffs represent the thunder, then the lightning must be Africa's resolve to trade with itself and chart its own economic course. Anything less would be economic negligence. The unpredictability of Trump's tariff doctrine underlines a broader truth: no African country can afford to hinge its economic future on the benevolence or volatility of a single trading partner. For South Africa, the US remains its second-largest trading partner, with $17.64-billion in bilateral trade in 2023. But such exposure comes with risks, especially when preferential access can be withdrawn overnight. The International Trade Centre and UN Trade and Development have long warned of these vulnerabilities, urging diversification and intra-African trade expansion as long-term solutions. If this trade turbulence does anything, let it be a clarion call to accelerate the building of resilient, intra-continental supply chains, create robust trade remedy institutions and reduce overexposure to foreign economic storms. African countries must learn to trade more with each other and less at the mercy of superpowers with shifting agendas. For Africa, the path forward is not looking outwards for salvation — it is looking inwards for strength. DM
The Citizen
13 hours ago
- The Citizen
DA intensifies fight against B-BBEE as economic outlook deteriorates
The DA today labelled three pieces of South Africa's legislation: Broad-based black economic empowerment (B-BBEE), employment equity (EE) and the Expropriation Act 13 of 2024 as the country's 'three roadblocks to economic growth'. Speaking during a media briefing in Johannesburg, DA leader John Steenhuisen said the party will use its influence in the Government of National Unity (GNU) to fight for the amendment of the three laws. 'We are targeting these three roadblocks that are holding our economy back,' he said. The Witness reports that the DA is challenging EE and the Expropriation Act in court. While the United States government is imposing the 30% tariffs on South African goods entering that country, citing other reasons for the high tariffs, there was speculation that President Donald Trump's government was in part punishing SA for the three pieces of legislation, which Trump had labelled 'bad policies'. The three policies and other issues of national interest were expected to feature prominently in the upcoming National Dialogue, which will be discussing SA's challenges and proposing solutions. However, Steenhuisen said there was no need for further discussions on the challenges holding back the country. 'We have been talking for far too long about what is wrong, now is the time to act. We know what the problems are in South Africa. 'The government wants to spend millions of rands on a National Dialogue while the country is bleeding,' he said. The DA, Steenhuisen said, has a plan to 'turbocharge the economy' by, amongst other things, the eradication of crime and corruption. The second largest GNU party after the ANC, Steenhuisen's organisation has, since the formation of the GNU in June last year, been at loggerheads with the ANC over government policies and the Budget. At the beginning of the year, the ANC had difficulties in having Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana's Budget passed by Parliament after the DA had voted against the Fiscal Framework. To dilute the DA's influence within the GNU, the ANC has embarked on a process to bring in more political parties to the 10-member coalition. Breaking news at your fingertips… Follow Caxton Network News on Facebook and join our WhatsApp channel. Nuus wat saakmaak. Volg Caxton Netwerk-nuus op Facebook en sluit aan by ons WhatsApp-kanaal. Read original story on
The Citizen
14 hours ago
- The Citizen
DA reveals plan to ‘turbocharge' SA economy with Eskom shake-up and scrapping BBBEE
More action, less talk said DA leader John Steenhuisen as the party launched its six-point plan to fix SA's economic woes DA leader John Steenhuisen on Monday launched a plan that he said would 'turbocharge' South Africa's economy. The party presented the six-point plan at its Bruma headquarters in the East Rand. Steenhuisen noted the biggest stumbling blocks to economic progress. He called for the removal of broad-based black economic empowerment (BBBEE) as it is legislated at present, along with employment equity legislation and the Expropriation Act. He said these measures have failed to deliver transformation, and have instead deterred investment, stifled small business growth and entrenched political patronage. 'BBBEE has done nothing for ordinary South Africans,' he said. 'The only empowerment South Africa needs is more jobs.' Steenhuisen: No talk shops, just action At the same time, Steenhuisen again dismissed government's proposed national dialogue on the economy as a waste of money and time, saying South Africans already know what needs to be done. 'South Africa doesn't need more talk. It needs action,' Steenhuisen said. The DA's plan proposes replacing existing empowerment and equity laws with policies that create opportunity based on need and merit, removing red tape for small businesses and reforming labour laws to make it easier to employ citizens and expand. ALSO READ: ANC moves to undercut DA influence in GNU The party also wants Eskom's monopoly broken, with the electricity sector opened to competition in both generation and distribution, and municipal electricity revenue ring-fenced for investment in infrastructure. The DA also called for the urgent modernisation of rail, ports and digital networks, including concessioning freight rail and port terminals to private operators and ending Transnet's control. Steenhuisen said South Africa's poor port rankings were holding back exports and economic growth. Public spending reform, particularly around flaccid state-owned companies is another priority. 'Bailouts to state-owned entities have cost R310 billion. Enough is enough. Government needs to stabilise debt, cut waste and root out ghost employees. Public money must build infrastructure and provide frontline services, not bankroll incompetence.' Investment in infrastructure The plan also touches on local government failures, and stabilising coalition administrations, set minimum representation thresholds for councils, and protect service revenue so it is reinvested in infrastructure. The DA also wants to see greater private sector involvement in municipalities that are unable to deliver basic services. Public private partnerships offer solutions where government coffers have run dry, noted Steenhuisen. Restoring the rule of law, Steenhuisen said the DA's plan includes establishing a new anti-corruption body, 'a Scorpions 2.0'. He also wanted to see lifestyle audits on senior police officials, strengthening rural safety measures and improving police capacity to combat crime across the country. ALSO READ: No interviews, but appointed: DA raises alarm over ANCYL members on Gauteng hospital boards Steenhuisen said these reforms would 'build a superhighway to growth and prosperity' and create an economy where participation is not determined by race or political connections. The DA intends to table the plan in Cabinet and parliament. 'This must become more than a promise. It must become a fight,' he said. 'A fight for growth, a fight for jobs. 'If you want clean water in your taps, electricity you can rely on and jobs for your children, this is your plan.' READ NEXT: Is GNU to blame for Powell's resignation as DA's international relations spokesperson?
