Why Socially Excluded Individuals Are Drawn to Hazardous and Risky Gambling
Gambling has long been a double-edged sword—offering the tantalizing promise of instant wealth while carrying the potential for devastating loss. Yet, not everyone perceives the stakes in the same way. For socially excluded individuals—those disconnected from mainstream society, often living on the margins with limited resources—the lure of hazardous and risky gambling can feel less like a gamble and more like a rational choice. This phenomenon isn’t just about thrill-seeking; it’s rooted in the unique psychological and economic realities of exclusion. When you already have nothing to lose, the risk doesn’t sting the same way it does for someone with a steady job, a mortgage, and a family to support.
Nothing to Lose, Everything to Gain
For the socially excluded, material and emotional stakes are often minimal. They may own little to nothing—no house, no savings, no assets to jeopardize. Compare this to a middle-class individual with a stable income, a home on a mortgage, and children to care for. Losing $100 for the latter could mean skipping a utility payment or derailing a week’s budget—a tangible threat to their carefully constructed life. For the excluded, that same $100 carries no such weight. They aren’t risking a disruption to a nonexistent status quo; instead, they’re rolling the dice on a potential windfall. In their eyes, the worst outcome is returning to the same baseline of scarcity they already endure—a baseline that feels like “nothing” compared to the losses a more privileged person might face.
This perception flips the traditional risk-reward equation. A family-oriented individual might see $100 as a resource to protect, earmarked for loan payments or their kids’ after-school activities. For them, gambling it away isn’t just impractical—it’s reckless, a betrayal of their commitments. But the socially excluded often lack such obligations. With no loan payments looming or dependents to prioritize, that $100 becomes disposable, a ticket to a game where the only real outcome is upside. They aren’t sacrificing stability—they don’t have it to begin with.
Gambling has long been portrayed in movies as a thrilling yet risky endeavor, where fortunes can be won or lost in an instant. It is often depicted as a way for individuals to break free from poverty and achieve financial success overnight. However, the reality of gambling is far more complex, often leading to addiction, financial ruin, or even crime.
Movies That Explore Gambling
Numerous films have delved into the world of gambling, showcasing both its allure and its dangers. Some notable examples include:
- Casino (1995) – Directed by Martin Scorsese, this film explores the high-stakes world of Las Vegas casinos, detailing the corruption and crime that often accompany gambling empires.
- Rounders (1998) – This movie follows a young poker player, played by Matt Damon, who returns to high-stakes poker to help a friend pay off a dangerous debt.
- 21 (2008) – Based on a true story, this film follows MIT students who use card-counting techniques to beat the casinos in blackjack.
- The Gambler (2014) – Starring Mark Wahlberg, this film portrays a literature professor who spirals into self-destruction due to his gambling addiction.
- Molly’s Game (2017) – A true story about Molly Bloom, who ran high-stakes underground poker games attended by celebrities and wealthy elites.
- Uncut Gems (2019) – A high-intensity thriller starring Adam Sandler as a New York jeweler with a compulsive gambling problem that leads him into increasingly dangerous situations.
These films illustrate the excitement and tension of gambling but also serve as cautionary tales, demonstrating how easily fortunes can turn into misfortune.
Lower Stakes, Lower Barriers
The economics of exclusion further amplify this dynamic. Socially marginalized individuals typically face lower living standards, which translates to reduced general expenses. Where $100 might barely cover a week of extracurriculars for a middle-class child, it could stretch much further for someone without those demands—or it might represent a rare surplus. Education costs, extracurricular fees, and other hallmarks of family life simply don’t apply. A socially excluded person isn’t budgeting for private tutors or soccer uniforms; their financial horizon is shorter, their needs more immediate. Gambling that $100 doesn’t mean losing something essential—it means taking a shot at something better, with no collateral damage to a nonexistent support system.
This isn’t to say the socially excluded are immune to loss. Addiction, debt, and emotional tolls are real risks, particularly with hazardous forms of gambling like illegal betting rings or high-stakes games. But the initial entry point feels less daunting when the alternative is stagnation. For them, the gamble isn’t about preserving a life they’ve built—it’s about breaking out of one they can’t escape otherwise.
Psychological Underpinnings
Beyond economics, psychology plays a pivotal role. Social exclusion often breeds a sense of detachment from societal norms, including the cautious financial planning that governs more integrated lives. When you’re already on the outside, the rules of “responsible” money management can feel irrelevant. Coupled with this is the allure of agency: gambling offers a rare chance to exert control over an otherwise unpredictable existence. For someone with little to call their own, the adrenaline of a bet—win or lose—can feel like a fleeting taste of power.
Research supports this pattern. Studies consistently show higher rates of problem gambling among socioeconomically disadvantaged and socially isolated groups. A 2023 review in The Journal of Behavioral Addictions highlighted how perceived hopelessness and lack of opportunity correlate with increased risk-taking in gambling. For the excluded, the game isn’t just about money—it’s about possibility, a defiance of their circumstances.
A Different Lens on Risk
Ultimately, the socially excluded aren’t more prone to hazardous gambling because they’re inherently reckless, but because their lens on risk is fundamentally different. A family man might see $100 as a lifeline to protect, a sum he can’t afford to lose without ripple effects. A socially excluded person sees it as a tool to wield, a chance to gain with no real downside beyond their current reality. Their lower stakes, lack of commitments, and reduced expenses create a perfect storm where risky gambling feels less like a hazard and more like an opportunity.
This disparity challenges us to rethink how we address gambling behavior. For the socially excluded, prevention can’t just mean preaching restraint—it must offer viable alternatives to the hope and agency gambling provides. Until then, the dice will keep rolling, not because they’re blind to the risks, but because the risks simply don’t weigh as much.
