Thread: Question for All: Gambling

Here's a question for all regardless of political persuasion.

Do you support state-owned gambling? Should states (or the fed) legalize gambling - video games, cards, dice, horses, sports?

Is this a way for states to raise revenues? Allowing enterprising business-people to provide a consumer need? A dangerous addiction? Contributing to poverty and family dysfunction?

Please respond with your respectful opinion.

Wife works in the casino industry. As far as I know, there is very little (overall) state-owned gambling. The states, or more importantly, localities within the states, vote whether or not to allow gambling in their area, and what kind of gambling - from full on casino complexes to simple video poker machines in convenience stores. The states, of course, take a cut, which is generally pretty large as a percentage, and applies it as they see fit - general fund, education, etc., complete with all the grifting that most state legislatures do.

It isn't and shouldn't be a federal issue.

All states that do allow gambling require the casinos themselves to fund and run gambling addiction prevention programs, so no cost to taxpayers. The Right should love the idea, because the revenue comes from people perfectly willing to give up that money and personal responsibility is high on their list of ideal personality characteristics. Many on the left might claim that it hurts the poor most (it does) and leads to addiction problems (it does) and the breakup of families (it does).

All in all, it is allowed at the will of the population that it will affect and I have no problem with the people deciding this kind of issue on a case by case basis.

BTW, the casino industry as a whole has been hit pretty hard by the recession, but there is so much money in it you won't hear them bitching about it, or not loud at any rate.

Gambling houses and lotteries raise a lot of money. If they were not around, people would be gambling with illegal bookies. Making it legal gets some money into the right places.

Originally Posted by Voice of Doh!

Wife works in the casino industry. As far as I know, there is very little (overall) state-owned gambling. The states, or more importantly, localities within the states, vote whether or not to allow gambling in their area, and what kind of gambling - from full on casino complexes to simple video poker machines in convenience stores. The states, of course, take a cut, which is generally pretty large as a percentage, and applies it as they see fit - general fund, education, etc., complete with all the grifting that most state legislatures do.

It isn't and shouldn't be a federal issue.

All states that do allow gambling require the casinos themselves to fund and run gambling addiction prevention programs, so no cost to taxpayers. The Right should love the idea, because the revenue comes from people perfectly willing to give up that money and personal responsibility is high on their list of ideal personality characteristics. Many on the left might claim that it hurts the poor most (it does) and leads to addiction problems (it does) and the breakup of families (it does).

All in all, it is allowed at the will of the population that it will affect and I have no problem with the people deciding this kind of issue on a case by case basis.

BTW, the casino industry as a whole has been hit pretty hard by the recession, but there is so much money in it you won't hear them bitching about it, or not loud at any rate.

Alchohol causes the same problems you attribute to gambling. There are people who make bad choices regardless.

Florida started their lottery in the late 80's, I believe. It was touted as a way to pay for education. Problem was, the gambling revenue was used to REPLACE what had been coming from the general fund. The bottom line was, education wasn't much better off.

We also have Seminole Indian reservations where gambling is legal.

My own thought is states should not depend on a budget from gambling. BUT, if there is gambling anyway, the states may as well get in on it too.

Originally Posted by justme

Alchohol causes the same problems you attribute to gambling. There are people who make bad choices regardless.

Florida started their lottery in the late 80's, I believe. It was touted as a way to pay for education. Problem was, the gambling revenue was used to REPLACE what had been coming from the general fund. The bottom line was, education wasn't much better off.

We also have Seminole Indian reservations where gambling is legal.

My own thought is states should not depend on a budget from gambling. BUT, if there is gambling anyway, the states may as well get in on it too.

Quote: It was touted as a way to pay for education.

Same in my state. It was going to go to bulding new schoold, increase teacher pay, etc., yet every election we're told our school system is broken and more money is needed. Many of us new it was the same old crap. If you've got a few years under your belt you know these same arguments for tax increase come up like clock work. It's never about cutting spending but increasing taxes. My state is broke and once again, tax increases are on the table. Big surprise.

Originally Posted by Right'zWrong

Here's a question for all regardless of political persuasion.

Do you support state-owned gambling? Should states (or the fed) legalize gambling - video games, cards, dice, horses, sports?

Is this a way for states to raise revenues? Allowing enterprising business-people to provide a consumer need? A dangerous addiction? Contributing to poverty and family dysfunction?

Please respond with your respectful opinion.

I don't gamble but if people want to spend their money that way I don't really care.

However, having been to Shreveport LA and seen the area around the casinos I have to wonder if gambling was the cause of it.

Originally Posted by southernman

Quote: It was touted as a way to pay for education.

Same in my state. It was going to go to bulding new schoold, increase teacher pay, etc., yet every election we're told our school system is broken and more money is needed. Many of us new it was the same old crap. If you've got a few years under your belt you know these same arguments for tax increase come up like clock work. It's never about cutting spending but increasing taxes. My state is broke and once again, tax increases are on the table. Big surprise.

Same here. While the lottery money has definitely helped, it was no where near what was promised. I actually voted against the measure when it came up simply because I knew it would be abused once approved.

I don't mess with the lottery much now. I will spend a buck for a chance when it reaches 25mil or so. Won a thousand bucks on a scratch off once.

It's only right that I let you know where I stand.

I think people who regularly gamble are unable to control themselves. A minority are able to make money on it.

I think people who gamble will do so whether it is legal or not.

States should legalize it to remove the criminal influence of underground gambling, and to gain revenue from it.

Given the toll on individuals and families, I'm guessing that gambling ends up being a zero-sum game for state revenue.

Originally Posted by Right'zWrong

Given the toll on individuals and families, I'm guessing that gambling ends up being a zero-sum game for state revenue.

I agree. Families end up losing their homes, cars, money and even jobs because of the addiction. They then have to go to the state for help. I've had my share of vices but gambling never was one of them.

Originally Posted by Right'zWrong

Given the toll on individuals and families, I'm guessing that gambling ends up being a zero-sum game for state revenue.

I'd have to agree with that.