Racino's in KY

[ladiesbballcoach]

But what does that have to do with racinos?

 

He made the point that Americans are responsible enough to handle their financial resources in a manner that is wise, yet we live in a time that many of those same TYPE of responsible Americans were NOT responsible enough and now we give them a break from not being responsible (cause we don't want to blame it on the normal person) by blaming it on the greedy and evil private enterprise bankers who I guess tricked or forced these predatory loans onto the innocent and responsible Americans.

 

Again, I am not sure how smart it is for a society to bail out one arm of the gambling industry by adding more gambling.

 

I went to an educational Professional Development that gave a stat that Nevada is the lowest state in the Union in graduation rates. And that the #1 correlation between graduation rates is that child's parents' family income.

 

Very quick search here is one http://www.swivel.com/data_sets/show/1005906 that shows in 2004 only 50% of Nevada HS students graduate.

[leatherneck]

The difference is that there is a correlation in SES and healthy living. Part of the culture in appalachia is a comfort with area and a feeling on oneness with the culture. I would fear that casinos would be too great a temptation for the region and could cause more harm than good.

 

Is the harm religious in nature? The reason I ask is that I started a thread involving free will. It was pointed out to me that there are two pretty wide viewpoints on free will. On extreme is the belief that God intended us to have the free will to decide if we were going to follow Christ, while the other extreme felt that we are each predistined to either be saved or to burn in Hades.

 

Under either theory, I can't understand why religious leaders would be opposed to racinos (or any type of gambling). If you are a free will type, then the temptation to sin should just be a test of that free will (what would be the point of free will if every form of temptation was eliminated?). If you are a predestiny type, those that are sinners are going to burn in Hades anyway.

 

I'd rather the religous types try to save the sinners from the pulpit than from the Capitol.

[leatherneck]

He made the point that Americans are responsible enough to handle their financial resources in a manner that is wise, yet we live in a time that many of those same TYPE of responsible Americans were NOT responsible enough and now we give them a break from not being responsible (cause we don't want to blame it on the normal person) by blaming it on the greedy and evil private enterprise bankers who I guess tricked or forced these predatory loans onto the innocent and responsible Americans.

 

Again, I am not sure how smart it is for a society to bail out one arm of the gambling industry by adding more gambling.

 

I went to an educational Professional Development that gave a stat that Nevada is the lowest state in the Union in graduation rates. And that the #1 correlation between graduation rates is that child's parents' family income.

 

Very quick search here is one http://www.swivel.com/data_sets/show/1005906 that shows in 2004 only 50% of Nevada HS students graduate.

 

But if you believe in personal responsibility like I do (and I believe you do too), then you can't be opposed to racinos because some people don't act responsibly. Those that can't gamble responsibly have no one to blame but themselves and should not be the reason that responsible gamblers can't gamble any more than drunks should not cause alcohol to be prohibited.

 

Addictive gamblers are going to find a way to gamble with or without racinos. To be opposed to racinos because of addictive gamblers makes about as much sense to me as banning guns because some criminals use guns. Just my thoughts on the subject.

[ladiesbballcoach]

But if you believe in personal responsibility like I do (and I believe you do too), then you can't be opposed to racinos because some people don't act responsibly. Those that can't gamble responsibly have no one to blame but themselves and should not be the reason that responsible gamblers can't gamble any more than drunks should not cause alcohol to be prohibited.

 

Addictive gamblers are going to find a way to gamble with or without racinos. To be opposed to racinos because of addictive gamblers makes about as much sense to me as banning guns because some criminals use guns. Just my thoughts on the subject.

 

In theory, I agree with you but that is not what this society practices.

 

You know as well as I do that government will have to spend millions for programs to help these poor addictive gamblers out.

 

On a side note, I was told today by a person that has a friend that will be soon getting out of prison that he will receive a disability check when he is released because he has spent more than 3 years in prison and considered unemployable. If we bail out criminals then of course we are going to bail out addictive gamblers.

 

Does any lawyer/police officer know for a fact that the above is true? While I could see our whacked out society doing this, I am hoping it is not true.

[leatherneck]

In theory, I agree with you but that is not what this society practices.

 

You know as well as I do that government will have to spend millions for programs to help these poor addictive gamblers out.

 

On a side note, I was told today by a person that has a friend that will be soon getting out of prison that he will receive a disability check when he is released because he has spent more than 3 years in prison and considered unemployable. If we bail out criminals then of course we are going to bail out addictive gamblers.

 

Does any lawyer/police officer know for a fact that the above is true? While I could see our whacked out society doing this, I am hoping it is not true.

 

Frankly I don't base my principles on how society practices and I'm pretty shocked that you would be basing your values and opinions on how society practices.

[Habib]

Yes, gambling is a problem for individuals and government should not be in the business of creating more obstacles for individuals.

 

But, the government will not be "creating" anything. Currently, the government is attempting to restrict something that already exists - rather poorly at that considering the state's stance on the lottery and horse racing. As several posters have stated, you must extend your logic to demand the government not "create" more "obstacles" for individuals by attempting to restrict all "obstructions." While hyperbolic in a sense, it does elucidate the inconsistency of that position if you aren't willing for the government to restrict most other "obstructions."

 

What is more, due to the awful handling of this issue by Frankfort, Indiana will have reaped unparalleled benefit. Ohio will be able to cut into that and enjoy moderate benefits. If Kentucky manages to pass a gaming bill, the state will reap the least amount of returns, sharing them with Indiana and Ohio - essentially enough for horse racing industry to stabilize. Kentucky has wasted a massive amount of money for nothing short of pettiness.

[leatherneck]

Frankly I don't base my principles on how society practices and I'm pretty shocked that you would be basing your values and opinions on how society practices.

 

LBBC, looking back I realize my above response to your post was too harsh. I apologize.

 

I do realize that the govt will no doubt have to spend big dollars to deal with addictive gamblers, although I don't think the govt should have any such responsibility. But if they do, I believe the money spent will be small in comparison to the revenue generated by responsible gamblers engaging in what is a lawful activity- gambling. Frankly it makes zero sense to allow the lottery and allow betting on horses, but not allow racinos. I have to logically assume that the lottery and horse betting also creates some addictive gamblers that the govt spends money treating. To be against racinos for the reason the state will have to spend money treating addictive gamblers, but to permit the lottery and horse betting (which again causes the same problem) is simply illogical to me.

 

The real opposition to gambling is for moral reasons and in my opinion, all other stated reasons, are a subterfuge. Racinos will not hurt economic development in the surrounding areas as I've heard claimed. Racinos will not bring in mass prostitution and crime as I've heard claimed. Racinos may cause an increase in addictive gamblers which results in the state spending money to treat. But if its a dollars and cents argument in opposition, unless the cost of treatment exceeds the revenues generated, its a bad business decision to oppose racinos on that ground. At the end of the day, the opposition lies in moral values. And while I place a lot of emphasis on morality, I just don't think the way to address morality is via legislation. Morality is addressed in the church and in the family; not in the state house.

 

Again, I don't gamble. Those that gamble for true entertainment value (and go into gambling venues with the expectation of losing everything they brought to spend), I have no problem with. Those folks are no different than people that spend hundreds of dollars to watch plays, attend pro sporting events, go to fancy restaurants, etc. Those, however, that gamble with the expecation of making money are frankly, in my opinion, suckers. They bring to mind the maxim of: a fool and his money soon part ways. But I don't think society has any obligation or right to enact laws that prevent people from being stupid.