Why do we have to bail them out?

 

So, politicians can get votes to keep their positions. That is our system and the way it is going to work.

I will answer your question with a simple question.

 

If you were personally in a tight, bad economic times, would you look to gambling as an answer to your problems?

 

What does it say about our society that state after state, community after community and many athletic departments are looking at a revenue source from gambling as the answer to their economic issues?

 

It is a bandaid covering a gaping wound and simply makes everyone feel good about themselves instead of addressing real problems that require hard choices and answers. We are not willing to face up to that but rather want to be made to feel good by a politician telling us that slots are going to solve the problem. What happens when IN THIS HARD ECONOMIC TIMES people don't have any more money to put into the slot machines? Wonder what will happen to their bills when their money is going into the slot machines instead of into an envelope to pay their bills? Haven't we had enough of government buyouts of companies whose customers were not paying their bills because of overspending?

Personally I'm not that good at it. That's why I only gamble with spare money I have. I have a friend that is a pro poker player though, so he would. I just want the option to use my money how I choose.

 

And in THESE HARD ECONOMIC TIMES I don't like my government not AT LEAST DISCUSSING an issue that could potentially save KY's signature industry. I can't say with any certainty that slots will save the racing industry in this state. I do know that it seems to be working at other tracks and it will not take any money out of my pocket to give it a try (unless I so choose to deposit money into the machines). You are attempting to use the public's averse opinions of buyouts to enable the government to regulate how I choose to live my life. I personally think I can make a much better decision about it than some politician.

So, politicians can get votes to keep their positions. That is our system and the way it is going to work.

You said we have to. This answer is just saying it's what happens now...not a certainty that must happen. This lackadaisical attitude towards government bailouts is what allow bailouts to happen.

Premarital sex leads to unintended pregnancies and perhaps abortion. Shall we make it illegal?

 

Once again, government isn't enforcing a mandatory 10 hours a week spent at the slots. Anyone who wants to gamble can, and anyone who doesn't want to gamble doesn't have to.

 

Great in theory, never going to happen.

 

There is going to be government programs to help them and you are going to pay for the government programs through your tax dollars.

 

Just because you can't see the direct link of your tax dollars going to them, don't assume it is not there because it will be.

 

Heck, we will problem get gambling addiction labeled as a disease in this country sometime in the next 20 years and make it a disability.

 

Government should try and prevent problems instead of allowing them to make us feel happy and then dump money into trying to fix the problems that same thing created 15-20 years down the line.

 

You still haven't addressed my question of what does it say about the status of our society when we are turning to gambling as the solution to our problems.

Personally I'm not that good at it. That's why I only gamble with spare money I have. I have a friend that is a pro poker player though, so he would. I just want the option to use my money how I choose.

 

And in THESE HARD ECONOMIC TIMES I don't like my government not AT LEAST DISCUSSING an issue that could potentially save KY's signature industry. I can't say with any certainty that slots will save the racing industry in this state. I do know that it seems to be working at other tracks and it will not take any money out of my pocket to give it a try (unless I so choose to deposit money into the machines). You are attempting to use the public's averse opinions of buyouts to enable the government to regulate how I choose to live my life. I personally think I can make a much better decision about it than some politician.

 

 

I applaud you for that. But government cannot make decisions based on best case citizen when about there are many, many, many more that are not like you.

 

Everyone on here tries to say, let them do what they want with their money and let the chips fall where they may and they have to be responsible if they get into financial hardship.

 

THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

We all know the politicians are not going to let that happen.

You still haven't addressed my question of what does it say about the status of our society when we are turning to gambling as the solution to our problems.

Messed up, in so many ways.

 

FWIW, I don't see gambling as the solution for any problems. I just don't see gambling to be inherently evil, and think people should have the right to waste their money without the government telling them that they aren't allowed. You believe that slots in KY will without a doubt lead to long-term gambling addiction problems and taxpayer-subsidized bailouts. I don't see the causal link.

delete

I will answer your question with a simple question.

 

If you were personally in a tight, bad economic times, would you look to gambling as an answer to your problems?

 

What does it say about our society that state after state, community after community and many athletic departments are looking at a revenue source from gambling as the answer to their economic issues?

 

It is a bandaid covering a gaping wound and simply makes everyone feel good about themselves instead of addressing real problems that require hard choices and answers. We are not willing to face up to that but rather want to be made to feel good by a politician telling us that slots are going to solve the problem. What happens when IN THIS HARD ECONOMIC TIMES people don't have any more money to put into the slot machines? Wonder what will happen to their bills when their money is going into the slot machines instead of into an envelope to pay their bills? Haven't we had enough of government buyouts of companies whose customers were not paying their bills because of overspending?

I sure am glad the government is here to protect us from ourselves.

 

Maybe they need to make credit cards illegal, and car loans, and check advance businesses, and home loans. How about while we are at it we eliminate any form of private retirement plans. We may lose it when the market goes down.

I sure am glad the government is here to protect us from ourselves.

 

Maybe they need to make credit cards illegal, and car loans, and check advance businesses, and home loans. How about while we are at it we eliminate any form of private retirement plans. We may lose it when the market goes down.

 

We should probably have the state make sure all automobile engines are governed to go no faster than 25mph. The damage to society with reckless driving could be irreversible.

How about this? In order to stop STD's, abortions, and overpopulation we ban sex and just allow the government to clone people? That may even lead to an overall reduction in diseases especially genetic diseases. Or have I gotten too radical for the RR?

We should probably have the state make sure all automobile engines are governed to go no faster than 25mph. The damage to society with reckless driving could be irreversible.

Cars are bad for the environment. Let's ban them and make it mandatory that every household own a bike. But since not every household can afford a bike...let's create new tax thus allowing universal bike ownership.

Gambling is still a choice people have.

 

The question is do I want it in my backyard, so to speak. And my answer is no. If it is that person wants to do it, fine, let them CHOOSE to travel and to CHOOSE to gamble.

 

This argument is that you guys are furious that everyone is not bowing down to YOUR opinion and goodness sake might have a different opinion than the all-knowing gambling proponents.

 

I thought this was a society to make your own choices and I am reading on here that I AM NOT ALLOWED to make my choice to oppose gambling.

 

The EXACT thing those on here are railing about is the exact thing they are wanting us not to do. Have an opinion.

Gambling is still a choice people have.

 

The question is do I want it in my backyard, so to speak. And my answer is no. If it is that person wants to do it, fine, let them CHOOSE to travel and to CHOOSE to gamble.

 

This argument is that you guys are furious that everyone is not bowing down to YOUR opinion and goodness sake might have a different opinion than the all-knowing gambling proponents.

 

I thought this was a society to make your own choices and I am reading on here that I AM NOT ALLOWED to make my choice to oppose gambling.

 

The EXACT thing those on here are railing about is the exact thing they are wanting us not to do. Have an opinion.

LBBC- no one says you can't have an opinion. People providing opposing arguments is not an infringement on your right to free speech nor is it us trying to drown you out or restrict your ability to have an opinion. All that is going on is a discussion on whether or not gambling should be expanded in KY.

LBBC- no one says you can't have an opinion. People providing opposing arguments is not an infringement on your right to free speech nor is it us trying to drown you out or restrict your ability to have an opinion. All that is going on is a discussion on whether or not gambling should be expanded in KY.

 

There is not discussion. There is ridiculing of another's opinions.

 

I have expressed opinions on gambling and some of having added to my statements to imply things that I did not say to justify that I am something I am not, so they can feel good about the justification of their opinion and label me as some "Mr. Rogers kook." I don't even own a cardigan sweater.

Gambling is still a choice people have.

 

The question is do I want it in my backyard, so to speak. And my answer is no. If it is that person wants to do it, fine, let them CHOOSE to travel and to CHOOSE to gamble.

 

This argument is that you guys are furious that everyone is not bowing down to YOUR opinion and goodness sake might have a different opinion than the all-knowing gambling proponents.

 

I thought this was a society to make your own choices and I am reading on here that I AM NOT ALLOWED to make my choice to oppose gambling.

 

The EXACT thing those on here are railing about is the exact thing they are wanting us not to do. Have an opinion.

You say you have a right to your opinion but shouldn't everyone have a right to choose whether to gamble or not? What's the difference?