4 ms·

Anyone have an examples outside of Vegas and maybe the first two Connecticut casinos where bringing in legalize gambling actually derived on the promise of rais

by blang 8y ago

Anyone have an examples outside of Vegas and maybe the first two Connecticut casinos where bringing in legalize gambling actually derived on the promise of raising projected revenue benefiting the wider economy?

porpoisely 8y ago
Gambling is zero sum, so within a closed system, it can never be beneficial. The only way it can be beneficial is if it extracts value from outside of a particular locality and distributed the losses externally. Why vegas or macau can succeed is because most of the gambling in these cities is done by people outside of vegas and macau. If gambling in vegas was confined only to the people of vegas, then vegas would collapse as a portion of their citizens' lives are ruined. Though I'm personally against all types of gambling, I believe in individual rights and a person's right to waste their money as they see fit. However, I don't think governments should be so closely tied to it and I certainly don't think governments should be depending on it for funding of any sort. They should tax the companies involved in gambling, but they should be "in bed with them" so to speak. And I don't think state governments should be involved in lotteries either. Lotteries should be purely private and the government should tax it. I don't think a moral or sane government that truly cares about and represents their citizenry could be involved in lotteries or gambling.
- logfromblammo 8y ago
  > ...a moral or sane government that truly cares about and represents their citizenry... Let me know when you find one, and I will donate a breeding pair of unicorns to its zoo.
- simonbyrne 8y ago
  It's not just that governments are dependant on the money, it's also that the gambling can then fund vast lobbying arms to the detriment of good policy. This has certainly happened in Australia (especially NSW): two of the biggest political donors are the Australian Hotels Association (AHA) and ClubsNSW, which represent the principal beneficiaries from video gambling machines: https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/machine-men-how-the-aha-and-clubsnsw-seek-political-influence-20160930-grrxe9.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/machine-men-how-the-aha-...
- smallstepforman 8y ago
  How is gambling a zero sum game? According to the article, taxes from the Casino operations are $393M, and from clubs operations $300M, so thats $693 tax revenue the government wouldn't otherwise have. How many hospitals, schools and other social facilities can be built with $693M per year. Also add in the venue staff running the place, the builders building the facilities, the engineers and technicians building the machines, etc. An enormous amount of people are employed in the industry, and the government gets $693M per year extra which it wouldn't have it Gaming was illegal. How is this a zero sum equation?
  - elhudy 8y ago
    I'm looking forward to his answer to this. But I would guess it's something along the lines of: -Society spends 2B gambling -Govt receives .7B tax revenue and spends it poorly -Game owners pocket 1.3B which disappears forever -Cost of increased social safety net, suicides, etc. VS -Society spends 1.5B on goods and services rather than gambling I don't think it's fair to count the venue, staff, etc., if the same money would otherwise be spent on other goods and services.
  - porpoisely 8y ago
    Gambling is a zero sum game because by nature, it creates no new or additional value. It's simply a matter of definition. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/z/zero-sumgame.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/z/zero-sumgame.asp In other words, someone wins and someone loses. Just because someone benefits doesn't mean it isn't a zero sum game. Stealing is also a zero sum game. It benefits the criminals who steal ( but no new value is created ). It's simply a transfer of wealth, not a creation of wealth. That's why it is zero sum.

by blang 8y ago

porpoisely 8y ago

Gambling is zero sum, so within a closed system, it can never be beneficial. The only way it can be beneficial is if it extracts value from outside of a particular locality and distributed the losses externally. Why vegas or macau can succeed is because most of the gambling in these cities is done by people outside of vegas and macau. If gambling in vegas was confined only to the people of vegas, then vegas would collapse as a portion of their citizens' lives are ruined. Though I'm personally against all types of gambling, I believe in individual rights and a person's right to waste their money as they see fit. However, I don't think governments should be so closely tied to it and I certainly don't think governments should be depending on it for funding of any sort. They should tax the companies involved in gambling, but they should be "in bed with them" so to speak. And I don't think state governments should be involved in lotteries either. Lotteries should be purely private and the government should tax it. I don't think a moral or sane government that truly cares about and represents their citizenry could be involved in lotteries or gambling.

logfromblammo 8y ago
> ...a moral or sane government that truly cares about and represents their citizenry... Let me know when you find one, and I will donate a breeding pair of unicorns to its zoo.
simonbyrne 8y ago
It's not just that governments are dependant on the money, it's also that the gambling can then fund vast lobbying arms to the detriment of good policy. This has certainly happened in Australia (especially NSW): two of the biggest political donors are the Australian Hotels Association (AHA) and ClubsNSW, which represent the principal beneficiaries from video gambling machines: https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/machine-men-how-the-aha-and-clubsnsw-seek-political-influence-20160930-grrxe9.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/machine-men-how-the-aha-...
smallstepforman 8y ago
How is gambling a zero sum game? According to the article, taxes from the Casino operations are $393M, and from clubs operations $300M, so thats $693 tax revenue the government wouldn't otherwise have. How many hospitals, schools and other social facilities can be built with $693M per year. Also add in the venue staff running the place, the builders building the facilities, the engineers and technicians building the machines, etc. An enormous amount of people are employed in the industry, and the government gets $693M per year extra which it wouldn't have it Gaming was illegal. How is this a zero sum equation?
- elhudy 8y ago
  I'm looking forward to his answer to this. But I would guess it's something along the lines of: -Society spends 2B gambling -Govt receives .7B tax revenue and spends it poorly -Game owners pocket 1.3B which disappears forever -Cost of increased social safety net, suicides, etc. VS -Society spends 1.5B on goods and services rather than gambling I don't think it's fair to count the venue, staff, etc., if the same money would otherwise be spent on other goods and services.
- porpoisely 8y ago
  Gambling is a zero sum game because by nature, it creates no new or additional value. It's simply a matter of definition. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/z/zero-sumgame.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/z/zero-sumgame.asp In other words, someone wins and someone loses. Just because someone benefits doesn't mean it isn't a zero sum game. Stealing is also a zero sum game. It benefits the criminals who steal ( but no new value is created ). It's simply a transfer of wealth, not a creation of wealth. That's why it is zero sum.