I appreciate the clarification, and I do think we're pretty much on the same page. There is definitely an overall responsibility to be a more-helpful-than-harmf

I appreciate the clarification, and I do think we're pretty much on the same page. There is definitely an overall responsibility to be a more-helpful-than-harmful member of society, and particularly when it comes to something like a casino, it's probably nearly impossible to prevent greed from manifesting as malicious intent. But as I detailed at length in another comment, it's a slippery slope trying to figure out where "the line" is. In my grandmother's case, those trips to the casino actually greatly benefit her. At 94 years old, the casino provides a level of sociability and exercise that she doesn't get otherwise. That said, even the particular casino she visits most likely does more harm than good to the local community. Not by a lot, but by enough. Unfortunately, the perception of whether that crosses the line is going to vary wildly between individuals. Some will think it's not greedy enough, and some will think it's the equivalent of murder, and there's no legitimate way to decide where the exact appropriate middle ground is. That's something we all have to decide for ourselves, and it can't be forced upon others.