4 ms·

It's highly-regulated in favor of the house. These gambling concerns are criminal-adjacent corporations with political connections and weak campaign finance law

It's highly-regulated in favor of the house. These gambling concerns are criminal-adjacent corporations with political connections and weak campaign finance laws.

freeopinion 3y ago
To call them "criminal-adjacent" seems like a conservative western tradition. I'm not a casino apologist, but it's not like they have some hidden agenda. It's gambling. Did you misunderstand that? It's a game of odds and the house controls the odds. Did you misunderstand that? Edit: Clearly you don't misunderstand that, so what's the complaint? Gambling has a very strange effect on the human psyche. I never hear anybody come back from Disney World bragging about how much they won. But I've met tons of people who "always win in Vegas". I know a few people who seem addicted to Disneyland. I never understood it. Season passes every year. Maybe one visit a month. Even when they don't have children. It seems weird to me. But the effects of gambling on people's brains is even more weird. It is only criminally-adjacent in places that perceive a giant risk to people and so have made it illegal. Otherwise, it is as criminally-adjacent as any source of wealth or power that has an incentive to build barriers to entry and to stifle competition.
- kjkjadksj 3y ago
  Yes, people might have biases. In this case though, Vegas really was developed by the mafia.
  - freeopinion 3y ago
    This is an interesting question. I don't think the first casino in Vegas was established by the mafia. The mafia's involvement later on is well documented. The mafia's current involvement is not so well documented. If you believe that the mafia was eventually exercised from Las Vegas and look at the development before and after that point... We could have a reasonable discussion about whether the development post-mafia dwarfs the development under the mafia and whether the development under the mafia dwarfs the development pre-mafia. But the claim seemed to me to be about the present day. Today, I think the industry falls about the same place as big-oil or big-pharma or big-auto or big-politics. That is, plenty of people would call them all criminal-adjacent. But it still makes me wince a little. I'm sympathetic to them all being heckled, though.
  - refurb 3y ago
    Gambling existed before the mafia. The mafia isn't that involved with Las Vegas any more.
- ekianjo 3y ago
  Casinos have been the way for the mafia to operate legally.
  - avidiax 3y ago
    What interest would a criminal organization have in a high cash revenue business? Could it be a way to launder money? Jimmy "No Nose" comes in with $40k cash every weekend and loses it gambling, and "nobody knows" where a guy like Jimmy gets that cash so regularly.
    - seanhunter 3y ago
      Gambling has been well-known for some time as a way to launder money. For example see this[1] official government report in the UK or this[2] which is US-specific but much less detailed. [1] https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/print/The-money-laundering-and-terrorist-financing-risks-within-the-British-gambling-industry https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/print/The-money-launde... [2] https://moneysmartathlete.com/betting-industry/money-laundering-and-sports-betting/ https://moneysmartathlete.com/betting-industry/money-launder...
    - laratied 3y ago
      The old skim was even better than that. Make $500k, report $300k and send $200k cash back to Chicago.
- bigbacaloa 3y ago
  Casinos are spiritually in the same place as drug dealers and pimps. Profiting off weakness and vice. If you like spending all your dime on drugs, dice and so forth then fine, but let's not pretend the guys selling it are fine upstanding businessmen.
- jasmer 3y ago
  This is not the right analogy. 'Criminally adjacent' means literally, adjacent to organised crime. This is not the same thing as 'above bar businesses are 'adjacent' to anything that is not' , or 'aggressive competitive measures'.

It's highly-regulated in favor of the house. These gambling concerns are criminal-adjacent corporations with political connections and weak campaign finance laws.

freeopinion 3y ago

To call them "criminal-adjacent" seems like a conservative western tradition. I'm not a casino apologist, but it's not like they have some hidden agenda. It's gambling. Did you misunderstand that? It's a game of odds and the house controls the odds. Did you misunderstand that? Edit: Clearly you don't misunderstand that, so what's the complaint? Gambling has a very strange effect on the human psyche. I never hear anybody come back from Disney World bragging about how much they won. But I've met tons of people who "always win in Vegas". I know a few people who seem addicted to Disneyland. I never understood it. Season passes every year. Maybe one visit a month. Even when they don't have children. It seems weird to me. But the effects of gambling on people's brains is even more weird. It is only criminally-adjacent in places that perceive a giant risk to people and so have made it illegal. Otherwise, it is as criminally-adjacent as any source of wealth or power that has an incentive to build barriers to entry and to stifle competition.

kjkjadksj 3y ago
Yes, people might have biases. In this case though, Vegas really was developed by the mafia.
- freeopinion 3y ago
  This is an interesting question. I don't think the first casino in Vegas was established by the mafia. The mafia's involvement later on is well documented. The mafia's current involvement is not so well documented. If you believe that the mafia was eventually exercised from Las Vegas and look at the development before and after that point... We could have a reasonable discussion about whether the development post-mafia dwarfs the development under the mafia and whether the development under the mafia dwarfs the development pre-mafia. But the claim seemed to me to be about the present day. Today, I think the industry falls about the same place as big-oil or big-pharma or big-auto or big-politics. That is, plenty of people would call them all criminal-adjacent. But it still makes me wince a little. I'm sympathetic to them all being heckled, though.
- refurb 3y ago
  Gambling existed before the mafia. The mafia isn't that involved with Las Vegas any more.
ekianjo 3y ago
Casinos have been the way for the mafia to operate legally.
- avidiax 3y ago
  What interest would a criminal organization have in a high cash revenue business? Could it be a way to launder money? Jimmy "No Nose" comes in with $40k cash every weekend and loses it gambling, and "nobody knows" where a guy like Jimmy gets that cash so regularly.
  - seanhunter 3y ago
    Gambling has been well-known for some time as a way to launder money. For example see this[1] official government report in the UK or this[2] which is US-specific but much less detailed. [1] https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/print/The-money-laundering-and-terrorist-financing-risks-within-the-British-gambling-industry https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/print/The-money-launde... [2] https://moneysmartathlete.com/betting-industry/money-laundering-and-sports-betting/ https://moneysmartathlete.com/betting-industry/money-launder...
  - laratied 3y ago
    The old skim was even better than that. Make $500k, report $300k and send $200k cash back to Chicago.
bigbacaloa 3y ago
Casinos are spiritually in the same place as drug dealers and pimps. Profiting off weakness and vice. If you like spending all your dime on drugs, dice and so forth then fine, but let's not pretend the guys selling it are fine upstanding businessmen.
jasmer 3y ago
This is not the right analogy. 'Criminally adjacent' means literally, adjacent to organised crime. This is not the same thing as 'above bar businesses are 'adjacent' to anything that is not' , or 'aggressive competitive measures'.