What are bloggers view on casino gambling now that Deval has finally “decided” what to do?
I’m not sure what the opinions are of David, Charley, Bob and a host of others. Has Deval’s proposals changed your opinion of casino gambling in Massachusetts? If so, from what to what? If not, what were/are people?
BTW I’m still against it
Please share widely!
Still for it.
I don’t need some do-gooder from New York State (Rep. Bosley) telling me what I can and cannot do with my own money during my own free time.
<
p>
In that case, it’s not your money, it’s the casino’s money. I guess they’ll do with it what they want. I wouldn’t worry too much about ‘do-gooders’ getting a hold of it in that instance…
<
p>
okay, i suppose you were trying to be funny in a tom-menino-i-think-newton-is-western-massachusetts kind of way, but dan bosely lives in north adams, the massachusetts community where he was born.
<
p>
if you’re looking to point the finger at out-of-state do-gooders, look no further than the guy in the corner office.
On moral grounds, I don’t like the idea of the government making money by preying on peoples’ weaknesses. I’m sympathetic to the idea of raising more revenue for the state, but I’m skeptical of the projections that casinos will do that for us. (Actually there are two issues — does the extra spending boost the economy and create net jobs, and does the diversion of spending from lightly-taxed ordinary activity to heavily-taxed casino gambling help the state coffers. I’m very skeptical of the first and lightly skeptical of the second.)
<
p>
That being said, I respect the Governor’s sincerity and give him some credit for looking at the idea carefully. If it’s really true that we can’t prevent some alleged Native tribe from starting their own casino without a plan like this to limit the number and control the impact, that’s a good argument in favor of the plan.
<
p>
UNITE-HERE, the union that would hope to organize the new casino workers, had a pro-casino ad running this week on WHMP, the Air America station in Northampton — “the state needs the money for roads and schools, and the 20,000 new jobs will help the general economy”.
Regardlees of your position on this one thing for certain is that the deabte over casino gambling is going to be long, protracted and probably somewhat ugly. As well, the outcome is far from certain. If its defeated then we would have wasted a lot of the precious political time and energy many of us thought would be used by the first Demo Govorner in nearly a generation to CHANGE the character, nature and purposes of our politics and Commonwealth. Casino gambling is a very thin reed on which to hang our political future.
<
p>
On the other hand, if casino gambling is approved after a long and ugly battle…what really would have been achieved and will it even be worth it? I won’t repeat the many, at a minimum legitimate, arguments against casino gambling but step back for a moment and look at what we will have if casino gambling is approved. Three or four casinos will clearly change and impact the chartacter of our state and its politics and, aside from the money, we may truly regret getting involved with an industry we are going have to live closely with for a long long time. I ask, is such an accomplishment what we all worked and hoped for from this adminstration? Hardly.
<
p>
Andre Malraux once correctly noted that you do not do well when you are involved in a matter of inner contradiction or in something against your traditions. We will never do well involved with casino gambling…this industry contradicts and is against our traditional values and politics. It aspires us to a nihlistic nothingness and will never end in anything lasting or good.
<
p>
Rather than taking us down this road, the Governor should gracefully reconsider and if we need more money then raise the sales tax by a mere 1 cent and then get on with being the great Governor we know he can be. Our sales tax is lower that our neighbors and I believe a mere 1 cent increase will provide sufficent additional funds.
“I don’t like the idea of the government making money by preying on peoples’ weaknesses”
<
p>
Like the Lottery?
Like taxing smokers?
Like taxing alcohol?
I guess I agree with you. Those taxes should be removed.
I feel the moral argument is hollow as long as the state lottery remains in place.
I believe it was Barney Frank who said – words to the effect of: who are we to tell other people what to do in their recreational time.
I haven’t seen anything that has shown revenue is off set from other areas in the state. I’ve heard that as an argument, but without substantiation. I also don’t buy the regressive tax argument. Some actual numbers from other areas would be good. I also like Deval’s resort approach, that might keep people in MA instead of elsewhere for area vacation dollars. Having a venue for concerts and other performances, with restaurants, etc. might be a good draw for weekends and conventions. Plus seasonal activities like golf. It could also impact upstate NY and New England dollars. To me it’s a no brainer.
<
p>
What will be interesting in the coming months are the Republicans who have pushed for casinos and attacked Democrats who stood against it. Now that Deval has put out a plan, I wonder how the R’s will treat it. I got my local reps position and a long memory.
Now I’m even more against them. People don’t think that many people will become addicted – and it’s there problem anyway. Yet, we regulate drugs, alcohol, smoking and so many other addictive behaivors for things that are probably less addictive (marijuana, anyone?).
<
p>
Most importantly, it’s not some small number of people that will become addicted. Adding casinos to Masschusetts will literally create hundreds of thousands of new addicts.
<
p>
Worse yet, that’s not even my biggest beef with casinos. They absolutely, positively kill local economies. All these vaunted profits are going to largely be redistributions of money this state has already been collecting, except now many of those industries will be dead.
I’d turn it around and say that while alcohol and smoking are regulated, they’re legal. And that’s the way it should be with gambling (marijuana, too). A regulated system which allows those who are not addicted to enjoy themselves while providing addicts with a means of overcoming addiction seems like a necessary balancing act.
It’s called the state lottery.
<
p>
If that isn’t enough, hop on the T and take the Blue Line to either the Wonderland or Suffolk Downs stops. Cross the street at either stop and go bet on horses or dogs.
<
p>
If that still isn’t enough, get off at Wonderland and take the bus toward Lynn. I’m not sure on the exact stop it is, but make sure to get off on the Lynnway when you see a sign that says “Horizon’s Edge.” Buy a ticket for that night’s cruise and within short order you can put all the coins you want into slots, or chips on green tables galore. There’s entertainment and food, too.
<
p>
Is that enough balance?
It doesn’t matter who is for or against the casino(s). It matters not whether casino gambling is good, bad or indifferent in Massachusetts. Certain business interests have decided that there will be casino gambling in Massachusetts. They are not “gambling” with their capital. They are investing in a sure thing. I think we all realize that many souls will be sold. Some at an extreme discount.
<
p>
My own feeling is that the government should be in charge of all the sins of mankind. The casinos should be state run. Houses of prostitution should be state run as they are in Europe. Alcoholic products should be sold by state stores as they are in New Hampshire and some other states. Drug houses (opium dens) should be run by the state. Certainly this would cut down on the illegal activities that flood the criminal justice system and provide a source of income.
<
p>
My concern is that, being state run, these places would lose money and require a subsidy.
<
p>
cuz I like shiny lights
Help me Dan Bosley! I can’t control myself! I’ve already spent all my rent money on the new $20 scratch ticket, because I can’t control myself without help from beneficient and omniscient legislators like yourself. And that was after I spent my grocery money going $100 across the board on Evening Attire this weekend at the MassCap. Where were you when I needed you, Dan?
<
p>You simply must stop the expansion of gambling in Massachusetts before Boston loses all of its cultural heritage and desirability as a tourist destination; I’d hate to see Boston resemble the soulless dystopias of Montreal or Quebec city. Casinos will only lead to the further proliferation of gambling. What’s next- legalized video poker machines in barrooms? Massachusetts will be the New Brunswick or PEI of the United States! Imagine, going to some bar in Worcester or Braintree and seeing people gambling? It would be worse than Charlottetown- ick! Please, Dan, keep fighting the good fight and keep Moncton in Canada! (Isn’t North Adams near Canada?)
The Montreal casino is isolated on an island in the middle of the river, and is nowhere near the size of any proposed facilities in Massachusetts. And given the anemic ecnomies of PEI and NB, I’m in no hurry to head in that direction.
<
p>
Just because you don’t have a gambling addiction problem doesn’t mean you have to mock anyone who keeps those folks in mind.
They don’t want windmills in the ocean, how about a moderately sized casino on the island itself? I’m up to making it an either/or proposition for them. Let them have a vote.
If you’d skip the sarcasm and derailments, we could have had a real conversation here.
<
p>
But who wants to either discuss compromises or be open-minded when one can make lame jokes?
That said, I hope the Wampanoags remain in the driver’s seat and ditch Cahill’s plan. Three is too many, one is a necessry evil. If Deval would be content to accept a payout from the casino on Federal lands, in a town that has voted to host it, instead of shoving it down the throats of others (WHERE in Worcester? Remake the Galleria? WHERE in Boston? Isn’t this the same waterfront neighborhood that raised hell over the Patriots going there because of traffic?) we might be OK.
It’s kinda hard to close.
<
p>
First off, if we agreed to the Wampanoag plan, we’re not just talking about one casino. We’re talking about at least 3: if the Wamponoags get one, the Martha’s Vineyard tribe and the developers of Mohegan Sun have both said they’d seek to build their own.
<
p>
If there’s a casino built in Massachusetts, Deval Patrick’s plan seems the most reasonable. It will keep the most money in state coffers – about 50% of the profits – versus ~25% of the Wamponoag’s profits on slot machines, such as is the case in Connecticut. The same businesses would be killed and problems would exist, yet we’d get far less money if we opted for anything but state-licensed casinos.
<
p>
Of course, it’s better to just block all of them in the first place.
Why would they rush to build a casino now?
<
p>
The Mohegan Sun plan for Palmer is based on Deval legalizing gambling. They have no Federal trust lands there.
<
p>
If the Wampanoag build the casino on Federal Trust land – then that’s it.
<
p>
With Deval’s plan, we get three simultaneously.
<
p>
Of course, all of this is due to Deval and Cahill whining about how the cut – for which they take NO risk – wasn’t big enough. Greed, pure and simple.