Lacking any cost benefit analysis, Sen. Therese Murray, Rep. Robert DeLeo, and Governor Deval Patrick are determined to revisit expanded gambling.
Senator “Ka-ching” Murray is showing a cavalier attitude and doesn’t seem to have any data to explain her support. The data shows that every dollar in state revenue will cost three dollars in social costs.
Pro-casino supporters question the studies that clearly show gambling to have dubious economic benefits yet can’t produce any numbers themselves that include an accounting of the costs. All we ever see is overly rosy job and revenue estimates.
If the economic data is right, the $400M in revenue we receive, will come with a $1.2B price tag.
Not exactly the sort of economic development I’m looking for. We should demand a real cost benefit analysis instead of accepting the tired old mantra of jobs, revenue, recapture without question.
As Bosley said during the last go-round:
“So far we haven’t heard very much,” he said. “We heard: ‘We don’t know how many people are going to become addicted. We don’t know what this is going to cost us, but we’re going to do it anyway.’ ”
That you link to.
<
p>This kind of “argument” just strengthens the case for casinos, because it makes opponents look like all they have is emotion to support their case.
<
p>Try again.
<
p>
It’s a summary presented by Grinols – one of the only researchers to do analysis of the economic costs. If you want the source studies that he draws his summary from, I’ll save you the trouble of googling for it:
<
p>They can be seen here.
<
p>I’d expect that any reader who saw an easy to read list of bullets, with a heading of “Gambling Economics: Summary Facts – Professor Earl L. Grinols, Baylor University” would have an easy enough time finding the source studies if they were so inclined to read them.
<
p>Now how about showing us some studies that show a net benefit in a cost benefit analysis. Try to stay clear of “studies” funded by casino interests.