Yes, gaming is the industry euphemism for gambling. The November issue of the magazine First Things has an article that those planning to vote yes on Issue 3 should read. I'll put a link here when the issue is available on line. In a few words, inviting the gaming industry into our state would be a mistake for the following reasons:Increased social problems - the National Gambling Impact Study Commission released in 1999 noted that problem gambling doubles within 50 miles of a casino.
There is anecdotal evidence that embezzlement and robbery increase, and drunk driving increases (as a result of free drinks while "gaming".
Yes, the positive impact of the casinos is said to be more jobs and increased revenue for the state treasury. But how about the increased social costs associated with casinos? As the First Thing article notes, "What price should we pay for addiction, embezzlement, child neglect, increased debt, drunken driving, and suicide, as well as for the prevalence of problem gambling?"
The First Thing article continues: "The complex nature of the task (trying to quantify the social costs) didn't stop the University of Nevada at Las Vegas from doing its own study in 2003. Professor Bill Thompson estimated that the cost of social problems in southern Nevada, a region that includes Las Vegas, amounted, conservatively, to at leas $300 million to $450 million a year and possibly as high as $900 million -- more that the taxes that gambling contributed to the state treasury."
If you want to be like Nevada, take a look at this chart.
And of course there is the moral argument against gambling. But as we become a more secular and relativistic society, who's to say what's right and wrong? (I'm being facetious or is it sarcastic? How about both?)
If you want more information on the problems associated with "gaming", take a look at Stop Predatory Gambling Foundation.org
No comments:
Post a Comment