Posted on 03/13/2011 6:32:06 AM PDT by BillKneer
Yep I was just there but what has that got to do with gambling?
Texas has close to 30 million people. LA has around 4.5 and Oklahoma has around 3.
For LA and OK to make money, they would need to attract a certain number of out-of state visitors. This can be done without too much difficulty at present.
Who would Texas attract? Even if everyone from LA and OK were to come to TX, it wouldn’t even register. This means that the gambling would be TX locals. Where would you locate your casinos? Houston, Dallas, Ft. Worth, Austin, San Antonio.
Remember that TX doesn’t have an income tax, only a sales tax. So TX only makes money off residents when they spend money in TX. If they are spending their money gambling, then they aren’t spending money on other things, which would lead to a decrease in state revenues.
You are right that TX spending money in OK and LA is a missed revenue stream, but the question is whether it is beneficial to the state of TX to do anything about it. I don’t think there would be any benefit to TX to try to compete with LA and OK by opening up gambling casinos in the population centres.
So you are more than willing to take away the freedom of those who want to play a game because someone MIGHT make bad decisions?
Do you ride a motorcycle? Drink beer? Go boating? Drive an automobile? Parasail? Cross the street? All these things MIGHT cause you to end up on public assistance. Maybe I should call for the legislature to make laws against them.
Take away freedom? Texas does not at present permit casinos. With good reason too. Texas doesn’t need them, nor are people barred from indulging in gambling. Nor is gambling a constitutional right.
One of the effects of building casinos will be that some people will gamble to excess, and will end up on public assistance. Do you suggest that we, as taxpayers ought to provide for them? You say we ought so that you can indulge. Fine. Why don’t we simply say that there’s no benefit to throwing some Texas folks into poverty so that others can gamble in-state? I don’t see it.
What about those food stamp cards? Are people going to be permitted to gamble with them? I’ve lived in a state that permitted all of these things, and I think these are issues that need to be confronted now, not sometime down the road.
“Do you ride a motorcycle?”
Motorcycling requires me to possess a license.
“Drink beer?”
There are plenty of dry counties. Alcohol consumption is not a constitutional right.
“Go boating?”
Licensing again, and my permit can be taken away.
“Drive an automobile?”
Licensing plus registration, plus inspection.
“Maybe I should call for the legislature to make laws against them.”
Government has substantial involvement in all of these activities. All of these are productive activities with the exception of alcohol consumption. I don’t see any reason why we ought to treat alcohol consumption any differently than gambling. States have the right to ban either.
Gambling is quite productive to alot of responsible people. Your bias is showing again.
Just because you don’t like gambling, doesn’t mean others don’t and there is absolutely NO logical reason to want to curtail other’s freedom to play a game. Many things others do I consider frivolous, or dangerous, but I do not seek to legislate away their desire or their freedom to do so.
Who said I don’t like gambling? I don’t want the state involved in gambling, period. Why should I subsidize your entertainment?
I really don’t see what is the big deal. You have a burning desire to go to a casino, hop over to LA or OK. Problem solved.
“NO logical reason to want to curtail other’s freedom to play a game.”
Then why are you demanding state support? You act like no one gambles in TX which is extremely false. It’s not difficult to find a game if you want one. But no, apparently going to a casino is a constitutional right.
Show me where it says in the constitution that gambling is a constitutional right, and I’ll agree with you.
Gambling doesn’t produce any money at all.
It may not produce any money at all........ but it damn sure takes a hell of a lot of money out of the state to adjioning states where casino gambling is legal.
It took until 1987 to get voter approval of pari mutuel betting in one of the state with its large horse industry.
Texas is a big state. The impact that LA and OK travellers have on TX is minimal. Most of the demand in TX would be domestic.
With domestic, all you are doing is shuffling the same dollars around. You aren’t bringing any revenue into the state. Instead of having folks spend the money on other things, you have them gambling. It doesn’t create revenue for the state, just shifts it around.
Ben I’m sorry but unless your willing to back up your comment with at least some supporting fact’s, your just blowing smoke.
As far as the "big thinking" that casinos here in OK..were going to be "destination spots"...like Atlantic City, and Las Vegas? ROFLOL....Never happened..and probably won't ever happen. Not many folks from other states are going to travel to Catoosa, OK, etc...to gamble.
Now..granted some of the casino's along I-40 and I-35 gather up some out of state money. And some casino's along the borders of TX, KS, AR, MO...also take in money from those states. But in the end...it's Okies losing money in Okie casino's.
Gambling is "productive" to those running the casino's...Plain and simple. And I happen to be a member of an Indian Tribe that has casino's.
FWIW-
That building a casino can actually have a negative return? Sure, I’ll see if I can’t get the tax receipts for my town.
Keep Texas free of gambling and all of its societal ills that follow it.
Amen!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.