The Man of Virtues Has a Vice (Bill Bennett gambles)

Newsweek ^ | 1/2/03 | Jonathan Alter and Joshua Green

[Callahan]

May 2 — In his best-selling anthology, “The Book of Virtues,” William J. Bennett writes: “We should know that too much of anything, even a good thing, may prove to be our undoing…[We] need to set definite boundaries on our appetites.”

DOES BENNETT? The popular author, lecturer and Republican Party activist speaks out, often indignantly, about almost every moral issue except one-gambling. It’s not hard to see why. According to casino documents, Bennett is a “preferred customer” in at least four venues in Atlantic City and Las Vegas, betting millions of dollars over the last decade. His games of choice: video poker and slot machines, some at $500 a pull. With a revolving line of credit of at least $200,000 at each casino, Bennett, former drug czar and Secretary of Education under Presidents Reagan and Bush, doesn’t have to bring money when he shows up at a casino.

(link for full article)

[Stone Mountain]

If Bill plays the high limit slots the return is around 96%. For every $1,000 fed into the machines he would lose $40 if he played for 50 years.

The "if he played for 50 years" doesn't really make much sense here - are you using it to imply odds over the long term? In any case, you are correct that he would on average, lose $40 for every $1000 he risks. In the case of high-limit slots, It is very easy to risk well upwards of $30,000 per hour (for instance, look at $300 per pull which is conservative with high level slots, and 100 pulls per hour which is also quite conservative) which equates to an average loss of $1200/hour. With multiple machines and multi-paylines, this easily gets multiplied.

If you add his comps into the mix, his enjoyment may more than warrant his gambling "vice".

His comps are small potatoes compared to what he is losing - casinos make their money off of high rollers like Bennett. If you want to say that Bennett is rich enough to lose a bunch of money, I don't have a problem, but saying that he's getting over on the casinos with comps and his enjoyment of losing a bunch of money is lunacy.

[Porterville]

I'm not condeming him, I just feel cheated...

It is very dissapointing to see that he would be so reckless knowing that these type of issue get out into the public. He not only wasted cash, he wasted political capital...how much money is that worth??

[mabelkitty]

I see you may be Catholic.

Have you thrown the money-changers out of the hall yet?

Let me know when you ban bingo and we'll continue our discussion.

[lonestar]

I think it's worse than "gambling"--it's almost a "garuanteed loss." :)

[george wythe]

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.


Context is your friend:

³   And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
⁴   They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
⁵   Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
⁶   This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
⁷   So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
⁸   And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
⁹   And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
¹⁰   When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
¹¹   She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

St. John 11

[zoyd]

Interesting that you now say you don't hold the casinos responsible since previously you said they were an institution that ruined families. Which are they, not responsible or ruinous institutions? Can't be both. In one of those two statements you're BSing me.

sigh... casinos are a place you can go, and voluntarily ruin your life. OK? If you go there, and ruin your life, it's not the casino's FAULT. But it IS an institution that ruins peoples lives. Do you see that I am not BSing you? Semantics.

And what's with this 'loser argumment, your hypothetical is already addicted' crap? Split some more hairs, disco. Some addicted gamblers will ruin their lives, some won't. Some will start before they get married, others won't. Same with drugs, same with drink. What difference does it make what DAY someone becomes addicted? You're really verring off topic. And it's not a red herring.

Is it immoral to waste $ 8 million that could have been donated to worthy causes? That's what Bennett is allegedly down over a decade. That's certainly NOT virtuous. That's just my point. Bennnett prides himself as a virtuous man. It's not whether or not 'he can afford it'. It's the choices he chooses to make, and gambling is NOT a moral choice. It's a potentially (and evidently) addictive pasttime that MORAL people should avoid.

You know, I'm not the first person on the planet to suggest that casino gambling is a harm to society. There's a reason casinos are rare in the world. There's a reason politicians and moralists rail against gambling.

It's funny to me that, as a libertarian, I have to explain to you all why gambling might be considered immoral, or at the least, NOT VIRTUOUS.

[discostu]

I think it's how the gambling interacts with the card play, there's a punishment for being wrong. And it teaches you to not be so reliant on random chance, to beat your opponents with your chips and not your cards. A lot of the things I learned at the poker tables of my youth have helped later in life, I just wish the lessons in when to say when I got in the rest of life had transfered to the table. I will say everybody should find their addiction and actually allow it to mess them up once, it's a very interesting sensation to know you should get up and leave and not be able to, and there's a very valuable life lesson in being completely helpless to yourself once. It taught me a lot about self control and why it's a good thing.

[mabelkitty]

I'm outta here.

Got a jones for a Barcardi and Coke and a cigarette, and my husband wants to know why I haven't left yet.

Men. All they do is nag nag nag! ; )

Have a good one.

[Warhead W-88]

From MediaWhoresOnline... THE -$8 MILLION MAN WILLIAM BENNETT EXPOSED AS GOP GREED, GLUTTONY CZAR WASHINGTON MONTHLY PUTS COMPULSIVE GAMBLER'S LOSSES IN THE MILLIONS! WHAT WILL ALL THOSE UNSUSPECTING, WELL-MEANING PARENTS WHO PURCHASE BENNETT'S BOOKS, LIKE "CHILDREN'S TREASURY OF VIRTUES" AND "CHILDREN'S BOOK OF HOME AND FAMILY," THINK WHEN THEY FIND OUT THEIR PROFITS GO DIRECTLY TOWARD FEEDING HUNGRY CASINO SLOT MACHINES?! WHY IS BILL BENNETT STEALING FROM THE POOR AND HELPING TO CORRUPT FAMILIES? FOR SHAME! ...................... Maybe it's true-- that most of the people trying to make a big deal about this are liberal trolls. If that's a case, I retract all my Holy Roller jibes.

[Irish Eyes]

Thanks for making your statement more clear. Looks as if we are on the same page.:-)

[mabelkitty]

I'm confused. I don't see where his personal gambling hobby was a sin to others. I don't recall him telling others not to gamble.

[mabelkitty]

Don't. There's a george wythe who needs a Holy Roller jibe.

[Senator Pardek]

I wonder what this fraud would say about rock stars who can afford their habit, and have a $200,000 line of credit from the dealer?

[Warhead W-88]

I just meant that in poker, there is the "Win the hand" aspect which is pure card-play, and the "Win Money" aspect, which is gambling, and that the object of course is the latter, not the former, and anyone who plays the former is going to end up broke.

By which I meant-- Beginning poker-players tend to stay in hands for too long, because they're interested in the card-play aspect (seeing if they can finish that straight, etc.), when more experienced players see folding the hand as just as "interesting" a move as trying to draw that needed card.

There is a big difference between the gambling-game and card-play game in poker. There's not such a big difference in Bridge, where card-play translates pretty much directly to success at the gambling aspect.

[discostu]

Wait, when I said the person was responsible you called that liberal headed. You're totally reversing position.

Not all gamblers are addicted, not all coke sniffers are addicted. An assumption of addiction is incorrect.

How much money has Bennett earned in that decade? What is that 8 mil as a percentage? Raw dollars don't tell the whole story, if that's only 1% of the money he's made over that time period big deal it's meaningless. To us 8 mil is a lot, is it a lot to him?

Feeding an addiction is immoral, having some legal non-exploitive fun once in a while is not immoral. That's my point. He's not hurting anybody in anyway including himself therefore it is NOT immoral. I don't care why it "might be considered" immoral, lots of stupid things are considered immoral by some subset of stupid people. The question here is whether or not it is immoral in the absolute. I say no. You say yes. Bennett, who makes his living making this kind of judgement says no. That's 2-1 against, sorry.

[Warhead W-88]

Without gambling, Poker is pretty much just a childish game of "collect the pairs."

That's all I meant.

With gambling, of course, it's a whole lot more interesting.

But it NEEDS the gambling to become a sophisticated and interesting game.

[Stone Mountain]

Well for one thing there's the willful violation of the law, right or wrong laws are the written rules of our society and willful violation of them shows a disrepect for our society and weakens the ties of society by helping to create a society full of secrets and distrust. Then there's the black market economy that feeds it, on the profit chain of drugs there is always a murderer eventually, there aren't good people involved in the black market and knowingly creating a living for bad people is clearly not moral behavior. Now if marijauna were legal then responsible non-addictive non-destructive use of them wouldn't be immoral behavior. IMHO anyway.

So you believe that our laws determine what is moral? I don't believe that, and I don't think Bennett does either. Incidentally, in my example, I talked about someone who was growing and smoking their own marijuana - no black market economy, profit chains, or anything like that was implied and no bad people (unless you consider the smoker himself) prosper. Take people who grow their own medicinal marijuana in California. They are legal under state law, but illegal under federal law. Do you consider them when using marijuana in a "responsible non-addictive non-destructive" way immoral or not? I would hope that all of our own issues about morality are stronger than what the laws at any given time happen to be. Slavery was legal at one time, but I do not believe that it was ever moral.

[zoyd]

Have you ever heard the term 'devil's advocate'?

I'm only making these points because Bennett was our Drug Czar. Empower America, his group, rails against gambling. I'm only pointing out the utterly obvious, that Mr. Morality doesn't seem to examine his own vices and habits as critically as he does your vices and my vices.

[discostu]

Winning the hand is card-play when more than one person reveals, if you're doing your job with the chips right that's a pretty rare occurance.

Interestingly while beginning players tend to stay in hands too long so do the junkies. And for the same reason, they're focusing on the money already tossed in, or even the money lost in previous hands. Both the beginning player and the junk have an inability to focus in the short term and have no memory of what has gone before especially the bad stuff (also a skill needed by goalies and quarterbacks... guess I'd suck at that too).

I'm not sure why bridge has never entertained me. I like hearts and that's in the family, maybe just not playing with the right people. Maybe just the human need to dislike something.