Revenue-hungry Kansas will be owner of new casinos

[ulmont]

But corruption and gambling themselves are connected.  When you have huge corporations making huge money in the locale, it is almost inevitable that those who make that huge money would make sure that the local government is not in position to threaten their interests.

Are you seriously saying that cities should discourage corporations from making money locally?

No? 

How do you distinguish gambling from other sources of "huge corporations making huge money in the locale"?

[DGuller]

How do you distinguish gambling from other sources of "huge corporations making huge money in the locale"?

Gambling companies are associated with the locale.  Harrah's can't pack up and move its AC operations to Cape May.  They also collectively tend to monopolize the economy of the city they're involved in.  I'm not sure where you're going with this.

[ulmont]

How do you distinguish gambling from other sources of "huge corporations making huge money in the locale"?

Gambling companies are associated with the locale.  Harrah's can't pack up and move its AC operations to Cape May.  They also collectively tend to monopolize the economy of the city they're involved in.  I'm not sure where you're going with this.

I just don't see anything you've said that would not lead you to condemn anywhere with a manufacturing plant?

[DGuller]

If the manufacturing plants have a record of co-opting their local government and making them do their bidding, then I'd condemn them too.  Maybe that's what happens, I don't know, I never cared about manufacturing towns.  I do care about Atlantic City, as I regularly visit it, so that's where my thoughts lie.  In any case, given the money involved, the towns dominated by the gambling industry would be a lot more corrupt than towns dominated by the manufacturing industry. 

[alfred russel]

If the manufacturing plants have a record of co-opting their local government and making them do their bidding, then I'd condemn them too.  Maybe that's what happens, I don't know, I never cared about manufacturing towns.  I do care about Atlantic City, as I regularly visit it, so that's where my thoughts lie.  In any case, given the money involved, the towns dominated by the gambling industry would be a lot more corrupt than towns dominated by the manufacturing industry.

But you only visit Atlantic City because of gambling, right?

[DGuller]

But you only visit Atlantic City because of gambling, right?

Yes?

[alfred russel]

But you only visit Atlantic City because of gambling, right?

Yes?

Your logic seems to be following along the lines of:

I care about towns I visit, others I do not care about--> I visit nearby towns that have gambling, therefore I care about them --> I see the effect that gambling has in the towns I visit, and think it is bad --> therefore I'm opposed to casino style gambling in the places I care about.

It seems following your logic you should be indifferent to gambling expanding, because you don't care about those towns without gambling. But at the same time want it repealed in the towns it does exist and that you visit (I assume that is only Atlantic City). Then once gambling is gone and you stop visiting, you will become indifferent to the town, and indifferent to seeing gambling return.

[ulmont]

If the manufacturing plants have a record of co-opting their local government and making them do their bidding, then I'd condemn them too. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_Town

[DGuller]

Your logic seems to be following along the lines of:

I care about towns I visit, others I do not care about--> I visit nearby towns that have gambling, therefore I care about them --> I see the effect that gambling has in the towns I visit, and think it is bad --> therefore I'm opposed to casino style gambling in the places I care about.

It seems following your logic you should be indifferent to gambling expanding, because you don't care about those towns without gambling. But at the same time want it repealed in the towns it does exist and that you visit (I assume that is only Atlantic City). Then once gambling is gone and you stop visiting, you will become indifferent to the town, and indifferent to seeing gambling return.

By care about I really meant "on my radar".  Since Atlantic City is on my radar, the effect of legalized gambling is visible to me, so that's what I talk about.

[alfred russel]

Your logic seems to be following along the lines of:

I care about towns I visit, others I do not care about--> I visit nearby towns that have gambling, therefore I care about them --> I see the effect that gambling has in the towns I visit, and think it is bad --> therefore I'm opposed to casino style gambling in the places I care about.

It seems following your logic you should be indifferent to gambling expanding, because you don't care about those towns without gambling. But at the same time want it repealed in the towns it does exist and that you visit (I assume that is only Atlantic City). Then once gambling is gone and you stop visiting, you will become indifferent to the town, and indifferent to seeing gambling return.

By care about I really meant "on my radar".  Since Atlantic City is on my radar, the effect of legalized gambling is visible to me, so that's what I talk about.

Gotcha.