|
|
Post by Brian Luther on Oct 24, 2008 10:48:27 GMT -5
Anybody love Vegas?
I have great difficulty finding a reason to support issue 6. How do you see it?
Would gambling be the answer to getting more tax revenue?
If its not "owned by Ohio" and not run/overseen by Ohio, what real benefit will Ohio see?
In a spot south of Columbus, is the location anything special? Not that I can remember...... Acres upon acres of "corn fields".
And if it changes Ohio's Constitution, how prevalent will gambling be across the state? And who might benefit from the tax loop-holes if other gambling casinos open up....?
|
|
|
|
Post by MarkD on Oct 24, 2008 11:36:50 GMT -5
These issues suck because they aren't simple. If it were as simple as "Yes or No" to casino gambling that follows a specific set of gaming laws to keep it fair and requires X percent of tax revenue, then it would be an easy vote. This issue a bit goofy because it throws some curve balls in the language.
Bottom line though... even though I'm against it, Ohio should pass a casino gambling law because too much revenue is going out of State...
|
|
|
|
Post by MarkD on Oct 24, 2008 11:38:33 GMT -5
ps: Yes, I love Vegas. Great venue for a marathon & half-mary !!
|
|
|
|
Post by MattCollister on Oct 24, 2008 12:24:27 GMT -5
Voted against
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Luther on Oct 24, 2008 12:28:28 GMT -5
In the end, other than "well-off" retirees and the folks luck enough to be making a six figure income, without dependents...... Where do we come up with the money to gamble?  Maybe cash advance on the credit card? ;D Oh, on the trips to Vegas, correct me if I am wrong..... I would say 98% plus of us come back with less money than we left! So the "casino owner" is the only one making money period. Brian p.s. I have enjoyed Vegas too.... Although, living out in the Desert South West, is too dang hot! |
|
|
|
Post by Aussie Rob on Oct 24, 2008 15:30:44 GMT -5
As far as casino gambling being a moral issue, i don't think it is one. If grownups want to gamble, thats their business.
I see both side of this argument. Yes, there are apparent loopholes that will probably have this casino paying little tax in the future, and i think that sucks. However, they will be employing 5000 people, as well as spending big money to build it. With the multiplier effect, thats quite a bit of money being put into circulation in southern Ohio. Besides, giving businesses big tax incentives isn't exactly new, and since they will be hiring locals, i prefer that to companies that get them who outsource overseas.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aussie Rob on Oct 24, 2008 16:17:58 GMT -5
Nah can't vote. Became eligible for citizenship recently though, so when i find a spare $680 bucks (RIPOFF after all the money ive spent so far in the immigration process) i'll go that route. In the meantime, ill continue to buy undecided votes like Durnos in exchange for hard currency (beer and wings)  |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Carney on Oct 24, 2008 16:29:24 GMT -5
You guys just call ACORN I am sure they will figure out a way to have you vote over and over. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by gvale on Oct 24, 2008 19:20:12 GMT -5
Nah can't vote. Became eligible for citizenship recently though, so when i find a spare $680 bucks (RIPOFF after all the money ive spent so far in the immigration process) i'll go that route. In the meantime, ill continue to buy undecided votes like Durnos in exchange for hard currency (beer and wings) The $680 would be less than an Ironman race. Sounds like it would be money well spent. As for issue 6. I will vote NO again for Casinos. Take a look at what the casinos have done for Downtown Detroit. Any one been to Windsor lately? |
|
|
|
Post by Aussie Rob on Oct 24, 2008 19:33:11 GMT -5
You guys just call ACORN I am sure they will figure out a way to have you vote over and over. ;D They'll register me over and over, but ill only be able to vote once. McCain should know though, he was their keynote speaker 2 years ago.  Yeah its worth it too i think George, and ill probably take a chunk of our tax return to make it happen. It's just that ive literally spent thousands in filing fees in the last 5 years already to go through the various steps. Plus, i have to go and pay to get my biometrics taken AGAIN, for the 3rd time, and thats $80 a pop. My finger prints havent changed! Immigrating to another country ain't cheap! |
|
|
|
Post by MarkD on Oct 25, 2008 7:01:39 GMT -5
Brian - you are mixing issues... I am against local casino gambling for a variety of reasons - I see how they destroy people's lives when they are close to home. My in-laws live in Evansville, IN and when I'm down there, I hear unbelievable stories about how lives are getting trashed. Keep it in Vegas, I say. Unfortunately, all the States around us allow it and are sucking the cash right out of us. So, that's when it gets complicated. Interestingly, I agree with Rob and have NO moral issues - my issues with it are social - big difference. At the end of the day, I'm inclined to vote for it; however, then I think about the way that THIS issue is written and I am inclined to vote against it. Like I said earlier - I wish the idiots would have created more straight forward language... Regarding Vegas - interestingly, when I go there for fun, I lose. When I go there for work, I win. Overall, believe it or not, I'm close to even money (after about 10 visits). I try to be smart about it and gamble no more that a budgeted amount. Since I'm cheap - that amount is $100 per day on a 3 day trip. I've never lost more than $300. My biggest win was about $500. Bet low - win low. Bet low - lose low. Vegas, baby, Vegas.  |
|
|
|
Post by Brandon on Oct 25, 2008 7:40:17 GMT -5
Yes, this is a confusing one. NE Ohio would see some tax revenue from this if it passes, as the revenues from the state tax would be distributed to counties based on population size. The bigger the county, the larger the amount of tax revenue. If/When another casino would open in Ohio, this casino's tax burden (to the state) would reduce significantly due to the way the initiative is written, and I this is where the language of the initiative becomes questionable.
Yes, some local residents would lose their lives to the casino, but it would also bring MUCH needed jobs and revenue to the southern part of the state.
I think I would rather see it sited in the southeast, near the river and the Appalachian foothills. hmmmm.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Aussie Rob on Oct 25, 2008 8:55:28 GMT -5
Ah see durno, i think many social issues ARE moral issues. Healthcare especially. I think its immoral for the richest nation on the planet to have millions of uninsured. Getting sick without insurance in this country WILL ruin you; trust me i know first hand.
The difference between that though, and issue 6 for me is, although i acknowledge that gambling can also ruin lives - there is a choice involved. Most of the time, the uninsured don't choose to be that way, especially the people that are uninsured because they recently lost their jobs, like what happened to Joan.
|
|
|
|
Post by chuckm on Oct 25, 2008 11:12:56 GMT -5
I've played A LOT of poker over the past 30 years. There was a time I'd play 20 or 30 hours a week. It can be an addiction as bad as drugs and booze. I've seen at least 2 people lose their homes over gambeling losses. I still play on-line from time to time, but will vote against it. The social cost is far greater than the tax revenue.
|
|
|
|
Post by MarkD on Oct 25, 2008 11:36:42 GMT -5
I agree that the health care issue is both moral and social; however, most are very different. Keeping with the theme here. Some individuals are MORALLY against gambling - period - regardless of the benefits. I am not. But, the social implications of gambling can be terrible and that concerns me. Of course, with it being available on-line, the real problem gamblers have access to it regardless, so, the question becomes: do the economic benefits (jobs and tax revenue) outweigh the problem gambling consequences (ruined lives, more people on welfare as a result). As as I've said twice before - its even further complicated by the way THIS issue is written. Chuck - thanks for the personal anecdote - it hits home even more when you personally know people affected... |
|
|
|
Post by Aussie Rob on Oct 25, 2008 12:23:34 GMT -5
I guess i would give that argument more weight if gambling wasn't otherwise available; but that's not the case. There are several casinos within driving distance for Ohioans.
I dunno, frankly i dont like the way this amendment is worded either. Too many gray areas, obviously written that way in favour of the casino lobby.
Ruin lives through gambling, or ruin lives through unemployment in a severely depressed part of the state. The only distinction to me is, like all addictions, gambling is ultimately a choice....unemployment more often than not, isn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by MattCollister on Oct 25, 2008 12:32:06 GMT -5
We've had gambling in Ohio for years. Ever see someone piss away their money buying lottery tickets?
What a scam that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Luther on Nov 7, 2008 8:54:36 GMT -5
Sorry Lyle Berrman! Hope you had a nice time in Ohio, and thanks for all that advertising revenue! ;D
Hey, I think I heard that cornfield he bought for his resort, might be up for sale! ;D
|
|
Maybe cash advance on the credit card? ;D
