We already have government-sponsored gambling. It is called the lottery, and few people object to that. For the record, I don't gamble much -- I went to a casino and spent $12 this year and that was the first time I had been to one in 5 years. So I am not a person that uses that as regular entertainment.
I don't think anyone is trying through legislation to monitor or force a moral path by objecting to government sponsored gambling. I think most want protection from the problems that are associated with a society rife with vice. None of us has the disposable income to support 5 casinos. If they aren't being fed with disposable income, where is the money coming from? And that is a plan to economic well being? There is nothing in this for Joe Minnesotan.
citiesdweller, you are mistaken if you really believe another venue for gambling will lower your taxes. Approving this will not reduce your taxes. It will not put 5K back in your pocket. It wasn't proposed to. FYI, gambling is considered a vice in most circles, as is prostitution, ***********, alcohol, drugs, pretty much the things that collapsed the Roman Empire. We can't legislate morality. That is not permission to promote the lack of it.
First, I live about an hour and a half from at least 5 different gambling venues. Who cares if there is one more? If someone wants to gamble, they are doing it already.
Next, it is ridiculous to compare a LEGAL thing like gambling, to an ILLEGAL activity like drugs. So stop trying to compare it to crap like that.
Next, to the South Dakota example, they probably pay on average $5,000 less then we do on taxes, would you be willing to add some small gambling establishments to put $5-10k in your pocket EVERY year? Having a Casino isn't any more trashy than having a Starbucks, or McDonalds on every corner.
those are worthwhile ideas, too bystander. I just know of some seniors who take $5 a day and sit at the casinos for 2-3 hours for entertainment and aren't gambling away their SS checks. There may be cases of that, but you don't hear of it often.
You can spend a lot of money on penny & nickel slots--don't be fooled by the "buy in" price. I would support scratch off tickets targeted at raising money for a new stadium. That way, if people want to support the stadium, they could buy the scratch offs--if they don't, they can just keep their money in their wallets. I'd also support a Vikings license plate to raise money.
Besides, SW and fuller -- what is the first thing people want to do when money is short for the government -- tax. And who do they want to tax? The immoral things -- rich people, tobacco, alcohol...
rock -- just making a point that most seniors don't gamble away their checks as was implied. Most that I know play the nickel or penny slots. And ultimately, if they decide to gamble their checks away, it is their call. That is what I am saying. And malarkey and SW -- we tax things that are morally questionable all the time, like cigarettes and alcohol. As I said, I am not in favor of expanded gambling across the state...just a racino where the money goes to a designated purpose.
Applying this rational to the education funding issues, we could use state owned land to raise pot to cover technology upgrades and salary increases. Maybe Poppies in the road ditches? Opium has always had a good following. Football Fans can't compete with the money flow of a good drug addicted society. If it's about the money, let's go big.
Hey, what do I know, we could also generate more money by allowing minors to buy and consume alcohol, or sell illegal drugs legally and tax that......or prostitution. In general all the immoral things could make a ton of money.
SW, if the seniors are going there to gamble away their social security checks, that is their call. Nobody forces them to go. and most of the seniors I have known to gamble are usually at the penny or nickel slots anyway and probably don't lose much. Just walk around Jackpot or Prairie's Edge and you will see most in that age group on the lower-cost slots.
BTW, SE, I am not in favor of the "casino on every corner" view. That is not what is proposed here, though. I don't think we need gambling expanded across the board, but adding one facility for a specific purpose doesn't seem like a bad idea.
SELyonCo, you owe me a keyboard. Next, the state will go into operating strip joints to finance a pro roller derby rink. As allowed for in the Constitution. The Founding Fathers were big on Government operated vice.
Yes, absolutely! Let's expand gambling so we can be just as classy as our neighbor to the west, South Dakota. Nothing says "hey, we're an economically thriving, progessive state" like mini-casinos on every street corner.
communismrules
We already have government-sponsored gambling. It is called the lottery, and few people object to that. For the record, I don't gamble much -- I went to a casino and spent $12 this year and that was the first time I had been to one in 5 years. So I am not a person that uses that as regular entertainment.
1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
ProdigalSon
I don't think anyone is trying through legislation to monitor or force a moral path by objecting to government sponsored gambling. I think most want protection from the problems that are associated with a society rife with vice. None of us has the disposable income to support 5 casinos. If they aren't being fed with disposable income, where is the money coming from? And that is a plan to economic well being? There is nothing in this for Joe Minnesotan.
5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
ProdigalSon
P_rn_graphy is censored?
5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
ProdigalSon
citiesdweller, you are mistaken if you really believe another venue for gambling will lower your taxes. Approving this will not reduce your taxes. It will not put 5K back in your pocket. It wasn't proposed to. FYI, gambling is considered a vice in most circles, as is prostitution, ***********, alcohol, drugs, pretty much the things that collapsed the Roman Empire. We can't legislate morality. That is not permission to promote the lack of it.
5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
citiesdweller
First, I live about an hour and a half from at least 5 different gambling venues. Who cares if there is one more? If someone wants to gamble, they are doing it already.
Next, it is ridiculous to compare a LEGAL thing like gambling, to an ILLEGAL activity like drugs. So stop trying to compare it to crap like that.
Next, to the South Dakota example, they probably pay on average $5,000 less then we do on taxes, would you be willing to add some small gambling establishments to put $5-10k in your pocket EVERY year? Having a Casino isn't any more trashy than having a Starbucks, or McDonalds on every corner.
1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
communismrules
those are worthwhile ideas, too bystander. I just know of some seniors who take $5 a day and sit at the casinos for 2-3 hours for entertainment and aren't gambling away their SS checks. There may be cases of that, but you don't hear of it often.
1 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
bystander
You can spend a lot of money on penny & nickel slots--don't be fooled by the "buy in" price. I would support scratch off tickets targeted at raising money for a new stadium. That way, if people want to support the stadium, they could buy the scratch offs--if they don't, they can just keep their money in their wallets. I'd also support a Vikings license plate to raise money.
12 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
communismrules
Besides, SW and fuller -- what is the first thing people want to do when money is short for the government -- tax. And who do they want to tax? The immoral things -- rich people, tobacco, alcohol...
1 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
communismrules
rock -- just making a point that most seniors don't gamble away their checks as was implied. Most that I know play the nickel or penny slots. And ultimately, if they decide to gamble their checks away, it is their call. That is what I am saying. And malarkey and SW -- we tax things that are morally questionable all the time, like cigarettes and alcohol. As I said, I am not in favor of expanded gambling across the state...just a racino where the money goes to a designated purpose.
1 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
fullermalarkey
Applying this rational to the education funding issues, we could use state owned land to raise pot to cover technology upgrades and salary increases. Maybe Poppies in the road ditches? Opium has always had a good following. Football Fans can't compete with the money flow of a good drug addicted society. If it's about the money, let's go big.
11 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
SwmnRes
Hey, what do I know, we could also generate more money by allowing minors to buy and consume alcohol, or sell illegal drugs legally and tax that......or prostitution. In general all the immoral things could make a ton of money.
1 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Rockinon
You're contradicting yourself. They're going to gamble their checks away playing the nickel slots?
7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
communismrules
SW, if the seniors are going there to gamble away their social security checks, that is their call. Nobody forces them to go. and most of the seniors I have known to gamble are usually at the penny or nickel slots anyway and probably don't lose much. Just walk around Jackpot or Prairie's Edge and you will see most in that age group on the lower-cost slots.
1 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
SwmnRes
Casinos really make the area look good. Nothing is more motivating than watching seniors********their soc. sec. check away!!!
1 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
communismrules
BTW, SE, I am not in favor of the "casino on every corner" view. That is not what is proposed here, though. I don't think we need gambling expanded across the board, but adding one facility for a specific purpose doesn't seem like a bad idea.
0 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
ProdigalSon
SELyonCo, you owe me a keyboard. Next, the state will go into operating strip joints to finance a pro roller derby rink. As allowed for in the Constitution. The Founding Fathers were big on Government operated vice.
11 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
communismrules
so apparently Jackpot Junction does nothing economically for its area, SE -- or Prairie's Edge. And the lottery has done no good, either.
1 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
SELyonCo
Yes, absolutely! Let's expand gambling so we can be just as classy as our neighbor to the west, South Dakota. Nothing says "hey, we're an economically thriving, progessive state" like mini-casinos on every street corner.
12 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
communismrules
Yes. Build the thing and let's get rolling.
2 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »