A Response to the CasinoFacts front page arguments against a casino

In bold are the CasinoFacts reasons why we shouldn't have a casino in Middleboro.

"Cause The Host Community To Lose Control Of Their Town"

Even if half of the town voters were casino employees (rather unlikely, isn't it?), why would you assume that they'd vote casino interests against their own interests in safe roads, education for their children, functional fire and police departments and so on?

"Deepen Our State's Budget Problems"

They say "Not one state in the country has ever solved its budget problems with gambling revenues".

So?  Has any state solved its problems with auto manufacturers, super malls or car dealerships either?  Saying a revenue source isn't going to solve our problems is meaningless, and certainly isn't a reason not to want that additional source.

"Dramatically Increase the Tax Burden on Non-Gamblers"

More nonsense.  They say "states pay higher taxes in part because they need to make up for the unmet revenue needs that were promised by the casinos".  So because casino revenue wasn't enough to cover all the needs a state has we should throw it away?  If  a store offers me a $10.00 off coupon I should complain because there's more things I need
to buy?  How ridiculous.

"Detract From Our State's Economy"

They say "cities like Atlantic City and Detroit and states like Louisiana and Mississippi are still languishing, despite their heavy concentration of casino".  Again, so what?  Because casinos aren't the be-all and end-all solution to every fiscal problem you can have we should shun them?

"Change the Quality of Life in Our Communities"

Sure.  Some people would say for the better:  they like the idea of a close by resort destination.

But does it have to change YOUR life?  My wife and I go to Dave's Diner for breakfast once or twice a week.  We like that we both can have a nice meal for under $15.00 including tip.  Do you think we'll be heading for the pricey casino breakfast instead?  So what haschanged?

" Hurt Our State's Families"

Yes, there are people with gambling problems, and yes they can hurt their families.  There are many other folks who are no more addicted to gambling than they are to the beer or wine they enjoy with their dinner, and they don't want to be told that they can't enjoy their lives because a few people have addiction problems.

There are ways to deal with gambling addiction.  If we really wanted to, we could even issue gambling "licenses" that could be revoked before a person got into deep trouble - at a casino or with our already ubiquitous lottery tickets and Keno games.  It would be extra overhead for the State and for casino owners, Keno bars and even grocery stores, but frankly it could also be a source of revenue.  I don't necessarily want another bureaucratic licensing board, and I don't want to show a "license" when I buy a lottery ticket,  but if gambling addiction really is a serious issue, maybe we need it.  If it isn't, we don't - and the folks nattering about damage to families should be satisfied either way.


 

HOME

Personal reflections

My wife and I moved to Middleboro 18 months ago.  We came here to Oak Point to "retire", though I haven't stopped working yet.  We came from a "rich" town, Sharon, where the streets are clean and well maintained, where the schools almost always get whatever they need - quite a change for us to see the sad state of this town.  We were really saddened to see the condition of the High School when we attended our first town meeting: the bedraggled flag fluttering above us as we waited to enter seemed symbolic of the town's problems.

Now we seem to have a golden opportunity to improve our lot.  The proposed casino resort has the promise of bringing much needed relief in direct payments, sales of gas and electricity, improvements to Rte 44 and the rotary mess, and an injection of employment and to local businesses who may provide goods and services to the project.  Yes, there are down-sides to a casino.   Unfortunately, there are those who see only the negative points and who refuse to acknowledge the real benefits this can bring.

Some anti-casino foes have complained that the $160 million figure estimated to be the cost of  improvements to water supply anddisposal, road improvements and so on is way too low; that it's as laughable as the original estimates for the Big Dig. I'm actually of the same opinion, but it doesn't matter: it isn't and won't be Middleboro's problem. The developers aren't offering Middleboro $160Mto fix these things; they simply have promised to do the work, period. The $160M is just a figure Middleboro department heads came up with as their estimate of the value of those improvements. Middleboro isn't being given $160M to fix the infrastructure issues: those things simply will be fixed, and if it costs three times that, it's not our problem.

Another issue is casino employees who may choose to live in Middleboro and could dominate town politics. No doubt the same fears were raised by the influx of we Oak Pointers, and there has been talk of changing Middleboro's form of government to help prevent such a takeover. I personally think it's overblown: even if half the town were casino employees, why would you think voting would be adversely affected? These are still people: they want good roads, fair taxes, education for their children, good police and fire services and everything else the rest of us want. Employees aren't "owners", and with large corporations, many employees may actually dislike their employer and might vote against its interests. I think it's very unlikely that casino employees would be a massive pro-casino voting block.

There are two other issues that are legitimate concerns. The first is inflation: we're being offered $7M a year now, but what's that worth 10 years from now? In the original draft agreement, there was provision for CPI adjustment, but it was not phrased well, and needs to be adjusted in the final agreement so that inflation doesn't erode this away to be meaningless.

Next is the issue of fiscal responsibility. There's a real fear in some quarters that the Selectmen will "waste" this money; will fritter it away on unneeded administrative overhead and so on. I don't know how Adam might respond to that; he might simply say that the voters need to exercise the control that they often give to others through apathy. That's true, but I'm reminded that I have read that many lottery winners who win many millions of dollars often end up broke a few years later. Some people just can't handle money and will overspend no matter how much they started with. Should the fact that some people do this dissuade me from buying a lottery ticket now and then? I don't think so. Neither do I think Middleboro should pass up this opportunity over fears of fiscal mismanagement.

Middleboro faces an unpleasant future without this casino. There's a cartoon at http://www.mises.org/story/1966 that well illustrates their thinking: somewhere along the way from now to that bleak future, a "miracle" occurs and all will be well. I think this casino deal is that miracle. There's not likely to be another.

HOME