dank
2008-01-23 19:12:23 UTC
I urge all California voters to vote against Propositions 94, 95, 96,
and 97 in the Feb. 5 presidential primary elections. The propositions
would greatly expand gambling machines on Indian reservations and turn
much of the state into an ashtray like Las Vegas.
I lived in Las Vegas for a decade and the only thing I can say about
gambling is that it is addictive as crack and for some reason makes
people chain-smoke tobacco cigarettes. I don't know what it is about
gambling and nicotine but the two addictions are completely intertwined
and by expanding gambling you increase the number of smokers as well as
the places they smoke. In Las Vegas they gamble everywhere, including
inside convenience stores and supermarkets, and smoking is permitted in
those places because gamblers won't gamble if they can't smoke and
supermarkets simply cannot stay in business selling food to people who
need to eat unless they put a bank of video poker machines in the
produce section.
Aside from toxic nicotine fumes, another reason to oppose Indian gambling
is because money that Californians gamble away is money they don't spend
on taxed products and services, since Indian casinos pay no state taxes.
The state would collect lots of tax revenue if that money had been spent
on movie tickets, restaurant meals, or almost any other recreational
activity besides gambling. Lost tax revenues combined with the increase
in tobacco-related health care costs means that the ballot propositions
are not a profitable deal for the state at all.
and 97 in the Feb. 5 presidential primary elections. The propositions
would greatly expand gambling machines on Indian reservations and turn
much of the state into an ashtray like Las Vegas.
I lived in Las Vegas for a decade and the only thing I can say about
gambling is that it is addictive as crack and for some reason makes
people chain-smoke tobacco cigarettes. I don't know what it is about
gambling and nicotine but the two addictions are completely intertwined
and by expanding gambling you increase the number of smokers as well as
the places they smoke. In Las Vegas they gamble everywhere, including
inside convenience stores and supermarkets, and smoking is permitted in
those places because gamblers won't gamble if they can't smoke and
supermarkets simply cannot stay in business selling food to people who
need to eat unless they put a bank of video poker machines in the
produce section.
Aside from toxic nicotine fumes, another reason to oppose Indian gambling
is because money that Californians gamble away is money they don't spend
on taxed products and services, since Indian casinos pay no state taxes.
The state would collect lots of tax revenue if that money had been spent
on movie tickets, restaurant meals, or almost any other recreational
activity besides gambling. Lost tax revenues combined with the increase
in tobacco-related health care costs means that the ballot propositions
are not a profitable deal for the state at all.