Originally Posted by
Bob21
Tableplay, you tried to answer my question in the way I asked it. Thank you!
While I respect Kj and RS_ answers, neither one answered my question. They're basically saying they can spend money better than the other side (meaning the casino people and government). That might be true but that’s a different debate.
For example, if Kj and RS_ didn’t win the money, someone else would have it and could make the same purchases they did and stimulate the economy in the same way. The exact same augment Kj and RS_ are making is the liberal argument for welfare. Liberals say welfare people are spending the money government gives them for doing nothing, so this is helping the economy. They say some welfare people also use it to start businesses or buy a house. The point is at some point someone has to work and do something productive or society falls apart. Look at Greece. They have so many people on welfare, the country collapsed and had to be bailed out by stronger economies (basically Germany).
Back to my original question. What I was getting at is what “value” is being created for society when anybody (AP or ploppy) wins money in a casino. The answer is none. And this has nothing to do with the morality of gambling or winning money. The only true “value” being created in a casino is that of entertainment by the casino. There is nothing else going on in a casino except an exchange of money from one party to the other, with the government getting their cut of the action. That’s why I call casinos government's voluntary tax program.
Movies, sporting events, concerts also fall in the entertainment space. The reason they’re different than casinos is because nobody goes to these so often they go bankrupt. With casinos (through no fault of their own) bankruptcies will increase when casinos open in a new area. People blame casinos for this, but it’s not the casinos fault. There will always be weak people in our society. Since we live in a free society, these people are free to do what they want, which includes losing all their money in a casino, or on lottery tickets.
Tableplay, as far as your scenario A and B, I think that’s a stretch. First, everybody knows APs don’t tip much. So just because APs win doesn’t mean casino staff will have any more money via tips. In fact, the reverse is probably true. Most gamblers tip quite a bit, even when they’re losing. When I say everybody should lose in the ideal casino world, I’m talking in the long run. Casinos know their games have to have close to even odds so some people (playing in a negative EV way) will win in the short run, like in a weekend. If ploppies didn’t win sometimes, they wouldn’t keep coming back. In the long run, we know what will happen.
RS_, as far saying an AP helps the economy by not taking someone else’s job that is a liberal concept. Liberals believe there are only so many jobs. A conservative understands that jobs (or work) will always be created in a growing free society. There is not some finite number of jobs.
Anyway, good discussion. I was surprised I got so many good responses, and very few people trolling.
My main reason for bringing this up is due to all the misconceptions APs (and the general public) have about casinos. Casinos are doing what their business model calls for them to do. It makes no sense to be upset at a business (any business) when they’re doing what they’re supposed to do.
Bosox, it's not that casinos are righteous. It's that they are doing nothing wrong so people should quite attacking them and blaming them for things outside of their control. This is why I defend them.
And for the 105th time: The casino’s business model is to provide negative EV games for the purpose of entertainment. I get casinos can do other things too, like have restaurants, shopping, entertainment shows, ect.
And Kj, I hope your 5 AP buddies (who can’t handle opinions that don’t line up with theirs) aren’t reading this. You need to tell them to stay off all the Moses channels. There is some high-level stuff being discussed on these channels, far beyond what they’re probably capably of understanding. Lol (I had to end this with a Lol).