Posted by Does the “everybody else is doing it” argument strike you as the oddest argument in favor of expanding legalized gambling? That sure didn’t work with our mommas when we were growing up.
The Press-Register today:
The truth is, many Alabamians are going to gamble. They can go to the casinos in Mississippi, buy lottery tickets in Florida and, if the amendment passes, play bingo at the racetracks in Alabama.
Outlawing all gambling would only send Alabama dollars out of state.
We should do it because our neighbors are doing it? You know what mom would say about that, “If everybody jumped off of a cliff, would you want to do it too?” I learned early to stick to the merits, and proponents of expanding gambling in the state have stronger arguments to make than this one.
Do you think Nevada’s neighbors have advocates for legalizing prostitution who complain “all of our brothel money is going out of state?”
Related Articles:
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
Hi Doc
Having thought (and written) long and hard about what it is about gambling that makes me (and many others) uneasy, I thought I’d discovered all angles.
However, this simple, common sense thought you’ve expressed above had somehow passed me by, yet it is so obvious.
The UK Government is taking the view that lots of people want to gamble, and it’s happening everywhere, therefore they should get a piece of the action through taxes. So far so good (sort off).
Problem is that they then moved on to liberalise and promote gambling in the UK with the Gambling Act 2005. As a result, more people will end up gambling and that makes a lot of people, like myself, much more uneasy.
In effect, the UK Government have said that lots of people are gambling therefore it should be encouraged.
Cyber bullying is in the news today in the UK where teachers are being humiliated by pupils while their friends take cell phone pictures of them which are then put on the Internet. Apparently, these images of skirt lifting and trouser pulling down are quite popular with some youngsters. Rightly, it is unlikely that many official voices will be raised in the UK in favor of liberalising cyber bullying. The argument that many people are doing it and therefore it must be good and encouraged simply doesn’t wash.
[...] Doc over in Doc’s Political Parlor made a common sense point about legislatures liberalizing gambling. Does the “everybody else is doing it” argument strike you as the oddest argument in favor of expanding legalized gambling? That sure didn’t work with our mommas when we were growing up. [...]
My objection to gambling isn’t intrinsic; it just offends me that we would rather fund our schools that way than reform our tax system. I don’t think that’s a good message to give to our children.
Kathy
I’m interested that you say ‘My objection to gambling isn’t intrinsic’.
I wonder if you are for it, against it or neutral intrinsically.
As a liberal, (small l), I prefer not to be against anything. The issue, to me, is one of truth. The essence of a gambling transaction is rarely made clear. Slot machines would probably be acceptable to me, if there was a big sign saying users will over a series of transactions receive back less than they put in and only so much in the dollar.
Of course, I suppose I’m assuming people wouldn’t therefore put their money in … So the effect would be the same.