New Jersey wireless Casino gambling

[grapabo]

I guess this is nothing new -- Nevada apparently has it -- but a couple of statistics put out by this article (decidedly anti-gambling) sort of pop out:

http://www.family.org/cforum/news/a0039757.cfm

[ QUOTE ]
Chad Hills, gambling analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said in her enthusiasm to find new revenue, Buono is neglecting to weigh the down side.

"Does anyone find it ironic that New Jersey has the third highest state deficit in our nation and the 14th-highest tax rate?" he said.

Hills said Earl Grinols, an economist at Baylor University, reported that the cost of casinos outweighs their benefits by a ratio of 5.6 to 1.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
As a result, he said, it is likely more people will become addicted to gambling and some of those will be children. More than 8 million adolescents in the U.S. experience a problem with pathological addiction to gambling already.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't think these figures are accurate, but this is why I think the argument that the government should just leave people alone doesn't cut it when it comes to this type of regulation. The anti-gambling proponents are going to trot out this social science to make the case that gambling is a public harm, not just a matter of private choice.

[jt1]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't think these figures are accurate, but this is why I think the argument that the government should just leave people alone doesn't cut it when it comes to this type of regulation. The anti-gambling proponents are going to trot out this social science to make the case that gambling is a public harm, not just a matter of private choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is the same argument for and against all legislation prohibiting certain lifestyles. One side says society will benefit from prohibition, the other says that society actually suffers from it. And they both have access to equally convincing numbers to back their claims up. For me the question is moot. Everyone knows that freedom comes with a price.