Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Cincinnati Casino? We Bet Against!

We have been slow to respond to the latest developments in the never-ending saga of attempts to legalize casino gambling in Cincinnati, largely because the issue seems to us to be so obvious.

However, the Enquirer's recent coverage has been sufficiently revealing that we must draw attention to it. What it shows is that there are people who stand to benefit--big time--from the construction of a casino at Broadway Commons.

It's not the immediate neighborhood. Most casinos suck the economic life out of the immediate neighborhood, drawing dollars away from other restaurants, hotels and entertainment venues.

It's not the people of Over-the-Rhine. They have enough ways to lose their scarce cash.

It's not the taxpayers of Cincinnati or Hamilton County. The projected revenue, around $20 million per year each, is a fraction of their budgets with a barely noticeable impact.

It's not the tourist industry in Cincinnati. Cities without tourism don't get it when casinos come in. Cities with tourism don't get more tourism with a casino. The money just gets redirected.

It's not even the gaming industry. A new casino in Cincinnati will largely displace gamblers from southeast Indiana. We've been told by a Rising Sun insider that the boat there will be the first to go. One reason for the Ohio ballot initiative that leaves Cincinnati out is that its primary sponsor owns the Argosy Casino in Lawrenceburg. A casino in Cincinnati will doubtless draw some to gamble who wouldn't otherwise. But that effect will be marginal compared to the displacement factor.

So who wins? The developer of the property. Louis Beck--restauranteur, hotelier and "progressive" political ally of Jerry Springer--stands to amass millions from his option on the parking lot on Broadway.

So, is Ohio ready to facilitate the destruction of individuals and families so that a millionaire can amass more millions? We think that even in its sorry moral and economic condition, the state's electorate has sufficient gumption to confine legalized gambling to the horse tracks, bingo parlors, and convenience stores, where it belongs.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

I hope you're right, but I can't remember the last time I heard of a gambling measure that was voted down. People tend to get stupid when they're offered the possibility of great riches for little effort.

Anonymous said...

The only person I know that makes money at the casino week in and week out is my friend George. He deals at the blackjack table. Makes about $60k a year and works about 30 hours a week. He has a M.A. from a Cuban university but Fidel will not let his transcripts out.

Danny Joe

Jon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNID said...

We are optimistic about this ballot initiative failing because (a) Ohio has decisively and repeatedly voted against casinos in the past; (b) multiple casino initiatives will be competing with each other on the ballot, effectively splitting supporters. It will take something on the order of Trumans 1948 campaign to win this one for the casinos.

Anonymous said...

Is Ohio ready to destroy individuals and families? Always.

The gambling industry relies on busloads of commuters. Who knows where the saturation point is, but there will never be lots of casinos. If there ever are, there will be a few millionaires, and millions of poor people (as in some parts of the world where cock fighting and Jai-Lai (sp?) are popular).

You should probably avoid using the word "gaming" in front of "industry." I prefer "gambling industry." Adult bookstores are really porn stores.

Even the word "industry" may be giving them to much credit since they create nothing of any value. Argosy is the "gambling lobby" when they influence policy.

Jon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNID said...

Sometimes for our own amusement we deliberately use the other sides euphemisms.

As noted before by a commentor on this blog, gambling is no industry. Even our own commerce department doesn't count gambling revenue in the GDP. Winnings and losings are transfer payments.

Jon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNID said...

We apologize for the omission of apostrophes in two consecutive comments.

Anonymous said...

On the new this evening Sherriff Leis was lending his support to the Cincy casino claiming that the revenues generated by said casino would help fund the new jail.

And you thought Mr. Winburn's idea for funding the jail was bad :-)

Jon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNID said...

Si permanently lost my vote yesterday. There's not a chance that a casino would generate enough dough for the county to run even a small jail. And that doesn't even begin to address the social problems or the moral issue.

If Winburn ran for sheriff against Leis, I would actually vote for Winburn. That's how sour I am on our esteemed Hamilton County Sheriff for Life.

pheobe22 said...

I continuously continue coming to your website once more simply in case you have posted new contents.online-casino-osterreich.at