Why gambling just for Hot Springs and West Memphis?

[CentralArkansas]

It would be a horrible idea to allow gambling in other areas, especially Little Rock. Gambling actually tends to hurt local businesses where it is introduced. The River Market is a family friendly area, and has too much going for it. Gambling would bring in a cheap feeling to the area, as well as the negative social impact. Like I said, the reason I support it in those two other towns is because it will be restricted to a certain environment, and betting is already allowed in the race tracks.

You are crazy if you actually believe gambling hurts local economies.

There are many churches in Hot Springs that don't feel comfortable speaking out against the new gambling machines because so many of their member's businesses depend on the track.

[mcheiss]

It looks like voters in Hot Springs, by a razor-thin margin, gave Oaklawn Jockey Club Inc. the go-ahead Tuesday to seek installation of more electronic gambling machines at its thoroughbred racetrack.

Also, Southland Racing Corp. coasted to an easy win in a citywide election on the same ballot question for its greyhound track in West Memphis.

[Mith242]

It looks like voters in Hot Springs, by a razor-thin margin, gave Oaklawn Jockey Club Inc. the go-ahead Tuesday to seek installation of more electronic gambling machines at its thoroughbred racetrack.

Also, Southland Racing Corp. coasted to an easy win in a citywide election on the same ballot question for its greyhound track in West Memphis.

Yeah, I don't think this is any big change or anything. But it could possibly be a step for things to come. It might also be a sign for other things. West Memphis passed it easily while Hot Springs barely passed it. Makes you wonder if Hot Springs would vote down anything more than what it already has. So talk of having casinos at Hot Springs in the future might be jumping the gun.

[mcheiss]

Yeah, I don't think this is any big change or anything. But it could possibly be a step for things to come. It might also be a sign for other things. West Memphis passed it easily while Hot Springs barely passed it. Makes you wonder if Hot Springs would vote down anything more than what it already has. So talk of having casinos at Hot Springs in the future might be jumping the gun.

Possibly.

A lot more people voted in Hot Springs than West Memphis.

[Mith242]

Possibly.

A lot more people voted in Hot Springs than West Memphis.

I guess I was just a bit surprised that it was such a close vote in Hot Springs. I don't think that they were making any big changes really there. Just makes me wonder if any big changes like having casinos would be accepted if so many people were against the minor changes going on now.

[Arkansawyer]

You are crazy if you actually believe gambling hurts local economies.

There are many churches in Hot Springs that don't feel comfortable speaking out against the new gambling machines because so many of their member's businesses depend on the track.

I believe that gambling hurts local economies, and I'm not crazy. You are ignorant on this issue. Gambling has a tremendously negative impact on economies. A city like Las Vegas does well because most of the money comes from outside the region. In other cases the negative impact is sudden and great. In Atlantic City, for instance, more than forty percent of the city's restaurants have closed since casinos opened in 1977. Here's an article against the opening of a casino in Pittsurgh. There are plenty of articles of this kind available on the internet.

[Mith242]

There are postive and negative aspects to gambling. I think the bigger question is which will have the bigger impact on these cities? Could gambling do okay in Hot Springs because it would be more likely to bring in people from outside the area because of it's tourist status?

[Mith242]

I thought of another aspect to this whole situation. What if a city is already in relatively bad economic shape like West Memphis? Would it be that bad for the city to introduce more gambling when the city doesn't have much going for it already?

[johnnydr87]

I'm so torn on this issue.

Still, apples to apples, I would say I'm against allowing gambling ("games of skill") in the state.

The measure passed by 89 votes in Hot Springs. Funny, my mom voted for it, and my dad voted against it.

[Mith242]

I'm so torn on this issue.

Still, apples to apples, I would say I'm against allowing gambling ("games of skill") in the state.

I can certainly understand your opinion. Even though I tend to lean more towards allowing more gambling I won't pretend there aren't any negative aspects to it. I don't even know if I would prefer it here in my city. But I would like to see some city in Arkansas have it. Perhaps cities like West Memphis or Pine Bluff where there's not a lot of good things going on.

[mcheiss]

It looks like the State Racing Commission has given the green light for up to 1,000 games of skill each at Oaklawn Park in Hot Springs and Southland Greyhound Park in West Memphis.

[dimebag1980]

I can certainly understand your opinion. Even though I tend to lean more towards allowing more gambling I won't pretend there aren't any negative aspects to it. I don't even know if I would prefer it here in my city. But I would like to see some city in Arkansas have it. Perhaps cities like West Memphis or Pine Bluff where there's not a lot of good things going on.

Gambling would probably be good for Pine Bluff, but it wouldn't be excellent. Then you also have Monroe, LA toying with the possibility of legalizing gambling if another casino license were to come available in Louisiana. If Pine Bluff were to consider it, it would be best for them to be proactive and get it done and get the industry established there before Monroe gets to that point. Not that Monroe's casino industry would ever get too large, but if it were already established in Pine Bluff, it very well could keep Monroe from stealing too much of the market.

[skirby]

I believe that gambling hurts local economies, and I'm not crazy. You are ignorant on this issue. Gambling has a tremendously negative impact on economies. A city like Las Vegas does well because most of the money comes from outside the region. In other cases the negative impact is sudden and great. In Atlantic City, for instance, more than forty percent of the city's restaurants have closed since casinos opened in 1977. Here's an article against the opening of a casino in Pittsurgh. There are plenty of articles of this kind available on the internet.

Is gambling the blame for restaurant closing in Atlantic City or are their other reasons. Acording to Cornell University's report dated 2005 on restaurant failures it say the following. Between 1999 and 2002 the Los Angeles area saw a cumulative failure rate of new resturants of 50.9%. It would be interesting to see the failure rate for the three decades before 1977 in Atlantic City and then compare them. I'm sure there were a lot of restaurants that were opened when gambling started. Maybe Atlantic City is not a good location. Trump could not make a go of it there.

[dimebag1980]

I believe that gambling hurts local economies, and I'm not crazy. You are ignorant on this issue. Gambling has a tremendously negative impact on economies. A city like Las Vegas does well because most of the money comes from outside the region. In other cases the negative impact is sudden and great. In Atlantic City, for instance, more than forty percent of the city's restaurants have closed since casinos opened in 1977. Here's an article against the opening of a casino in Pittsurgh. There are plenty of articles of this kind available on the internet.

I've never heard of an economy hurt by gambling, but rather by the loss of the gambling industry. Take Reno for example. When the casino industry was king there, the city was in excellent shape. But their economy depended completely on casinos, and when the industry fell apart there, so did the city.

Shreveport had become a nearly-deserted, oft-forgotten place after the oil industry fell apart here. Why? Because the economy depended completely on that industry. Fast-forward to the early '90s when local leaders started buzzing about the possibility of casinos, and how they would help the local economy. A lot of people came out in opposition, claiming societal ills, damaged economy, etc. But the one thing this market finally realized was... it couldn't get any worse. So then why not try? The gambling industry was voted in, and the first casino opened here in '93 or '94. Since then the industry has expanded to 6 casinos: 5 water-based and 1 land-based, all but one of which have constructed hotels and the other has hotel plans on the drawing board.

If casino gambling actually hurts economies, then why has Shreveport-Bossier experience nothing but record growth since the industry came to the city? Why is it that more casinos are located in Bossier City than Shreveport, and still Bossier City is growing much more rapidly than Shreveport - and even gaining residents who are moving from Shreveport. Not to mention the companies who have moved their facilities from Shreveport to Bossier.

Shreveport's problems can't be associated with the casino industry... in fact, it's better off since the industry came here. The city has long suffered from loss of its citizens, but before the casino industry revived the economy here the migration the loss was to outside areas. These days the loss tends to be to the local suburban areas and to Bossier City rather than to places like Houston and Dallas.

Crime has dropped, home sales are at record highs, unemployment is at a record low, small towns that were drying up in the late 80s are now turning into vibrant suburbs and experiencing tremendous growth, and on and on. Sure, everything still isn't perfect... but it's a HUGE change from what it was. And the casino industry was what started the ball rolling around here. No one can be sure what this area would be like right now had the casino industry not taken a gamble on this market, but there's no doubt how much the industry has changed this area in a positive way.

There's no reason to go around saying "gambling hurts economies" when there's simply no proof of that. There is, however, a lot of proof to the contrary, and many cities in this nation are proof of just that. I certainly won't say you're crazy, but I will say you're wrong.

[skirby]

If gambling is so bad for a cities economy ask the people in Tunica if they want to get rid of it and to return to they way they were before.

[Aporkalypse]

If gambling is so bad for a cities economy ask the people in Tunica if they want to get rid of it and to return to they way they were before.

I'm with you and SBC on this one.

It's had a huge impact in Shreveport, which was kind of starving for jobs at one point.

[arkansas_buff]

Gambling is simply a tax on people who are bad at math.

[arkansas_buff]

If gambling is so bad for a cities economy ask the people in Tunica if they want to get rid of it and to return to they way they were before.

skirby... let me first just say how much I enjoy all of your updates (especially photos) in the Little Rock area. That aside, I can see where the argument you're putting forth here would make a lot of sense to a simple-minded person...

Slave traders thought the same thing. Why would they want to give up slave trade when their economies and ways of life depended on it? Simply put, the end does not always justify the means.

[dimebag1980]

The best argument you have to prove your incorrect theory that gambling hurts economies is to liken it to the slave trade?

You've got to come up with something better than that if you want anyone to take your point seriously.

Name an instance, in present-day America, where gambling has actually hurt an economy! I've given examples to the contrary, and skirby has done the same.

[neon9]

skirby... let me first just say how much I enjoy all of your updates (especially photos) in the Little Rock area. That aside, I can see where the argument you're putting forth here would make a lot of sense to a simple-minded person...

Slave traders thought the same thing. Why would they want to give up slave trade when their economies and ways of life depended on it? Simply put, the end does not always justify the means.

You're comparing gambling to slavery? I could compare it to video gaming, and much more accurately at that. I wonder if you have been to the Mississippi Delta and seen how people live there, or even worse how bad Tunica was before gambling. IIRC, it was the poorest county in the nation. You'd get chased out of Tunica Co. with a stick for making that comparison there.

[skirby]

skirby... let me first just say how much I enjoy all of your updates (especially photos) in the Little Rock area. That aside, I can see where the argument you're putting forth here would make a lot of sense to a simple-minded person...

Slave traders thought the same thing. Why would they want to give up slave trade when their economies and ways of life depended on it? Simply put, the end does not always justify the means.

Thanks for calling me a simple-minded person. I would rather be simple-minded than be a person who compares slave trading and gambling. With the help of gambling Mississippi will soon be able to say "Thank God for Arkansas." I do not gamble but I think it is wrong that Mississippi and other states get the benifits from those who live in Arkansas. By the way slave trading still exist. It maybe illegal but there is still a demand and as long as there is a demand for anything it will be provided. Being from Paragould I'm sure you know a few people who cross the stateline to get something to drink on Sundays. How about people from Jonesboro driving to your town to get their drinking requirements? Is Paragould any less of a town for supplying the citizens of Jonesboro something they cannot buy in their own town? Are you one of those people who think fastfood places should be done away with? After all the food they serve makes some people fat. Their end result is feeding people but their means results in people being overweight. Next time I'm in Paragould maybe I get a Big Mac to go with my Paragould beer. You know one can get thirsty driving from Jonesboro.

[arkansas_buff]

WOW . That post sure stirred some folks up! Calm down, fellas. Let me go in order here...

SBCmetroguy: I understand that gambling, lotteries and the like bring additional revenue to the state. BUT that revenue comes at a cost (see below).

neon9: As I told SBC, I don't deny that gambling has brought in millions in revenue to areas like LV, Tunica, or WM. Sure, I used an exaggerated comparison with slavery, but the point remains the same. The end does not always justify the means.

skirby: I apologize for using the term "simple-minded". I should have used "mis-informed" as a more accurate adjective. Please accept my apology . I don't really understand your point where you talked about slave trade still existing . And I personally wish Greene county was dry like Craighead. The statistics on dry vs. wet counties is very clear. I won't go into detail on that here, but you can read the stats from an earlier post of mine. Arkansas' economy is doing just fine as it is with a projected surplus going into 2007 of $325 million!

Here are the reasons I don't feel gambling is good for AR. Let's talk about Mississippi first...

1. The number of court cases filed in Tunica County, Mississippi, went from 689 in 1991, the year before casinos began operating there, to 11,100 in 1996. I don't have the stat on what that cost the taxpayers, but I know attorneys, judges, and the like aren't cheap.

2. The Mississippi Gulf Coast experienced a 43 percent increase in crime in the four years after casinos arrived. Harrison County, where most of the Gulf Coast casinos are located, witnessed a 58 percent increase in total crimes between 1993 and 1996.

Here are a few facts on other gambling Mecca's:

1. "We arrest 450 to 500 people a year for various types of embezzlement crimes. About 40 percent are employees," Keith Copher, chief of enforcement for the Gaming Control Board in Nevada, validates.

2. "We have studies that show for every dollar you bring in gambling revenue, you'll lose $1.90 in costs to the taxpayer," he said. It's as simple as ABC, "the addiction, the bankruptcy, the crime and corruption that you already have will just multiply with this expansion."

[dimebag1980]

Okay I will respond to this later when I have time.

But first I want to set something straight. No one is making this a one-sided issue. I personally invited you to prove your point, did I not? And you've come back with a lot of information which I will sift through later.

But don't act like everyone is ganging up on you and not allowing you to state your case. It was actually recommended that you do so.

Edit: By the way, you're just another Regular Joe on the internet like the rest of us, so I highly doubt you've ticked anyone off here.

[tim2462]

There is no reason for argument. It really is as simple as ABC.

1. Does it matter what it costs the taxpayers? We're paying it to the other states and paying more taxes to pay for things that could be provided at a much lower cost if there were large casinos.

2. We spend money on what we see fit, whether it be at a casino, at an arcade, or by purchasing expensive clothing we can't really afford. We'd actually save money by having casinos here, because we'd save gas money. If we go broke at a casino, then we'd be just as likely to go broke on a shopping trip we can't afford.

3. I don't buy the crap that crime is higher BECAUSE of casinos in casino communities. There are way too many factors, to be attributing it to one certain venue of entertainment....the fact is more people = more crime whether it be around casinos, or at a mall...that is what security is for.

4. IF WE ARE GOING TO SPEND OUR MONEY AT CASINOS, IT MIGHT AS WELL BE IN OUR OWN STATE WHERE WE WILL BENEFIT FROM IT.

[mcheiss]

3. I don't buy the crap that crime is higher BECAUSE of casinos in casino communities. There are way too many factors, to be attributing it to one certain venue of entertainment....the fact is more people = more crime whether it be around casinos, or at a mall...that is what security is for.

4. IF WE ARE GOING TO SPEND OUR MONEY AT CASINOS, IT MIGHT AS WELL BE IN OUR OWN STATE WHERE WE WILL BENEFIT FROM IT.

Amen, amen. Thankyou for mentioning this. More people will equal more crime, not casinos.

You can also add that Arkansans are going to gamble if they really want to. The majority are going over to Miss., Lousiana, and Oklahoma because they want to. If any of you have been to the Cherokee Casino in West Siloam Springs, Oklahoma you can look through the parking lot and about 80% of the vehicles are from Arkansas.