Should slots in Maryland be legal

[tombarnes]

Mississippi already has casinos. Reversing that decision is an impossibility at this point. I see no great purpose in allowing gaming in more places than those which already have it. Perhaps you will disagree. I'm not convinced that Maryland needs casinos in order to stay solvent.

[lexington87]

Mississippi already has casinos. Reversing that decision is an impossibility at this point. I see no great purpose in allowing gaming in more places than those which already have it. Perhaps you will disagree. I'm not convinced that Maryland needs casinos in order to stay solvent.

[tombarnes]

I have not stated that I don't want Maryland to see progress in economic growth. I merely question whether or not gambling is the correct path for Maryland to take in order to achieve said goal. This is not a competition between states or jurisdictions. If the District were to consider such a path, I'd probably question that decision as well. I have cited the Mississippi example as the one place I have seen where the impact of gambling has been somewhat positive. I remain unconvinced that gambling has had a positive effect in Florida, Louisiana or other states. The presence of huge new casino resorts in New Jersey might well render slot parlors in Maryland as negligible anyway. To use the logic you suggest, gambling might as well be legalized everywhere. Perhaps this would be the most equitable solution, but a landscape humming with slot machines does not guarantee economic prosperity. Would Maryland be ruined by slot machines? History would tell us otherwise. Would Maryland be vastly improved with slot machines? I think not.

[lexington87]

I have not stated that I don't want Maryland to see progress in economic growth. I merely question whether or not gambling is the correct path for Maryland to take in order to achieve said goal. This is not a competition between states or jurisdictions. If the District were to consider such a path, I'd probably question that decision as well. I have cited the Mississippi example as the one place I have seen where the impact of gambling has been somewhat positive. I remain unconvinced that gambling has had a positive effect in Florida, Louisiana or other states. The presence of huge new casino resorts in New Jersey might well render slot parlors in Maryland as negligible anyway. To use the logic you suggest, gambling might as well be legalized everywhere. Perhaps this would be the most equitable solution, but a landscape humming with slot machines does not guarantee economic prosperity. Would Maryland be ruined by slot machines? History would tell us otherwise. Would MAryland be vastly improved with slot machines? I think not.

[tombarnes]

I don't pretend to be an economist. You persist in mentioning other states as though they are in competition with Maryland for tourist dollars. Perhaps in some sense, they may well be. In the greater scheme of things, they are not. I would prefer to keep this discussion on an even keel without the encumbrance of terms like "fear" and the like. If this were the case, one might be thinking more in terms of New Jersey, Delaware and Pennsylvania as being in "competition" for slot dollars. If you feel that Maryland must enter the fray, then fine. say your piece. Slot machines, however, don't enter my picture of a better Maryland. I'm sure there are many avenues of economic growth which can be pursued which don't include slot machines. In the greater scheme of things, the revenue from said enterprises is perhaps finite. Slots would undoubtedly bring in revenue, but I still maintain that the greater social cost of doing so would outweigh the benefits of having them in the state.

[Lowerdeck]

I would just be worried. Massachusetts is looking like they want casinos to fill in some economic shortfall and to get tourist dollars. The only people that would go to these casinos are residents from Massachusetts anyway, and maybe a few from nearby states. It would just take money on the most part from in-state citizens anyway. I'm also worried that if the state decides to put too much economic reliance on the casinos, then it flops or isn't that successful, the state will hit economic problems.

Maryland having slots isn't a problem, it's just opening the potential for slippery slope.

[skylinefan]

I don't pretend to be an economist. You persist in mentioning other states as though they are in competition with Maryland for tourist dollars. Perhaps in some sense, they may well be. In the greater scheme of things, they are not. I would prefer to keep this discussion on an even keel without the encumbrance of terms like "fear" and the like. If this were the case, one might be thinking more in terms of New Jersey, Delaware and Pennsylvania as being in "competition" for slot dollars. If you feel that Maryland must enter the fray, then fine. say your piece. Slot machines, however, don't enter my picture of a better Maryland. I'm sure there are many avenues of economic growth which can be pursued which don't include slot machines. In the greater scheme of things, the revenue from said enterprises is perhaps finite. Slots would undoubtedly bring in revenue, but I still maintain that the greater social cost of doing so would outweigh the benefits of having them in the state.

[tombarnes]

Well. it looks as though the voters in Maryland may have their say. The Maryland House has passed a resolution allowing for the possibility of a vote on the issue next year. We'll see where this goes, or if it even gets to a vote. I agree with you Skyline that thre must be better ways to generate revenue.

The Washington Post