What a great way to spend taxpayer money, fighting a failed experiment called Video Lottery;
City Councilor Vernon Brown said the Supreme Court historically has given cities wide discretion on land-use issues. He expects the residents of Sioux Falls would like to see the matter appealed, calling it a public safety issue.
Wouldn’t spending taxdollars on getting rid of this stupid form of tax collection (which probably costs us more in social costs, as you point out . .
“I don’t think we want to locate the businesses that get the most armed robberies next to elementary schools,” he said.
be a better solution? While I agree with the judge that the state has the right to regulate VL casinos, I think all of these suits prove that VL is costing us more then helping us. It’s time to put it back on the ballot in 2012 and get rid of it once and for all.
I still laugh at the guy wandering around our takeaway room at the restaurant I work at one day, and I asked him if he was looking for the bathrooms, and he says, “Nope, gotta any machines?” and I said, “Nope. Thank God.”
Of course, it gets no media coverage, but the effects of VL are exponentially more damaging than the drug use that does get the headlines. My family’s business had never had problems with internal theft until VL. Couple that with police detectives who don’t like to work too hard and you have thousands of dollars disappearing with no recourse.
It’s a fucking disease on our state worse then meth, but the fat cat bastards that are getting rich from it are paying off legislators and in some cases are legislators.
Can you get a concealed weapons permit if you live near a lottery casino? There should be machines at the state capitol. Pay state employees then cheat them out of it.
I still think Jack Billion’s idea in our last podcast was the best; “We should put nickel machines in the nursing homes.”
Make VL revenue a 20% cut to machine operators and you would see casinos disappear overnight.
Why do you keep beating on that drum? It’s broken! The video lottery issue has been on the ballot in one form or another at least three times, plus the lawsuits. The people have spoken again and again and again. It’s over. You get nothing! You lose! Good day sir!
So we should never talk about it again?
I think now would be a great time. Casino revenue was down last year while robberies were up.
Yes, it should never be discussed again. People are sick and damn tired of it. I’m no law scholar but I believe it is referred to in legal parlance as settled law. Get over it.
So we should keep it forever even if the social costs are higher then the payback.
You are an idiot.
i hate video lottery. having said that, it is funny that on one hand greg jamison was whining about how much money south dakota was going to lose from video lottery with the new casino in larchwood. yet on the other hand votes to restrict video lottery in sioux falls. if sioux falls is so worried about video lottery revenue being down, shouldn’t they allow it to be on every street corner in town?
The argument can be made that the social costs of many things are higher than the payback. It’s a matter of perspective. What you may think of as too high a social cost may be acceptable to me or to others. That doesn’t mean either one of us are idiots.
On the subject of video lottery, the matter has been discussed and argued ad nauseum. You don’t like it and/or want it eliminated. There are many other people who don’t like it and/or want it eliminated. There are more people that do like it or are at least able to justify it and want it to remain. The matter has been brought up and rejected several times. Your side lost. Get over it. Move on to the next battle.
Oliver, maybe you should make yourself available to give us the ok on any topic that’s discussed. I’d hate to talk about something that you object.
(I guess skipping posts you’re not interested in is not possible.)
“Oliver, maybe you should make yourself available to give us the ok on any topic that’s discussed.”
No can do. This is my fucking blog not yours Oliver.
I never asked to be moderator or arbiter of the blog. I am simply doing what the rest of you are doing; stating my opinion on a topic raised by the creator of this “fucking blog”.
L3wis has put forth the opinion that we should rid our state of video lottery casinos altogether. He claims it is a “failed experiment” but offers nothing to back that up other than “It’s a fucking disease on our state worse than meth.” Talk about an idiotic statement. I’d like to see some data on that claim.
Based on the latest data The State of South Dakota has brought in about $1.7 billion since inception which has funded education and lowered property taxes. Private business owners have brought in over $2 billion. Dollars they have used to build and renovate properties, employ people to operate their businesses and purchase goods and services from other businesses, thereby helping to provide further employment for our workforce. Nearly $4 billion dollars in benefits to every citizen of the state. How does that compare to the social costs? The people of the state of South Dakota have answered that question several times; the benefits outweigh the costs. Like many things in life, it just comes down to the math.
It’s easy to track revenue from VL. Tracking social costs is next to impossible.
Bankruptcy, suicide, broken homes, court costs, incarceration, police, fire, damages to businesses, addiction. I’m sure when you start adding that stuff up as a whole, it will certainly outweigh the few people who got rich from the industry.
You also have to look at the broken promises of VL; Good jobs and education funding? LMAO! Both have never come to fruition.
I say let’s keep VL, but the state should take a 80-90% cut and use the money to fund education.
So other than anecdotal evidence of social costs that you are certain would outweigh the benefit, you have no real argument.
I agree that there are social costs to video lottery but there are social costs to a lot of things; alcohol, tobacco, fatty foods, sugary snacks, punk rock. Some things you and others like, some things I and others like. It all comes down to the math; do the benefits outweigh the costs? South Dakota voters have agreed over and over and over and said YES to lottery.
Your assertion that good jobs and educational funding are broken promises of video lottery is just plain ignorant. It sounds good and it whips the anti-lottery crowd into a frenzy but that doesn’t make it true.
Video lottery provides good jobs for skilled technicians working on the maintenance and repair of the machinery. The development also provides good jobs for skilled individuals in architecture and planning as well as craftsmen in the building and remodeling of facilities. It provides good jobs for bookkeepers and accountants. It also provides the “crappy” jobs you refer to with such disdain. Just like fast food joints and convenience stores and retail shops have “crappy” jobs. But they are not the only jobs video lottery or any other business provides.
Lottery funds have kicked $400 million into the state’s General Fund and $1.5 billion into property tax reductions, both of which are the primary funding sources for education.
It’s not emotions or feelings or opinions or likes or dislikes. It’s math.
Well, Oliver, I was clearly being facetious when I suggested you “moderate” the blog’s topics.
Scott – I understood you were being facetious with your moderator comment. You can’t always come back with a well reasoned response or snarky comment. Sometimes you just have to fire off a “Oh, yeah, well you’re a poopy-head” response. You can’t hit it out of the yard every time.
So how many casinos do you own Oliver? Or are you one of those skilled laborers in the VL industry? You sound like the chickenshit city snowplow operator who I got into with it on the Kelo/facebook forums and when he figured out I called him out on all his city employee whining he deleted his comments. At least he had the balls to use his real name and occupation. I’m just saying.
I do not own any casinos and am not involved in any business or governmental agency related to the industry. I’m a concerned citizen of the state of South Dakota and have a viewpoint that is different from yours. I thought that was one of the principles of blogs— to bring out differing opinions and create substantive discussion and lively debate. Scanning through this topic I don’t see much of that. I’ve stated a reasonably solid case for my opinions. You clearly don’t agree with my opinion but offer nothing substantive in response, nor has anyone else.
By the way, how do you know that’s not my real name?
Well, is it your real name? I would assume not since you have to ask.
I think I have made my case very clear. VL has cost us socially, I don’t need to bring up statistics to prove it. Look around, the signs are everywhere. You bring up revenue which means nothing to me. Why? That revenue affects me very little, yet I have to pay for the social costs involved with VL.
Here is a 2006 report by our ol buddy Bob Ellis.
http://www.responsiblegambling.org/articles/video_lottery_south_dakotas_stealth_addiction_for_people.pdf
I’m sure the social costs are much higher now. I’ve never played VL. I like my odds to be at least 50-50. No chance of that with VL. I do occassionally frequent establishments that have VL for a cold one or a bite to eat. I see the same thing time and time again. People with an addiction, usually multiple addictions, throwing their money away. But Oliver says they have a choice. No I don’t think addicts have a choice. Oliver only sees $$$$$ signs and comin’ on here and playin BossMan.
My name is as real as everyone else’s name on this blog.
No one has made a case at all and yes you do need something of substance to prove your point. Anecdotal evidence sounds compelling but it’s smoke and mirrors. The Bob Ellis report is long on percentages and short on real numbers —- a good trick to use when the real numbers represented by the percentages don’t pack the punch the author wants. Stating that something increased by 33% sounds a whole lot more significant than saying it increased from 3 to 4.
L3wis, how do you support your statement that you derive very little benefit of the lottery yet you somehow suffer the impact of the social costs? Quantify the costs you have incurred. Quantify the benefit. Try removing how you “feel” about it sometime and try doing the actual math. Just once.
Poly43, I never made the statement that people had a choice, but thanks for pointing that out. People do have a choice in everything they do and unfortunately often make the wrong choices, over and over again. Speaking as a recovered addict I know that my behavior, as destructive and undesirable as it may have been, was indeed my choice. Saying it had a disease or saying I had no choice would have been a crutch. What I was doing was wrong and destructive so I stopped doing it. It was difficult and it really sucked, but just as I decided to engage in the behavior I decided to disengage from the behavior. You may think that sounds cold but it is the honest voice of experience.
I’m not really sure how it is that I’m comin’ on here and playin’ BossMan. I’m still trying to figure that one out.
OK Scott. Why can’t I post here?
Anecdotal to you, very real to others. I know of three families that were torn apart by VL since it’s inception in 1989. Most everyone knows someone who has lost it all to VL. So anecdotal? I guess…if you don’t give a damn.
Personally, I don’t agree much with Steve Hildebrand these days. He took the creditators money and portrayed a good man who would have made a good mayor as “Doctor No”. Now he duels with the creditator he put in office over “where” to put a $150,000,000.00 white elephant that will be crammed down our throats. Steve is also a human being who shows compassion when compassion is in short supply. More than I can say for some.
From the Rapid City Journal.
These days, Hildebrand alternates between sadness and rage. But some of his anger is directed at video lottery, a business that generates more than $100 million a year for the state budget and also destroys the lives of a certain number of players.
Unlike the gaming options in Deadwood and on American Indian reservations, video lottery machines are easy to reach and hard to avoid.
“Unfortunately, in our state gambling is very accessible because of video lottery,” Hildebrand said. “And he was drawn into it and couldn’t get out of it and was in casinos all over town, spending my money.”
Hildebrand said he feels betrayed but also by a system that sanctions a type of voluntary tax that so easily destroys the most vulnerable of its citizens. And he admits empathy for his friend’s personal struggle.
“Imagine what somebody must be going through if they’re sitting in video lottery casinos, stealing money from their boss who is also their friend,” Hildebrand said. “Imagine the emotional part of that. And to do that day after day after day, think of what that person is dealing with.”
I’m afraid (for the most part) I have to agree with Oliver on this one. I sincerely doubt the societal costs come anywhere near the revenue generated from VL, and in fact I would argue the societal costs are much less than alcohol.
L3wis – if you wish to prove VL results in an actual cost to the taxpayer, you need to put up some hard numbers. Compare crime rates, divorce rates, homelessness, incarcerations, and other factors both pre and post video lottery and you will soon find out the differences are negligable.
Poly – you may know three families “torn apart” by VL since 1989, but how many families are “torn apart” by alcohol? I’d bet a lot more than are ever impacted by VL. We lose people every day from alcohol related crashes – many of which are innocent victims. The crime, domestic disputes, and emotional distress resulting from alcohol addition and usage is exponentially higher than VL.
Besides – technically alcohol and Video Lottery never tore a single family apart. It is the actions of the person who chooses to abuse it that results in those outcomes. Whether it be VL, substance abuse, a shopping addiction, or whatever else – addictive behaviors all result in the same things. The only difference is the varying degree they impact others, and I doubt anyone can say with straight face that VL has a higher impact than something like alcohol.
Now don’t get me wrong – I’m all for increasing the state’s percentage of the take from VL. Since I have heard bar owners refer to VL as “legalized theft” I’d be more than happy if they earned no more than 5% of the profits from it because other than some electricity to power the machines they really don’t have much of an investment.
However I could never condone banning VL altogether, especially knowing most of our state is within a 60 minute drive to an Indian Casino anyway, and I can promise you the tribe isn’t about to pay for addition recovery programs like the state tries to do.
Besides – like it or hate it – VL is a personal choice. There is no direct impact upon others and I can’t support making something illegal just because I don’t like it. It boils down to personal freedom which is why I feel it should be legalized statewide. Tax the heck out of it if you wish, but let personal responsibility thrive and we will all be better off for it.