Why are Their Assumptions Better Than Mine?

I am combining the two articles together because I do not think the State or the casinos factor in or take responsibility for the damage they cause. They only make assumptions about the losses from gamblers that they believe will add to their coffers. At least I would like to give the State the benefit of the doubt about their intent. I would feel better if they said out loud they know that they are partly responsible for the pain caused by their legalizing gambling. My hypotheses/assumption is that when the casinos reopen they will cause great pain for the people with a gambling disorder. I also hypothesize that 50-90% of the people who go to the casinos after they reopen will be people with a gambling disorder. I have made recommendations to the State in the previous blog, Who is Responsible Gambling. My assumption is that nothing will come from those recommendations.



If the above link does not work google, The Atlantic and gambling stories. The second link is a story I read in the Chicago Trib today about the Illinois Legislators passing a piece of legislation that will make it easier for Chicago to get a casino. Something about making it easier to start a casino in the city. And, how important the casino, and it’s revenues/losses to gamblers, are to the fiscal stability of the city and the state.

In the city article Gov Pritzker talks about “…reliable funding streams”, “hundreds of millions of dollars annually to repair our schools, hospitals, and higher education buildings across the entire state”. Rep Bob Rita from Blue Island used 500 million each year, Sen Bill Cunningham from Chicago used 200 million a year, Gov Pritzker seemed to use hundreds of millions. My guess is that none of them have a clue what a casino might bring in. They have been incorrect on the lottery and video games. The State is in fiscal straits even with the previous gambling expansions. The ProPublica article mentioned in the blog piece, Redeeming Qualities , speaks to incorrect assumptions of losses/revenues made in the past. If it is not in the article check online as the ProPublica article was part of a 4-part series.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: