Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Rights and Liberties

The Gambling Scam on America's Poor

By Mark Lange, Christian Science Monitor. Posted May 3, 2007.


What kind of government spends millions of taxpayer dollars peddling false hope to confiscate cash from its poorest citizens to fatten state coffers?
Advertisement

Some scandals don't involve illegal activity -- they're just outrageous and unjust. Take gambling in America. Abetted by Congress, legislatures from 48 states now sponsor gambling operations and lottery monopolies to balance their budgets on the backs of their poorest and most vulnerable citizens -- while basking in the virtue of fighting tax increases.

Three decades ago, there were no casinos outside Nevada, and only 13 states ran lotteries. Today 19 states support commercial gambling in densely populated markets near interstates, 28 states host Indian casinos, 41 run lotteries, and 43 allow track-side betting. Even so-called riverboat casinos have expanded rapidly as states lift wager limits to permit casinos they couldn't sanction on solid ground. Only Utah and Hawaii still ban gambling.

States have stretched legal loopholes to ludicrous lengths for the same reason Jack Abramoff wielded his influence: They want the money, and the money is there for the taking. US gambling interests have seen an eightfold increase in revenues since 1982. Last year, Americans legally wagered more than $1.1 trillion. Along the way they lost more than they spent on movie tickets, recorded music, spectator sports, video games, and theme parks combined.

Clearly, America's appetite for what industry officials benignly call "gaming" has grown. It's all legal, so what's the big deal? Here's the scandal: In 1999, the bipartisan National Gambling Impact Commission found that 80 percent of gambling revenue comes from households with incomes of less than $50,000 a year.

More remarkably, players with annual incomes of less than $10,000 spent almost three times as much on gambling -- in aggregate, real dollars -- as those with incomes of more than $50,000. With the aggressive encouragement of state governments, US gamblers -- most of them scraping by on limited incomes -- had to lose $84 billion last year in casinos and lotteries for the states to raise $24 billion in new revenues.

Consider Massachusetts, a typical example of a state under pressure to legalize casinos. With 16 percent of adults leaving the state to gamble in the past year, advocates argue that legalization would "recapture" lost revenue from these gamblers and generate $350 million in income to the state from slots alone.

On the surface, that appears to represent only a $475 annual loss per player. But industry executives will tell you that 85 percent of their revenue comes from 20 percent of the players. So I called a Massachusetts state legislator's office that is fighting the introduction of casinos in the state to help me with the math.

"For the state to make its $350 million on slots after payouts," an aide told me, "147,000 gamblers -- about 3 percent of the entire adult population -- have to lose a total of $496 million. That's an average annual loss of $3,374 apiece." Incredible, perhaps, until you've seen the transfixed expression on the face of a "player" at one of these machines.

Adding slots to Massachusetts' revenue mix is equal to raising taxes on the average player by 62 percent. Legislators wouldn't try that with the folks at home, but it's easy when pitched as entertainment.

Of the many ways government can raise money, gambling is the worst. It's regressive. And it can ruin lives.

To be sure, most states gain political support for their lotteries by earmarking them for appealing causes such as education, schools, roads, and parks. But there is no practical way to prevent a legislature from allocating these revenues to other reelection-prompting purposes -- and most do.

Anyone comforted by the idea that gambling is voluntary should spend a day with the casino staffs that segment local markets, track prospects' and players' observed worth, define their predicted value, and systematically maximize individual "share of wallet" through targeted and customized promotional messages, limited-time cash offers, and carefully tracked time-to-response and spending analysis.

This is highly sophisticated and systematic coercion -- and it works. At casinos such as Pechanga in Los Angeles, demand for drive-in slots has become so great that the parking lot is jammed on weekdays and two-hour lines often form on the weekends. State lotteries are among the largest buyers of radio advertising in their metro markets. What kind of government spends millions of taxpayer dollars peddling false hope to confiscate cash from its poorest citizens to fatten state coffers? The same government that spends more taxpayer money on ads offering help for addicted gamblers.

In the next election, consider asking your state legislators whether their mandate is to serve or to swindle the people. No government should be running soak-the-weak scams.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: debt, poverty, gambling, casinos

Mark Lange is a former presidential speechwriter.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The Stupidity Tax
Posted by: White middleclass male on May 3, 2007 12:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it funny that I received a Florida “Bright Future” scholarship paid for in part by people so ignorant they spend their last few dollars on lottery tickets. Sometimes I love the status quo.

I bought one lottery ticket in my life. It was on the day I turned 18. I bought it just because I could and even than I felt stupid for doing so.

Everyone knows the odds of winning the lottery are less then being struck by lightning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Stupidity Tax Posted by: mazel
» Where did... Posted by: Bbear41
» RE: The Stupidity Tax Posted by: uncoveror
» RE: The Stupidity Tax Posted by: Doubtom
It's still voluntary
Posted by: kepstein7777 on May 3, 2007 3:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Going to buy a lottery ticket and picking numbers is a calculated move. So is driving or taking a bus to AC.

If poor people in other countries can die in the streets speaking for their rights, walk 10 miles through jungles and deserts to vote in an election, and so on, why can't the poor people in this country stop pissing away their paychecks on lottery tickets?

You don't need a PhD in statistics to know that you are more likely to be hit by lightning 100 times in one day...in the same spot...than to win the lottery. How do casinos pay for all them fancy buildings if the odds are fair? Hmmmmmm....

I know what it is to sit at your boring job and fantasize about winning the lottery. It's quite another thing to actually believe that the lottery is your ticket out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's still voluntary Posted by: BadBird
» RE: It's still voluntary Posted by: allblue
» RE: It's still voluntary Posted by: PirateJesus
» RE: It's still voluntary Posted by: allblue
» RE: It's still voluntary Posted by: Jarmadi
» RE: It's still voluntary Posted by: Doubtom
I stuck a few euro in some slot machines in Italy just to kill some time
Posted by: ateo on May 3, 2007 4:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm fully aware of the economics of gambling and that I was essentially throwing money away.

I have a friend who loves to go to Atlantic City every couple of months and piss away money. I've thought about going there myself but the fact is there are other forms of entertainment I can partake in that don't involve throwing (as much) money away.

(By the way if anyone is going to deconstruct my title I will say preemptively that I don't know if it was Euros or Dollars and that I was on an American Air Base. I'm pretty sure gambling is legal in parts of Italy though.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Numbers racket
Posted by: allblue on May 3, 2007 5:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When the Mafia used to run it, it was called the 'numbers racket', and considered a threat to the moral fibre of the nation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Of Thee I Sting Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Of Thee I Sting Posted by: Poe
» RE: Of Thee I Sting Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Of Thee I Sting Posted by: cmaciain
» RE: Of Thee I Sting Posted by: Astroboy
Yes, but ...
Posted by: ProgressiveManiac on May 3, 2007 5:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe gambling is a symptom of insanity. When I see people sitting at a slot machine depositing coin after coin and pulling the handle, I am reminded of the dictum that insanity is when you do the same thing over and over while expecting a different outcome.

Just as with drugs and alcohol, some people are prone to abuse gambling. While many people will place an occasional bet as an amusement, there seem to be people who will foolishly bet their last dollar. What is not clear is whether more people will do this when the government takes a hand in providing the gambling opportunity.

One can argue that more people will gamble when the government places its stamp of approval on the act. On the other hand, society seems better served if government undercuts the criminal monopoly. This country did learn a lesson similar to this with regard to prohibition (of alcohol) that may be applicable to the prohibition of gambling.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yes, but ... Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Yes, but ... Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
A dollar and a dream
Posted by: mizipi on May 3, 2007 6:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I spent a lot of time in NY State in 1989-91. Two TV commercials I will never forget. One about Genesee (sp?) Beer with a sexy babe and the other about the NY State Lottery, ALL IT TAKES IS A DOLLAR AND A DREAM. I don't think this ad was for people with money to spare.

Then casino gambling was legalized in Mississippi in 1993. Our school teachers are still among the lowest paid in the US. We still pay 7% sales tax on food and everything else.

Using the logic that "gaming" is a source of revenue for the government is stupid. If not, then why don't we legalize marijuana, tax it and ensure its quality? I doubt anyone can find reputable research to prove smoking reefer is worse than dreaming of becoming a millionaire. The last time I looked into it, a person was more likely to be struck by lightening than winning a lottery, and more likely to go to jail for smoking reefer than being struck by lightening.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A dollar and a dream Posted by: Dboy
Sadly, liberal Democrats are usually the promoters of gambling
Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma on May 3, 2007 6:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article disingenuously mentions Massachusetts without mentioning that ALL the legislators here urging more gambling are, unfortunately, liberal Democrats and nearly ALL the opponents are, unfortunately, Republicans. This seems to be the pattern in every state. So much for protecting poor people.

Maybe worse, ex-Gov. Nitwit Romney "slashed," as the newspapers say, state spending to help gambling addiction... liberal Dem Deval Patrick had a campaign promise to put it back... then he "slashed" again it himself as governor! Let's just turn the poor people upside down and shake the quarters out of their pockets, shall we?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Liberal Democrats: an oxymoron Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
heh
Posted by: ShoShenQ on May 3, 2007 6:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My ex girlfriend used to work at the casino of Montreal, and while she neither I gambled (and i mean NEVER) we have seen plenty of people lose their last penny, quite pathetic if you ask me, but hey its life and the govt. will make a better use of the money than the mafia, cuz make no mistake, there is a demand and if you dont offer the "goods" someone else will do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: heh Posted by: allblue
» RE: heh mafia Posted by: sasquuatch55
Personal Responsibility
Posted by: locutusofborg on May 3, 2007 7:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What happened to personal responsibility in this country and when did we become a nanny state. If you are stupid enough to gamble away your money then I am, nor anyone else should be responsible. You loose your money go get help from a charitable organization but do not use my hard earn money that I was not stupid enough to gamble away.

Given that why is the US Federal and State Governments getting involved in gambling? Once again they are stepping beyond what they are here for, they should not be creating nor helping anyone involved.

This nanny state, that both the Right and the Left side of the political spectrum is creating, is really getting old and going down a path towards a dangerous Orwellian socialist society.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Personal Responsibility Posted by: allblue
» Fair enough Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: Fair enough Posted by: allblue
You might as well just sell them crack. At least they would get
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on May 3, 2007 7:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
something, albeit temporary, for their money. And some of the money earned by the sale would help support poor, indigenous farmers in Central and South America as well as developing our inner-city's entrepeneurial class.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sniff, Sniff - Here We Go Again . . .
Posted by: MAD on May 3, 2007 8:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These Pawn Shop, Pay-Day Loan, Gambling stories always seem to draw an abundance of sympathy from your average Alterneter, much to my bemusement of course. It boggles the mind that we still cannot grasp the "I control and am responsible for my actions" model. That doesn't seem to matter to Alternet writers, most of whom won't be happy until everyone is insulated from their own stupidity when the "US Dept for the Preservation of Imbeciles and Half-Wits" is established.

It seems that anything (particularly that which is electronic) that flickers, strobes, shines or beeps is simply irresistible to evolutionarily challenged people. That they could, in the process, win the shiny, red Corvette on display in an explosion of lights, bells and scantily clad cocktail waitresses sends them into a primordial frenzy. "Copping meth down at the trailer park won't ever be the same!! Wait 'til those guys get a load of me in this baby", thinks Jimmy Bob. So off he goes to gather his paper cup, simultaneously turning off higher brain function, in particular those centers responsible for critical thinking.

Of course any discussion of the toll gambling takes on poor, defenseless Americans would not be complete without singling out Native Americans as purveyors of iniquity. What a truly horrible turn of events! YES, it's quite unfortunate that these poor and downtrodden Americans (who still find money to gamble mind you) are losing their welfare checks at Blackjack tables owned and operated by the very people their ancestors displaced and slaughtered. I wonder how many white folks, in one of those "I've got to make it all back" fits of gambling rage, wagered titles and deeds to land that was stolen from Native Americans to begin with. Wouldn't that be funny? LOL!! Am I the only one who sees the irony (not to mention poetic justice) in this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Likes to Gamble
Posted by: Jarmadi on May 3, 2007 9:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I like to gamble. In Vegas, at least, information about the house advantage of a game is easily obtained. Most casinos offer classes in how to manage one's money wisely, and how to select bets that have the best chance of winning. The aim is to give yourself a reasonable chance to win........knowing that more people will lose than will win. In Vegas, the gambler knows that there is a regulatory body that activly inspects these games of chance to assure that the advertised amount of risk is accurate.

In Oklahoma, there is an Indian casino down every road. It is murky as to how the casinos are regulated by each tribe. Management personnel seem to have no idea what house advantage or payback ratio are. Games like "blackjack" have bizarre, funky rules that almost guarantee losses at what should be the most fair of games, and encourage bets larger than one might otherwise make. This doesn't keep Texans from flocking to the border casinos and filling up all the "blackum jackum" chairs.

In Vegas, customers of "local" casinos get a better deal than is offered to the gamblers on the strip. Oklahoma locals are treated with very little respect, possibly because so many of the gamblers are inexperienced and uninformed and so do not demand better gaming services. Since casino gambling in Oklahoma will probably be around for a long while, as will the lottery, I would like to see an Oklahoma Gamblers Association that can possibly leverage for a better deal for Oklahoma gamblers. I would like to see each casino offer free classes in how to gamble wisely, understand the odds, play the games properly, and to manage ones money wisely to avoid excessive risk and to maximise enjoyment and chances of winning. I would like to see postings in each casino of the house advantage of each type of machine or table game and an adequate regulatory body to inspect and assure that the advertised payback ratios are indeed accurate.

Finally, I would like to see that each casino recognizes that not all customers can handle this activity properly, and to try to identify problem gamblers and attempt to channel them towards treatment, or to perhaps ban them from the place. A responsible casino does not aim to get it's profits from problem gamblers.....from losers that cannot control their betting..........their profits should come from customers that play more or less wisely, have fun and sometimes win, and do not risk more than they are fully prepared to lose.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Huge Scam
Posted by: NoPCZone on May 3, 2007 9:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Aside from general arguments against lotteries and casinos, take a look at how big a scam this is.

In Tennessee, a border state of mine with the Powerball Lottery, all of the profit from ticket sales is directed to education and scholarships- otherwise, it offsets a tremendous amount of funds for education that normally would come from taxes. This is also true in many other states. However, the states then tax winnings as income (Tennessee does not have an income tax, but most states do).

Think about that. The lottery ticket buyer pays the cost of lottery operations, funds the winners, provides a ton of money for the state government and still gets winnings taxed as income. Talk about a den of thieves. The lottery ticket buyer is ripped off if they win or lose.

Next, operations are not the model of scrupulous propriety. In Tennessee, a big $ lottery winner was the owner of the business that sold the ticket and the agent that sold him the ticket was a member of his family and his employee. Does that pass the smell test? I don't think so. It was probably above board, but looks really bad and should not be allowed.

Gambling doesn't bring jobs worth a damn to the community, except for a very few at the top of the food chain. Most jobs created by gambling/gaming are low paying. Period.

The impact on the local community is huge. When legal gambling comes to a community pawn shops, payday lenders, title loans (car pawning), consumer credit counseling, bankruptcy & divorce lawyers, debt collectors, repo men become the growth industries. Rates of divorce, drug and alcohol abuse, child neglect, prostitution, spousal abuse and other social ills go through the roof. Problem gamblers lose jobs, licenses, careers, families, reputations, houses, cars and more.

Spend a little time and look at the stats in a community before and after gambling comes to a community- the numbers are astounding and never get mentioned by those advocating 'gaming' and lotteries. There is a reason so many states had provisions against gambling in the past- they were the result of corrupt lotteries in past history. In Tennessee it was written into the state constitution.

I'm no prohibitionist- generally holding to a libertarian viewpoint about voluntary social behavior. I think Marijuana should be legalized, along with prostitution and gaming. If you do not wish to participate- don't. Our law enforcement assets have better places to be. But I object to the predatory nature of much of the gaming & lotteries in the US.

Regulation should be tight, independent, transparent and free from industry influence. Laws should also keep casinos from cashing paychecks, giving free alcoholic drinks and operating small denomination slot machines (1,5,10,25,50¢). Lottery operators should be required to clearly post the very long odds of winning anything- much less a grand prize.

Finally is the federal subsidy of gambling. It is legal to report and deduct your gambling losses from your taxes and the system in effect is wide open to fraud and misrepresentation. It's time to close this loophole.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Huge Scam Posted by: Jarmadi
Red Brown and Blue Party comment
Posted by: redbrownandblueparty on May 3, 2007 1:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't forget the granddaddy casino of them all--the stockmarket, that materialistic addiction of junkies who want to get something for nothing. The stockmarket is 99% non-productive, one giant speculative scam bubble, destroying the earth and personal character in the name of a "free?" market. Tell a lie often enough and it's taken as gospel. 99% of us are addicts to the money machine, especially the 1% of the 99% who think they are kings of the mountain. "Fool, this night they demand thy soul of thee."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

typical
Posted by: spyderjunkie on May 3, 2007 4:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Al Sharpton would be proud. Blame others for you personal defects.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

now you see why gambling at home is illegal
Posted by: eosrk on May 3, 2007 4:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
you're taking money from the goverment.....and they don't like someone else doing their job!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

America's Poor?
Posted by: billfaster on May 3, 2007 5:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You state, "demand for drive-in slots has become so great that the parking lot is jammed on weekdays and two-hour lines often form on the weekends."

I didn't think the poor owned automobiles...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

low income people have lower incomes because they are either stupid, lazy, or make poor choices
Posted by: ricimer129 on May 3, 2007 5:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
there is a fairly strong correlation between IQ and economic success. people with higher incomes are smarter and have made the proper choices in life. Those at the other end have not. Gambling is an example of the type of behavoir that the wealthy avoided in order to become successful. why should it suprise people that smart successful people are not willing to waste their money and the lottery.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Casinos and Lotteries are two different beasts!!!
Posted by: elfinito on May 3, 2007 7:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hate prohibition of all kinds...I guess I am a libertarian in that sense. Illegalizing things that people want to and will do simply creates two major problems (1) A black market that creates more violent-crime problems, and (2) Gives the police and prosecutors the power to choose when/who to enforce the law against. See the 55mph speed limit -- Its broken by 95% of drivers at all times, therefore giving the cops the power to pull-over whoever they choose and Harass them if they want. In New Jersey, eventually became a losing Supreme Court case, they tried to fix these "pre-text" stops by citing to the fact that even though only 14% of drivers in NJ were black, nearly 90% of te stops were Blacks...making it worse was sevral studies and polls taht all agreed on the fact that Blacks (out of fear of being pulled over) actually drove slower on average. Never-mind how racially inequal marijuana and all drug arrests are!!

However, gov't sanctioned lotto is a joke...primarily because the odds are disgusting (the pay-out is a tiny fraction of the odds of winning...any casino that cooked the odds in theri favor as such would never succeed), their ads are flat-out lies, and they do not regulate themeslves.

My suggestion for a healthy Lotto --> Perhaps a section on your W-4 for taxes, you select a X$/week deduction to enter into X number of lotto drawings that week (maybe each drawing is just a random pulling..raffle style...of SS #'s, and whoever is pulled wins. Each drawing winner gets $500,000 tax free. Simply add the number of participants for each week, and determine how many drawings can be had (allowing for maybe 10% of all money back into system, so it would take 1.1 Million to have two $500,000 drawings).

However place rules such as, only $2/wk per $100 of pay so poor people cannot throw away too much on this "Dream." Perhaps even disallow people over $2000/wk from participating, and once you win you also cannot participate. Think about it, no-one would spend too much...and every week, in each state maybe 20 drawings would be held...so 1000+ people nationwide each week are able to move out of the low income bracket.

Right now poor people cling to a dream that fallacious advertising has given them. In Brooklyn, I go to the same deli for coffee every morning, and I see a few of the same people there spending 40-60 dollars per week...and some of them are definately very poor...so lotto is just compounding their problem because "You can't win if you don't play" and "all you need is a dollar and a dream."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gambling and Brain Chemistry
Posted by: PaxilMan on May 3, 2007 8:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think it is generally difficult for someone who is NOT addiction-prone to understand what life is like when you ARE addiciton-prone. To these people, the moral failures of others are merely a matter of choice, not genetics or chemistry. This is not always the case. I come from a family of gamblers and alcohol/drug addicts/users. I would spend thousands of dollars a year on gambling, because the same part of my brain that couldn't focus on tasks, had mood swings, etc., also lit up when the thought of winning money entered my brain. Arriving at a casino was like having sex. Endorphins were released and I felt great. Several hours later, riding the rollercoaster of winning/losing, I would leave emotionally drained and swearing not to EVER do this again. Of course, I would return to the same activity in a matter of weeks or months because of the rush, the firing neurons triggered by thoughts of "winning." And it didn't hurt that the casinos "juice" that brain chemistry with lighting, pleasant sounds and free drinks served by scantily clad waitresses.

Then, as part of my addiction rehab/treatment, I was prescribed Paxil, an SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor). Among the many other benefits of this drug, I have NO DESIRE to EVER visit a casino again, nor do I binge out on lottery tickets and scratch tickets. I spend four dollars a week on the lottery, mainly out of the unreasonable "fear" that "my numbers" might come out, leaving me a "chump" for not having played them. I am literally saving thousands of dollars a year on gambling, drugs and alcohol by paying $30 a month for my prescription and $200 every six months for a visit to my psychiatrist.

I'm not a stupid, lazy or morally lax person. I have a B.A., summa cum laude, two Master's degrees and a Ph.D. I publish regularly in my field and work hard. But I've been a border line obsessive/compulsive all my life and never knew that my brain chemistry could be tweaked to make my life easier and more productive.

The message? For me it was all about brain chemistry. I'm sure this is true for thousands, if not more. So, in effect, the gambling industry derives a portion of its income from preying on the chemical imbalances in some peoples' brains.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gambling and Brain Chemistry Posted by: blitzmesser
Indians and gambling
Posted by: Roger Király on May 4, 2007 7:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It may surprise AlterNet readers to learn that many Indians are opposed to gambling casinos. (Sorry: "gaming".) Many tribal Elders have tried to prohibit casinos, often to find themselves overruled by money-hungry younger Indians. Indians who are against casinos include my wife, who believes that casinos will turn Indians into greedy "fat takers"---exactly like the people who stole their land and culture. Is it too cynical to believe that the various local, state, and Federal governments involved would be happy about that? It's a contemporary version of "termination" that doesn't offend people and even encourages fools to say that letting Indians run casinos "is fair after what we did to them." Indians once believed that greed was "the white man's disease" and a crucial difference between Native people and the "settlers". Well, that's a quaint anachronism now, and not just to white people.

So, light up a cancer stick bought at an Indian smokeshop, watch a Redskins game on TV, and then take a drive to an Indian casino to gamble away money that could be saved for your kid's education. On the way home, rent "Dances with Wolves" (which many Native people call "Lawrence of South Dakota") and be happy that Indians are finally learning how to be good Americans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Indians and gambling Posted by: crazyoglala