This is sad news – Wonderland Greyhound Park, the 75-year-old racetrack in Revere, closed today. The voters of Massachusetts chose to ban greyhound racing in a 2008 ballot initiative, and Governor Deval Patrick and the state legislature recently failed to come to an agreement to allow casinos or slot machines at racetracks, something that Wonderland was hoping for.
In addition to 100 employees losing their jobs, Massachusetts is also deprived of a landmark that, although not the most upscale place to say the least, is a unique part of our state’s culture and character. The voters made the wrong decision to ban greyhound racing, which is not in itself harmful to dogs. The governor and the legislature failed to agree on a bill authorizing casinos or racetrack slots, which is kind of pathetic since they are both in favor of allowing some number of casinos.
The loss of Wonderland leaves Massachusetts a little bit worse off, and it is the decisions of our voters, governor, and legislature that caused this. Massachusetts needs some new leaders (and a change in the anti-liberty attitudes of many voters) who will make the state a better place instead of a worse one.
Photo courtesy of Zchangu @ Wikipedia, CCASA 2.5
In a Boston Globe opinion piece today, Tom Cosgrove argues against allowing casinos in Massachusetts:
“New revenue,’’ though, is just casino-speak for a new tax: a sucker tax on those willing to plunk down cash on tables tilted sharply toward the pit bosses. A sucker tax on those willing to sit at slot machines ergonomically designed to keep players in thrall of the lights and levers for hours at a time – complex algorithms creating the illusion of near-victory as wallets empty.
I’m not sure whether Cosgrove is saying that gambling itself amounts to a tax (which would be completely false because people can choose whether or not to gamble but people are required by law to pay taxes) or whether he is just arguing against taxing gambling. I’m going to assume the latter.
Although I am generally anti-tax, I favor bringing casinos to Massachusetts. I believe that taxes on gambling are much less objectionable than income taxes because people can choose whether or not to gamble and thereby choose to avoid the tax, while everyone is forced to pay the income tax. The government could then use the new revenue to cut the income or sales tax (it won’t, of course, but it should).
I don’t buy the paternalistic argument that casinos are bad because they cause gambling addiction. If you choose to gamble, that is your choice. If you choose to spend all your free time gambling and to lose all of your money gambling, that is also your choice. The presence of casinos does not force people to gamble. In fact, by banning casinos, the government is hurting people who otherwise would gamble, because it’s stopping them from doing something they want to do.
I don’t see any good reason to ban casinos in Massachusetts. They provide a fun activity for many people (I myself don’t gamble because I don’t want to lose money, but just because I don’t find something fun doesn’t mean other people don’t), and taxing them might allow other taxes to be decreased. Why not allow casinos?
