Death Of The Casinos

Discuss all things Las Vegas. Hotels, restaurants, good deals, airfares, cabbies, conventions, shows, etc.
notes1
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3143
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:18 am

Re: Death Of The Casinos

Post by notes1 »



chicago, another good post. i have been making the point that it did not seem likely that a young person, buying a couple of over priced drinks, would be close to as profitable, as some old person, slamming away at a slot machine for hours at a time.  as to whether young people will replace their parents at the casinos, i think that is a complicated subject. since the dawn of time, some folks have always gambled. when i was young, the money was just not available to risk at a casino. i would guess the same situation exists today for most young people.  casinos have grown in popularity for older americans because it used to be a reasonable value for the cost and because for some, it is a safe place to go, get out of the house and meet with friends.   

JT
Forum Regular
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 4:50 am

Post by JT »


ADDITION TO ABOVE COMMENT:

If you look at most casino advertising, it is almost always beautiful young women in low cut dresses, but when you actually get to the casino none of the gorgeous young advertising models are to be found. It is the casino industry's attempt to lure in the younger crowd.Go to the Borgata or Harrah's in Atlantic City on any given Friday or Saturday night, they're everywhere.  Very drunk and falling off their ridiculous high heels.  Highly entertaining.

case
VP Veteran
Posts: 720
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:37 am

Post by case »

Notes1, your last sentence sums my wife and I. We gamble and what we win or lose is up to us. However we get free rooms and food. Yes if we did not spend enough our offers would decrease. We find casinos safe and a place we can get out and enjoy ourselves.

I think the younger crowd tends to "hang out" where other younger people hang out. If you are on the strip you will see lots of young people at places like Cosmopolitan and Aria. You will not see as many as say Sams Town or Boulder Station.

Older retired people have more income and time and certain casinos cater to them with senior discounts and food specials. As the younger people age they will become the seniors of today. Example I used to like loud music and rock concerts. As I got older I like neither of those. I search out the quieter casinos with better odds.

One thing is certain and that is saturation of casinos will hurt them all and no one wins.

Chicagoan
Senior Member
Posts: 275
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:17 pm

Post by Chicagoan »

Online retailing has become the golden child of the younger generation, so possibly there will be more pressure in future years to legalize online gambling in the U.S. That might be a method of enticing the younger set into casinos, even if they are online casinos.

DaBurglar
Video Poker Master
Posts: 4535
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 12:11 pm

Post by DaBurglar »





Online retailing has become the golden child of the younger generation, so possibly there will be more pressure in future years to legalize online gambling in the U.S. That might be a method of enticing the younger set into casinos, even if they are online casinos.People in many places and in many positions and locations, people of all walks of life and professions, people of all political, religious and cultural persuasions, ALL over the WORLD (and especially here in the USA) are asking or ruminating on this question:WHERE ARE THE JOBS?  (or alternatively  "What has happened to the job market in <insert name of country or region>?")by far the biggest, and easiest, most OBVIOUS reply is simply, "Technological advances, primarily in computers and robotics, have ELIMINATED an ominously HUGE as-yet-still-undetermined-but-still-climbing number of jobs that previously employed people in both the Blue collar and low-end whitecollar spheres of employment"......The internet is obviously one of the largest culprits with the way it has simply (almost) eliminated entire Industries, like shopping malls/department stores and all the ancillary businesses that went with them.     Virtually EVERY industry and business profession has seen both the wondrous improvements and advances wrought by technology, as well as the ominous elimination of so many jobs and positions that formerly required a human being to spend loads of time completing (such as accounting & office work, which used to involve HUGE numbers of files and countless reams of paper, now simply fitted to a tiny storage device managed by a single person!)GAMBLING and the casino industry is no exception, and ONLINE gambling represents a HUGE efficiency and revenue UPSIDE while exhibiting a large potential human capital/workforce DOWNSIDE.....we all have seen just what happened to casino floor staff numbers (as well as the number of people needed behind closed doors in the Casino Cage and counting rooms) when they did away with coin-in & operated machines and implemented  the "T I T O" system.....So when Democrats promise "creating strong lasting improvements in the availability of jobs by matching localized incongruities between supply & demand" via government sponsored (i.e. "funded") employment projects (i.e. "Bureaucracy").......OR......when Republicans blather on and on with questions like "Where are the jobs Mr. Obama?"  or by repeating the mantra, "cutting taxes (almost exclusively on the wealthiest 1%)  will CREATE Jobs, as will kicking out all those dirty immigrants, legal or otherwise!".....All of you remember (and do not be beguiled)......None of the politicians wants to state the painfully OBVIOUS truth.....these "wondrous" technological advances, except in the fields of medicine (perhaps) and of Technology ITSELF,  are  PERMANENTLY (i.e. "forever") eliminating millions and millions (...and many MORE millions) of JOBS.



notes1
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3143
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:18 am

Post by notes1 »



i will concede the forum has a harvard grad who is an expert on 'blathering". as far as fiscal conservatives wanting people to keep more of the money they earn...guilty as charged. the nerve of some people that think obama's proposed one year spending budget of $4.1trillion, and includes hundreds of billions in additional debt, should be reduced. the nerve of some folks that think the national debt of $19t, left for others to pay, should be reduced. the nerve of some to point out that the national debt accumulated under the current potus, is greater than all the other presidents...combined. and, what is even more audacious of these people is to ask that the government see if there are places to cut spending, programs that are not working or needed, money wasted, abused or used to buy votes, before they ask for more. as far as who pays the federal income taxes in america, the top 10% pay 68% of all taxes, while they earn 45% of the income. the bottom 50%, pay 3% of federal income taxes. and, what does it take to be in the top 10%, approx $113k/year of household income. anybody earning that amount feel rich?   

Tedlark
Video Poker Master
Posts: 7039
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:29 am

Post by Tedlark »

I think he minored in blathering, declared in his 3rd year. Prior to that it was just an activity.

DaBurglar
Video Poker Master
Posts: 4535
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 12:11 pm

Post by DaBurglar »




i will concede the forum has a harvard grad who is an expert on 'blathering". as far as fiscal conservatives wanting people to keep more of the money they earn...guilty as charged. the nerve of some people that think obama's proposed one year spending budget of $4.1trillion, and includes hundreds of billions in additional debt, should be reduced. the nerve of some folks that think the national debt of $19t, left for others to pay, should be reduced. the nerve of some to point out that the national debt accumulated under the current potus, is greater than all the other presidents...combined. and, what is even more audacious of these people is to ask that the government see if there are places to cut spending, programs that are not working or needed, money wasted, abused or used to buy votes, before they ask for more. as far as who pays the federal income taxes in america, the top 10% pay 68% of all taxes, while they earn 45% of the income. the bottom 50%, pay 3% of federal income taxes. and, what does it take to be in the top 10%, approx $113k/year of household income. anybody earning that amount feel rich?   1)   Notes1, how is it that you completely and totally ignored the MAIN PRIMARY theme of my post (which you obviously read since you chose to respond to it), which was the theme of TECHNOLOGY and the impact it has had on JOBS?   Seriously, please respond on THIS topic as to whether or not you actually agree with THAT premise, I would be very interested in your opinion on that matter.2)   Most people in the USA have no clue as to how the federal government actually works, and how the executive and legislative branches actually interact and who actually has the power to do what.....the Federal Budget process, and specificlaly how money gets spent, is the most obvious example of this, and notes1, with his abject hatred of OBAMA. is no exception.Presidents annually PROPOSE budgets.....those budgets are then sent to the congress for approval and amendment.   If the president does not like what congress does to the budget, he vetoes some or all of the new budget.   Congress then decides whether or not to OVERRIDE the President's vetoes, and the resulting budget is then implemented for the year.    If you will kindly notice in this sequence, it is THE US CONGRESS, as required by the US CONSTITUTION, that bears ultimate responsibility for determining, allocating and spending the funds of the US treasury.    This is a very simple fact which almost all americans completely ignore or fail to comprehend.    THE RESULT IS THAT PRESIDENT after PRESIDENT gets "Blamed" (or credited in rare cases) when the budget results in more debt, more deficits, etc.     In truth, if it was not for congress GOING right along for the ride these past 3 decades in accumulating 19 Trillion in debt, the money never would have been spent.  So sorry to pop this latest "I hate the first african american president so much I am willing to believe fantasies" episode balloon.......And your totally distorted "picture" as to who actually pays what in taxes proves what exactly???    It does not refute one bit the single point I made inside my main theme about technology and jobs, that being the standard republican mantra of Cutting taxes on the rich creates jobs is total economic fantasy (what Bush the elder called Voo doo), otherwise known as supply side or trickle down.    Nope, total hogwash.I do admire your sympathy for all the distraught, unfortunate Americans earning 113K a year though.....Please try and respond, the tatters of your argument are in danger of violating the forum's code on litter.

notes1
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3143
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:18 am

Post by notes1 »



another history lesson and another civics lesson, i would expect nothing else.  in all your rants about bush and the iraq war, did you distinguish the fact that congress approved the war, on a bipartisan vote. or, did you elect to blame potus. another expected response, racism. that is getting old.  and yes, i have great sympathy for all those who pay the bills in this country, including those who earn a $113k/year. might be nice if all those who are the benficaries of government largess that they receive from the few who pay the bills, just show a little gratitude once in awhile. 

olds442jetaway
Video Poker Master
Posts: 6239
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 9:08 pm

Post by olds442jetaway »

Pay as you go is the way to go imo. At least the 52% or whatever the latest number is that pay nothing now will pay something. Now what will we do with all the lawyers and tax accountants? There will be one problem if we go this way. Unless there is an electronic way for the govt to get the tax directly at point of sale, there will have to be a large collection force to collect the withheld point of sale taxes. That part is not good. Many businesses will collect it and either blow it, hide it, or just plain keep it. Just like what happens with withholding/fica that some businesses collect and fail to turn over. Not only does the government not get the "collected" taxes from these businesses, the employees still get credit for the withholding. That part is only right since the failure to pay the withheld taxes by the business is through no fault of the employees. The exception would be officers of the business with huge salaries that were involved in the scheme to withhold and not turn over. This happens on a pretty wide scale. Much wider than most people know about. It could be a much worse problem with pay as you go 8% or whatever the number would be unless there is an electric mechanism in place to get the money instantly. There would still be a big problem with cash sales. The government of course would love to do away with cash entirely. We may see that in some of our lifetimes.
     Edited to add a quick example. If the average person earning 113k a year pays in 14k or so in income tax after deductions, A pay as you go system would have to have a rate higher than 8 percent. If the same person made 113k a year and saved 13k, 8 percent wouldn't cut it unless it was made up by the non paying 52 percent paying as they go. Personally, I would love to not have to spend hours toiling over all of the preparation, record keeping, etc. involved in doing a tax return. My breakfast instead of costing 5 bucks at the diner, would cost 5.60 or so. I think I could handle that. Sorry gang, can't work vp into this post except the part about a cashless society someday.

Post Reply