Harrahs AC

[Carcounter]

DB, like your ideas, but alas they will never happen in AC. Several more casinos will likely close,if casinos are approved in North Jersey, which appears all but inevitable, a lot more pain and suffering for AC. I remember the Revel promotion. I think Bob Dancer, and perhaps others alerted Revel to the potential disaster that the promotion would be and they quickly pulled it. I would have played it if it stayed as I am local and could have gotten down every week for the 20 weeks it would have taken to get your free play back. I think it was for up to 100k in losses, but you got the free play back in 20 weekly installments. I always suspected that they would have down a serious downgrade to their paytables once the free play kicked in. Basically gave you a free shot at a big jackpot if you could get down for 20 consecutive weeks to pick up your free play. They had 9/6 JOB and I was going to go all in, but they pulled the promotiom within 2 weeks if I remember.

[notes1]

it would be easy to blame all that ails AC on the casinos, but that would be too simple. the government, unions, competition and economic events were all contributing factors to it's downfall. I won't bother re-hashing it all, because DB will likely write a long essay about it.

nearly every casino built in our country is dictated by the government. that is the root of the problem. it is not a business decision, but rather a political move for elected folks to appear to be bringing jobs to an area, while it's real intention, is a government revenue source. people keep demanding more free stuff, the pols are happy to oblige, and the players are paying for it.

CC is right, more casinos in AC will likely close.

[DaBurglar]

it would be easy to blame all that ails AC on the casinos, but that would be too simple. the government, unions, competition and economic events were all contributing factors to it's downfall. I won't bother re-hashing it all, because DB will likely write a long essay about it.

nearly every casino built in our country is dictated by the government. that is the root of the problem. it is not a business decision, but rather a political move for elected folks to appear to be bringing jobs to an area, while it's real intention, is a government revenue source. people keep demanding more free stuff, the pols are happy to oblige, and the players are paying for it.

CC is right, more casinos in AC will likely close.

No need to rehash it because if someone wants to go back and re-read the past 3 years of posts by me, I covered it all quite extensively.Everything you said above though is generally true, except the usual peeve of yours that  the demand by people for "free stuff" is driving politicians to keep approving more casinos to be built.You need to do your own unbiased research into what is truly driving government spending and costs (at all levels of government, local, state & federal).....it is not the free stuff you typically deride (which I assume is things like food and welfare checks for people having illegitimate kids.)     That stuff is a drop in the bucket (Plus it gets spent BACK into the economy.)The real KILLER is things like Healthcare costs for retired pensioners (at the local and state levels), pensions for other professions and people that were calculated 40 years ago based on things BACK then;   Infrastructure costs (woefully lacking and getting worse.)   At the federal level, we all know it is Healthcare via our aging, sick, obese population and what it is doing to MEDICARE, AND our bloated and absurdly wasteful military budget.For the TRILLIONS.....T R I L L I O N S .... that has been sunk in Iraq and Afghanistan the last decade, ALL of our most pressing domestic problems (Infrastructure, healthcare, education) coul dhave been covered and solved MANY times over.    And yet you gripe over "free stuff"......I do not get it.    But I will agree with you that NO ONE SHOULD really get anything they truly do not need or deserve, but not at the expense of denying those who really do need them.   Its basically like I am willing to see 10 guilty felons walk to prevent 1 not guilty person going to jail....hopefully such extremes are not necessary, but in principle, that's where I stand.

[notes1]

I consider government workers who have lifetime guaranteed employment, generous benefits and oversize retirement packages as getting free stuff.

you fight those who hate you and are trying to destroy you on their turf or at home, you choose.

trillions have been spent on eliminating poverty, we have the same percentage of folks on poverty as before the programs began. money well spent.

[Minn. Fatz]

Not so. In 2012 16 percent of Americans were considered "poor." Adjusted for inflation, changes in definition, etc., the 1967 figure was 26 percent. And in a global context, "poor" means earning less than US$2 per day.

[notes1]

Not so. In 2012 16 percent of Americans were considered "poor." Adjusted for inflation, changes in definition, etc., the 1967 figure was 26 percent. And in a global context, "poor" means earning less than US$2 per day.

yes so!

I will quote my source; US CENSUS BUREAU, CURRENT POPULATION SURVEY, 1960-2015 ANNUAL SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SUPPLEMENTS, percentage of americans living in poverty;

-1965- 15%
-2014- 14.8%


www2.census.gov

[DaBurglar]

I consider government workers who have lifetime guaranteed employment, generous benefits and oversize retirement packages as getting free stuff.

you fight those who hate you and are trying to destroy you on their turf or at home, you choose.

trillions have been spent on eliminating poverty, we have the same percentage of folks on poverty as before the programs began. money well spent.I have to ask......what exactly are you talking about here?    what programs, expensitures, etc?     Unless you are including Medicare, I do not see how this is either possible or relevant to what I cited (the TRILLIONS literally wasted and vansished in Iraq Afgahnistan etc the last decade)One HUGE HUGE difference you fail (and those who argue conservative views fail) to recognize is this simple but vital fact:   If the federaql (or state) government gives money out to poor people (as an example) to buy food and other things, that money gets put directly back into the economy so it is in effect simply transferred within the country (the US) and thus the wealth remains ours........BUT, when Trillions are literally "vanished" in Iraq and afghanistan as has been the reality, that wealth is GONE forever.   WASTED.  like it never existed.    Same with a lot (but not ALL) defense spending....you are building missles and bombs and stuff you hope you never ever use.          This is reality.......and I am not advocating giving away all kinds of "free" stuff to people who do not need it, but there are good forms of government spending, neutral forms of it, and VERY BAD forms of it.    And the republicans specialize in the latter.....

[Carcounter]

Most of us who have jobs and are even moderately successful do not mind paying our fair share of taxes, insurance premiums etc. to help people who are less fortunate. I count myself as one of these lucky folks. But I think we have a right to have a say in how that money is spent. It was once ours right?

[notes1]

trillions may have been spent fighting the wars, but it did not all go 'missing'. using your logic, which I disagree with, the money spent on weapons employed US citizens. so too, the money spent on boots, clothing, food, and everything else to sustain the troops.

you are completely wrong if you think that taking a dollar from a taxpayer and giving it to someone else has the same impact on the economy as a dollar earned and spent within the private sector.

what programs you ask, food stamps, heating assistance, housing assistance, free cell phones, free school meals, I could go on. the point was that these programs were created and justified to reduce the percentage of americans in poverty. but, here we are 50 years later, and the same percentage of people are still living in poverty.

now of course, your response is that I and others do not want to feed hungry kids. BS!!!!

if there is money being wasted in the defense budget, I am all for cutting it and the same should go for social expenditures. if, for 50 years, we have tried to correct a problem, spent a lot of money doing so and it is not effective, its time to rethink it.

the more stuff you give people, the more they get used to it, the more they want and you have created an entire class of dependent folks. this feeds upon itself and soon, others reason, why should I work, pay taxes, when I can get my basic needs taken care for free.

think of a cart holding all those who need help, and the folks pulling the cart are the taxpayers. when enough stop pulling and decide to climb into the cart, you have a problem.

[Tedlark]

So, quoting from a prior post:"when the government gives money out to poor people (as an example) to buy food and other things, that money gets put directly back into the economy so it is in effect simply transferred within the country (the US) and thus the wealth remains ours."

GEEZ, what was the person who wrote this smoking at the time they wrote it?

Apparently the author of the statement doesn't think about WHERE the government got the money from? DID the government EARN it?

Also the author of the statement didn't think about a little thing called "welfare fraud"? There is a black market for the assistance that the government doles out. Right now its running at about a 50 cents on the dollar exchange rate.

The assistance money the government doles out DOES NOT go directly back into the economy, it goes DIRECTLY to the people who own the stores and quicky-marts where the assistance money is spent. These shop owners stash the money into a safe at home.