Here's why we don't have it ...

Who does the racino compete against? Yep - that's right - the Indians and their casinos. Who are some of the largest backers for the Dems? Yep - that's right - Indians and their casinos.

This thing is such a no brainer it's laughable ... it should have been put in place when Dick Day first announced it. I have yet to hear/read a good argument against it.

 

As long as it is strongly worded enough to tie it down to current tracks only I am for it.

I just don't want to see everybody and there brother with nickel slots.

I spent 8 yrs in MT where anybody with a liquor license can have slots and that's some of the most depressing sh*t you'll ever see.

 

As long as it is strongly worded enough to tie it down to current tracks only I am for it.

I just don't want to see everybody and there brother with nickel slots.

I spent 8 yrs in MT where anybody with a liquor license can have slots and that's some of the most depressing sh*t you'll ever see.

I am with you dont want a bunch of these either BUT these 2 race tracks wouldn't hurt nuttin and we get tax money out of it , better than what we get now

 

Bring it on!People are always going to gamble so the state might as well benefit from it.The Indian casinos will definitely fight it ,because they will lose big time cash.

 

IMHO often times people that gamble are those that can least afford to.

I'd rather see decriminalization and taxation of dope but seeing as how we still cant buy booze on Sunday or in the grocery store I don't really see that happening anytime soon

 

With the multitude of Native American Casinos in this state, anyone that wants to gamble, can. Some of these Tribes are getting rich off the casinos, and there is nothing wrong with that. Many of them are putting those profits into community, schools, and such. Others are using it to acquire more land, or putting it into Tribemembers pockets. Theres nothing wrong with any of this.

What is wrong is that the state receives no tax revenue from this. I believe that some competition from sources that pay property taxes, income taxes, etc. would be good for the state. People that want to gamble already have plenty of places to go, so adding more that contribute to state funds will not create a significantly worse gambling problem in the state.

 

Obviously the main issue is Canterbury (Liquor) vs Mystic (no Liquor) being so close to each other and so close to the gigantic twin cities market.

I could care less...my biggest problem is that I see more gambling revenue as robbing peter to pay paul.

 

I know alot of people that gamble and would much rather go to a casino that would help out the state.Maybe if the Indian casinos had some compatition they would payout better.

 

Maybe if the Indian casinos had some compatition they would payout better.

haha

When I walk into a casino, there's only one thing I know for sure- the house always wins.