No... The ones in Vegas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana make campaign contributions to our elected officials to try and keep it illegal here.

I don't see them as the 'economic boom' they're always touted to be. They give low to mid-low paying jobs. They're a vice. Its a net negative on the communities surrounding them. The only people who really get rich are the owners. There is not much middle management, high paying jobs. Its not a part of economic trade that leads to flourishing.

To get them in texas, the state has to cede equal footing to native american tribes. There will be a bunch of outright fake to extremely flimsy stories pop up about how such and such place is indian land now because some local homeless person is actually a descendant of a tribe and actually takes their indian heritage seriously (after being paid).

Agree. All I'd want is legal online sports betting platforms. Don't need the casino part.

They're not an economic boom. Casinos suck money from their local economies because they a) don't pay out on jobs or local purchases more than they bring in, and what they bring in from locals pulls revenue from other other local businesses.

At the end of the day, casinos don't bring much of anything into a community. Quite the opposite. Vegas only makes money on gambling and sees a net positive because it was ahead of the pack and has become a destination for outsiders to come in and drop money. They're a tourist city centered around gambling. Unless a city can replicate that, which no one really can, they're just asking for trouble with casinos.

Indian reservations and other locations can make money as secondary having destinations more convenient than Nevada for towns and cities around them, but none of them hold a candle to the money flowing into Vegas. If you legalize gambling and casinos in more states and dilute the pool of people going to places like Lake Charles, ShreveBo, or one of the reservations, you'll see they practically all just suck up money from their surroundings.

There's huge population centers that are an easy drive to AC. Looks like around 7 million folks within 75 miles.

Not the case for SPI.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

I don't see them as the 'economic boom' they're always touted to be. They give low to mid-low paying jobs. They're a vice. Its a net negative on the communities surrounding them. The only people who really get rich are the owners. There is not much middle management, high paying jobs. Its not a part of economic trade that leads to flourishing.

To get them in texas, the state has to cede equal footing to native american tribes. There will be a bunch of outright fake to extremely flimsy stories pop up about how such and such place is indian land now because some local homeless person is actually a descendant of a tribe and actually takes their indian heritage seriously (after being paid).

---

You talking about Sugar Land?

fka ftc said:

---

one MEEN Ag said:

---

I don't see them as the 'economic boom' they're always touted to be. They give low to mid-low paying jobs. They're a vice. Its a net negative on the communities surrounding them. The only people who really get rich are the owners. There is not much middle management, high paying jobs. Its not a part of economic trade that leads to flourishing.

To get them in texas, the state has to cede equal footing to native american tribes. There will be a bunch of outright fake to extremely flimsy stories pop up about how such and such place is indian land now because some local homeless person is actually a descendant of a tribe and actually takes their indian heritage seriously (after being paid).

---

You talking about Sugar Land?

---

What you did there? I see it!