Casino How Casinos Are Evil

This guy is spot on with every thing he says. One of the best gambling related channels on the tube.

 

This thread was started by somebody I have on ignore and I cannot see his content but I can see the video. The guy in this video is full of crap on almost every point. Hell yes casinos prey on local communities, that's why they're there. Local casinos have local people as their customers, duh. Casinos do not create problem gamblers, that's ridiculous. That's like saying local bars create alcoholics. These people have those problems already. Of course casinos cater to the vulnerable, so does the state lottery and loan sharks. Goes with the territory. Of course casinos target senior citizens, they're the ones with all the money and time on their hands. He's full of crap when he says they have promotions around the 3rd of the month because that's when seniors get their Social Security benefits. He doesn't know what he's talking about. Social Security is paid out according to when your birthday is, if it's in the first week of the month you get your benefit the first Wednesday of every month. If your birthday is the third or fourth week you'll get your benefit the 3rd or 4th Wednesday of every month. So this guy is totally full of shit. Casinos are not evil, they don't claim to be anything they aren't. Most people know exactly what they're getting into when they go into a casino. And they go anyway because maybe they'll get lucky and it's kind of exciting for them. Luckily I won't be able to see the response from the person who started the thread. LOL


.

 

Yeah, all that and, surely nobody counts cards these days? I mean 6 shoe shuffled decks discarded half way through for a fresh shoe?? I'd rather RR a roulette wheel any day.

 

One only has to consider the cuisine of stale food somebody has been living off to determine if casinos create problem gamblers and the damage that they inflict on certain individuals.

More absolute horseshit, thankful he has stopped selling jarg watches on eBay

 

Blackstone bid for crown casinoverse.

Will this open the duopoly in skipptophia?
Will this bring some of the American flavour casinoverse style comps?
Or will it just be another money /arms laundering Southern Hemisphere arm of blackstone? Skipptophia is only 160km from Papua New Guinean the local land bridge to Indonesia 190 million population.
Cheers

 

Oh I think this will be a really fun conversation. I have lots of stuff to add. I agree with you on most points, however not completely on everything. I surmise it should be one of our better chit chats. I haven't made coffee yet so give me a few min.

Heads up, I'm per-expecting to be wrong about several things since I know my pro-gambling experience is so different.

I'll just tell you my thoughts and experiences, but only frame them as opinion, not fact and correct me as much as possible.

To get the ball rolling, I think he's using a very tried and true sales technique of creating a villain and using "appeal to anger (indignation)" to frame himself as a savior. He's not ALL wrong in my opinion, just exaggerating. More after coffee.

P.S. ID replacement today.

 

First let's discuss the points you made on which I totally agree:

1. Preying on local communities is a clear use of inflammatory language. Obviously, any business tries to profit from their customers. Does a grocery store prey on its customers? No it provides a service they want or need and tries to make a profit providing it. Kinda the way our society works...not evil. Just SOP business practice.

2. So far as casinos creating problem gamblers. There is some evidence that modern gaming machines take advantage of operant conditioning and inconsistent positive reinforcement with the goal of making gaming devices "more engaging". Notice, I did not say, "more addictive". The true villains in this process are market annalists, guilty of the unforgivable crime of asking people, "So which game did you like better?" It's a bit like the dynamic in the produce industry of asking focus groups which tomato theY preferred. That paradigm, when allowed to run for twenty years resulted in nice firm pretty bright red almost flavorless bags of tasteless water.

Are we really going to call someone evil, that asks you what you want and gives it to you???

The strongest word I could use there is "misguided". What people want and what they need are not always correlated...(and for the record, people don't want to hear that...BUT THEY NEEDED TO.)

3. His comments about how casinos promote problem gambling are at best supposition. In areas where there is no legal gambling people engage in risky ventures just as much if not more, and there are no metrics to judge it. In the book, "Best Possible Odds" I read a story about a fellow with a serious gambling problem for whom that took the form of buying and selling antiques he got at garage sales. He'd "bet" his last dollar on something he found with no guarantee it was what he thought it was or if he'd be able to sell it. Another argument in the book was that some people "gamble" on mates. Bottom line: Risky behavior takes many forms, and in areas where there is no legalized gambling they find an outlet for their preexisting condition. That being said, "if one is predisposed to risky behavior, an outlet for that behavior meticulously crafted by well meaning people trying to make the game more exciting by the reprehensible act of asking people what they like--could indeed exacerbate (rather than help) the issue. This is plausible.

4. He said that 40-60% of casino income comes from disordered gamblers. This is a gross over-statement. (Sort of) It depends on where you are talking about. The last hard figures I read, put it at about 14% in tourist rich cities like LV. In some areas around the great lakes the numbers climb as high as 84%. To say it's 40% overall is ridiculous. Most people that gamble do not have gambling problems. In America the rough percentage is 4-8%.

5. The comments he made about casinos designing their establishments around keeping people there and disoriented about time are 100% true. I even know a couple of Vegas architects and saw the parameters they were provided to work with. Don't let them leave, would be a good summary.

In closing, I would say he exaggerated almost everything because he was trying to sell his product. His statements did have a kernel of truth even if he popped those kernels and burned the popped corn.

THIS IS JUST MY OPINION...

Book Recommendation, "Addiction By Design". I had the author on my show...

 

P.S. I just noticed the word, "almost" in your post. I'm going to love finding out if we agree on the parts he was right about.

 

Additional comment: I knew a very nice man that was a slot host. His attitude, and I can't fight his logic, was that if people were determined to lose all their money, why not put some of it in his own pocket (which didn't have a hole in it) and support his family. His stance was that these people were going to gamble away whatever they had regardless of whatever he did. He focused on trying to make that process as fun as possible and at least give them some value for their time. He retired for a year and all his customers went bust at twice the rate they did when he was their host.

I do not see that as evil. Is a bartender evil for giving someone a better drink and a more friendly experience when if they refused service the same person was simply going to walk out and buy worse alcohol for more money and drink alone in a alley?

It's a gray area to be sure...but I would argue it's not black & white. Just gray, leaning towards the light...

 

As a former bar owner/bartender they are definitely enablers for people with addictions. So are casinos. Does that make them evil, is Nabisco evil for having great Oreo TV commercials that enable people with diabetes to want their product? We are surrounded by people with addictions and surrounded by businesses that enable those addictions. Like you said it's all a gray area.

 

I learned long ago that you can't stop people from jumping off cliffs. The lesson I never learned, is that surprisingly, the market for selling them parachutes is not viable. Everything is gray at dusk or dawn--especially in the twilight zone...

 

I completely agree with you, this has to be one of the best gambling channels

 

he seems to know about what he´s talking about but there are some things he says that really don´t make sense

 

Addiction by Design by Natasha Dow Schull is a spectacular summary of relatively recent studies in gambling and addiction. She covers it all and summarizes both the research and the history. Dow Schull is an anthropologist (my late wife had a Ph.D. in anthropology), and she comes at things from a perspective not tied at the hip to U.S. uber-capitalism.

I'm surprised, if you've read the book and interviewed Dow Schull, that you don't use the word "addiction" more when discussing casinos. It's more than appropriate. The fact that it's appropriate to discussing consumerism in general doesn't make it less applicable to casino gambling.

 

Yes I have read the book, though it's been a long time ago, and I think I only skimmed it for interview questions as my memory of the detail is poor. I am 80% sure I had her on my radio show. Though it is possible I was only talking to her to get her on the show and then Bob derailed it. He didn't like to talk about the negatives of gambling.

I do not use "addiction" or "addicted" at the behest of Dr. William G. McCown, who was on my show 4 times. He kept correcting me that as of DSM-V it's called "disordered gambling". I learned psychology during the DSM-IV's reign, so I still tend to refer to people with gambling issues as "pathological gamblers."

You are of course right. It is an addiction for some, and a rose by any other name would still have thorns.

 

It's "addiction" in the DSM IV supplement and later in the DSM- V because it can now be listed for treatment that can be funded. It's all about money.

I laugh because those that try to treat "problem gambling" never try to teach a poor pathetic client how to win. It's way better for their own income if the client is never cured. They don't teach how to win at 12 steps either. They just give the poor sucker a lifetime of perpetual ridicule.

Do I believe there is a chemistry component involved in all this? Yes. Are the conclusions on how to treat these changes working? Not by anyone that I have read so far. It's just recognized that logic is abandoned over inoculation to self destruction. They see the danger and they think that this is all you get. It does not stop there. A person that is trained and skilled to win does not allow these chemicals to derail their objectives. There isn't a single therapist or psychologist on the planet treating the root cause. They have no clue how to teach a person to win. So, they deal symptomatically with subjective solutions. So If you do end up getting treated by these Witch Doctors after losing your wife, children, house, car, etc... then you are sure that the fees for treatment will finish you off. If you go the 12 step way then you can go to weekly meetings and make fun of your stupid self for decades to come. Yep, gambling is a hoot.

 

You bring up some very good points Giz. When I say "good", I mean really good and things I have offhandedly mused over in the past.

The most comprehensive compendium of gambling addiction research and exposition on treatment paradigms that I am aware of is, "Best Possible Odds" by Dr. William G. McCown. I remember becoming physically ill when reading the book, as all I could think of is, "why aren't these idiots just teaching them probability math and how to win instead of lose."

I remember thinking, (2004) what's more difficult, breaking someone of a crippling lifelong addiction--OR--just reminding them of what they learned in their Junior Year math class.

I have attempted to put this concept to actual use, helping a close friend that had a gambling addiction.

What I learned from that disastrous attempt at reasoning someone out of something they were not reasoned into, is that while it is possible to lead an addicted gambler to water, you cannot make them drink.

THEY DON'T WANT TO WIN. Teaching them how to win often exacerbates their issues, as now they feel even more guilty for losing, when they know winning is possible and how to do it.

In some cases this involves self destructive behavior. In other cases, it's self punishment, which creates an almost unbreakable cycle...I gamble to punish myself for being a gambler. Some people simply like the dysphoric effect, which takes their minds off other issues. In the case of my friend, the primary issue turned out to be related to something called, "the opponent process model." He was a Vietnam combat vet and had become addicted to his parasympathetic nervous system's response to extreme stress and potential ruin.

The opponent process model is hard to understand. Essentially, your body and nervous-system reacts quickly to stress. Much more slowly, the process of homeostasis triggered by your parasympathetic nervous attempts to bring balance back to the force. Oddly your bodies re-reaction to your bodies initial reaction can be highly addictive, especially when the response developed to overcome nearly unbearable situations.

P.S. I could have just said, "It's very complicated."

 

What it takes to win is difficult to learn. There is no way to teach experience. The person must come across that in a process. I like the idea of finding out what an idiot gambler is trying to accomplish. They believe that that last few bets before their bankroll is gone will turn everything around. It's ignorance. There is so much to unlearn before they can actually learn. It comes down to motivation and work. If they don't want to do that then heck with them. Cast them to the depression of treatment by whichever predator wishes to feast on them.

 

How fatalistic of you. I'd really like to disagree, but I'm having issues forming a cogent contradictory argument.

I think that some people can be helped with sufficient effort. As a pro gambler that takes into consideration, cost, risk, and potential gain; the conclusion that attempts in this regard are a negative expectancy seems highly plausible.

It took me three years of hands on one on one discussion almost every day after we worked together to discern Gary's issues and another full year to resolve them. He finally kicked his bad gambling habits only to die four months later.

I can't imagine that any psychologist would have done better, or any expenditure of money would have shortened the process. It was only our friendship that justified the time expenditure. You could not have paid me.

 

I learned to ski with consequences. It's a metaphor for if you fall, you die. I only went to places where none of us would fall or die. But if any of us did fall, then pow, that's all she wrote. Believe it or not it was never about the thrill. It's all about execution of the possible. It was a validation among similar minded people that we were the kings of the universe that day.

When I go into a casino to take their money I do this with the full knowledge that randomness will fall over and give me a wonderful win streak. As long as the casino keeps spinning that wheel and taking my bets I get to wait for the moment and exploit what is happening. I can teach that to the willing. But I can't shove it down anyone's' throat. Why should I make a parade for people that want to remain self destructive? Let's all wear a ribbon on our lapels for the down trodden degenerate gamblers that lose their money to live on. I have a better idea. If I can watch a friend screw up and die because they were not good enough then why should I lose any sleep over people that won't help themselves? It's all about risk and properly identifying the consequences of that risk. If you want to help them then learn how to take advantage of known opportunities. Once you know how then you are qualified to help those that are blind.