Lets Gamble on Beloit

The Wisconsin State Journal has long been a right wing free-trade loving anti-protectionist newspaper. They tout the wonders of every free trade deal that comes along and are against every kind of protectionist policy that is desperately needed to help bring back manufacturing to the US. In spite of all of this rhetoric, one of their priorities, as they see it, is to bring jobs back to the state. All well and good even if their priorities are working directly against each other. Then today they come out with an editorial saying NO to building a casino in Beloit. While Beloit has the highest unemployment rate in the state, I guess these jobs are not good enough for the WSJ.

The Ho-Chunk Nation, headquartered in Black River Falls, told the Beloit Daily News this week that the tribe is working to develop a casino in Beloit. The Ho-Chunk spent $4 million on 26 acres of land last year that had been the proposed site of a previous pitch for a casino by the St. Croix and Bad River Chippewa tribes, the newspaper reported.

The lure of casino jobs and a new revenue stream for local and state governments may sound enticing. But this is a bad bet for Rock County and Wisconsin.

The new casino would merely compete for the same dollars already being spent on gambling. And the state’s cut of the casino’s profit would be offset by smaller takes elsewhere.

Enough is enough.

Let’s focus on expanding the good-paying jobs of the future instead of falling back on this same old wager that won’t pay off.

SO now the Wisconsin State Journal (ie Scott Milfred) is against the free market and competition. I am not suite sure what he is for.


Related Articles

7 thoughts on “Lets Gamble on Beloit

  1. Considering the Oneida Tribe in Green Bay actually hires a lot of workers regardless of race? I think people should be more open minded to it. While it is preferred to have Native Americans work there, we also do not turn down applications for people of other races.

    I find this a silly topic, considering the tribes don’t discriminate individuals in this state compared to say other states where it is “You have to be Native PERIOD to work for the tribe.”

  2. Only in your twisted mind is a government sanctioned monopoly “free market.” I mean, you do realize that gambling is otherwise illegal in this state – so the few exceptions the state provides (for people of only one particular race) is pretty much the opposite of free market, by definition.

    Sometimes, you really make me laugh.

    1. I don’t think gambling should be illegal, it’s people’s choices to spend the money how they want to at casinos. Similar to how drug addicts should be made as criminals and instead people with medical disorders along the lines of alcoholism. Although I do think people who sell them should pay consequences for doing so.

      Then again I’m one of the firm believers who believe the War on Drugs are a big failure in similar the way the Prohibition was a failure. (Something that I agree with Ron Paul on.)

  3. Thats the point i was trying to make. Why are there restrictions anyway? Mostly because the “religious right” in association with the republican party are once again nanny staters and telling us what is good and bad for us. If they are truly free market then they would allow you and I to open a casino if we had the money.

    1. Nice job moving the goal posts. Your post was about being against a casino in Beloit, and that taking that position means they are against the free market. Called on how idiotic that as, you respond with your typical over generalization and attacks on Republicans/conservatives.

      What does this have to do with your argument that the Wisconsin State Journal’s position against a new casino in Beloit mean’s it’s anti-free market. Nothing of course.

    2. As Locke pointed out, accusing someone who is for/against a Native American casino of being pro/anti free market is kinda silly. It is a government sanctioned, race-based monopoly. Closest thing to free market is Nevada.

  4. actually i was going off of this line:

    The new casino would merely compete for the same dollars already being spent on gambling. And the state’s cut of the casino’s profit would be offset by smaller takes elsewhere.

    which you could use for any new business anywhere but they never have. Its not moving the goalposts Locke because I think anyone who wants to open a casino anywhere should be able to. Its the free market, let all states try and be nevada. It is also not an overgeneralization because it is the right wing religious zealots who have perpetually fought any expansion of gambling.

Comments are closed.