Casino Fined For Making Error--In The Players' Favor!

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Yes it is.

All businesses, sooner or later, pass on all costs to the customer.

In this case, when it comes time to set up next month's comp mailer, some bean counter's sphincter is going to tighten and reduce the comp to recoup the $10K...

100% incorrect. If the 'bean counter' felt that by reducing a comp, he would net the casino an extra $10k, then he will reuce the comp regardless of whether there was a fine or not.
Also, if there is enough competition between this casino and other casinos, the casino caannot just 'pass on all costs to the customer'. They may WANT to, but say, if they had a health hazard which closed the place for a week, they cannot just start paying even money on a blackjack to 'pass the cost on to the customer'.
That's not how the real world of business works.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Try this:
Although the casino lost a lot due to their error, punish them anyway, in the name of all the players who couldn't be there to benefit from the error.

Respectfully, this is a terrible answer. Let's say I am eating a steak at Mortons, I order it rare and it comes out well done. They apologize, bring me a new steak, and comp it off my bill. This represents a business operator error that results in a benefit (free food) for the patron. Should Morton's be fine in the name of all the other consumers of food whose orders Morton's got right?

Quote: rxwine

Because it's easier to fine a casino for going out of the boundries of the regulations than it is to figure out if one could set up various scams to skim casino profits with outsiders.

If you fine them for everything, you discourage theft, by making them run a tight ship.

Taxes are a form of theft and are illegitimate as such. But if you believe that this one form of theft is moral, as so many seem to, this would be a good answer.

My response could be that the gaming board claims to be looking out for the players best interest (or at least to give the players a fair shake) and this argument shows pretty clearly that they have their own interests at heart, which is not suprising.

Also, this is pretty clearly a one off mistake, not an attempt to launder money. There are far more discrete ways to launder money.

Furthermore, if the government people feel a business is engaging in criminal activities, they should have to prove that in court. There are reasons why the criminal courts exist, to protect the accused. Do you really want to live in a world where anything that looks remotely criminal can be punished without a trial? That seems to be the position you are advancing here.

Quote: SOOPOO

100% incorrect. If the 'bean counter' felt that by reducing a comp, he would net the casino an extra $10k, then he will reuce the comp regardless of whether there was a fine or not.
Also, if there is enough competition between this casino and other casinos, the casino caannot just 'pass on all costs to the customer'. They may WANT to, but say, if they had a health hazard which closed the place for a week, they cannot just start paying even money on a blackjack to 'pass the cost on to the customer'.
That's not how the real world of business works.

This is correct. Long term costs for an industry get passed on to the consumer. One off costs cannot be.

Look at it this way. Imagine a competitive airline industry. If I own a fleet of jets and lose one in a crash, I cannot just start charging more for flights than my competitors. I have to eat this cost. Imagine, instead, that all the companies insure their jets. If the cost of insuring a jet rises, say, 25%, this is a cost that will be passed on to consumers, since it is a long term cost that affects all carriers.

Quote: bigfoot66

Respectfully, this is a terrible answer.

I agree. It was the best wording I could come up with at the time. Others have given a better answer, but I stand behind my answer.

Quote: bigfoot66

Let's say I am eating a steak at Mortons, I order it rare and it comes out well done. They apologize, bring me a new steak, and comp it off my bill. This represents a business operator error that results in a benefit (free food) for the patron. Should Morton's be fine in the name of all the other consumers of food whose orders Morton's got right?

No. A restaurant operates under a completely different set of rules. Casinos operate under a very strict set of rules as well as detailed procedures. Also, the done-ness of a steak is something of a judgement call. An overdone steak cannot be backed up out of the discard rack for analysis.

Quote: bigfoot66

Furthermore, if the government people feel a business is engaging in criminal activities, they should have to prove that in court. There are reasons why the criminal courts exist, to protect the accused. Do you really want to live in a world where anything that looks remotely criminal can be punished
without a trial? That seems to be the position you are advancing here.

I wouldn't doubt the regulation originated out of the mob era. Losses don't get taxed, and the money goes back to the casino anyway if your customer is not really a customer. You could also bribe politician's "associates" with casino "mistakes" with no reprecussions. Oops, 2nd cousin of the Mayor had a great session today. It's harder to do that if you get fined for those "accidents"

I don't understand why my analogy does not hold. Some customers benefitted because of the casino error. Other players did not recieve the benefits of the casino error. Therefore, the gaming board should fine the casino $100,000 in the name of the patrons that did not benefit from the error.
I benefitted from from the Morton's error and other patrons did not, therefore Morton's should be fined.

While the doneness of a steak is partially an art, lets say there is no red in the steak and I ordered it rare. That is certainly wrong by all accounts.

Quote: bigfoot66

Taxes are a form of theft and are illegitimate as such.

No more army, navy, air force or marines?

Forced conscription without pay would be slavery. How do you feel about that?

eh, I know, off topic, but just too curious.

Quote: bigfoot66

I don't understand why my analogy does not hold.

Argument by analogy is risky and lends itself to criticism.

But you learn a few thigns trying to write, so:

Suppose a restaurant advertises burgers with 200 grs. meat, pre-cooked weight. One day the kitchen assistant makes them with 210 grs. instead. So the restaurant gets fined for that, because future customers will make do with 5% less meat than the lucky few who ate there that day.

Or suppose the same restaurants lists the price of burgers at $5 each. One day the system gets the flu and charges $4.50, and no restaurant employees catch the mistake. Lather rinse and repeat.

Quote: rxwine

No more army, navy, air force or marines?

Forced conscription without pay would be slavery. How do you feel about that?

eh, I know, off topic, but just too curious.

Forced conscription with or without pay is slavery. I can defend libertarianism and have done so here before in a thread titled "tax fraud". However, I believe that the burden of proof rests on those who think they are entitled to throw me in jail if I do not hand over a big chunk of my paycheck each week.

You brought up slavery. Taxation, especially the income tax, makes all of us slaves. See Nozick's Tale of the Slave:
http://www.duke.edu/web/philsociety/taleofslave.html

Quote: Nareed

Argument by analogy is risky and lends itself to criticism.

But you learn a few thigns trying to write, so:

Suppose a restaurant advertises burgers with 200 grs. meat, pre-cooked weight. One day the kitchen assistant makes them with 210 grs. instead. So the restaurant gets fined for that, because future customers will make do with 5% less meat than the lucky few who ate there that day.

Or suppose the same restaurants lists the price of burgers at $5 each. One day the system gets the flu and charges $4.50, and no restaurant employees catch the mistake. Lather rinse and repeat.

Thats a good analogy. Or how about a credit card that advertises a 10% apr but charges some customers only 7%. Or how about the folks in Jesus' parable of the farm workers....

Quote: bigfoot66

Forced conscription with or without pay is slavery.

Oh, well, I guess I was wondering how a military would exist without taxes. Volunteers, and bring your own stuff? Wouldn't we all be speaking Chinese soon?

The government is notoriously inefficent and often counterproductive. If we were able to remove this incredible burden we would be much safer and wealthier. The Chinese would be speaking English soon not because we would conquer them but rather because we would all be so much wealthier. Regardless, I am making a moral argument that stealing is wrong. If you are interested in how a stateless society might look I reccomend 'healing our world' by Mary Ruwart, or
'the market for liberty'. I believe both are available for free at http://book.freetalklive.com

hey, there are more chinese people learning english than there are americans speaking it.
as far as conquering them goes, not even macarthur and truman were that crazy
when they had the chance to attack in april 1951.
and as far as wealth goes, the chinese are well on their way.

i'm curious, are you libertarian or anarchist?

Quote: WongBo

hey, there are more chinese people learning english than there are americans speaking it.
as far as conquering them goes, not even macarthur and truman were that crazy
when they had the chance to attack in april 1951.
and as far as wealth goes, the chinese are well on their way.

i'm curious, are you libertarian or anarchist?

The Chinese continue to get much wealthier, it's true.

My political leanings are far enough from the mainstream that I try to avoid labels. If I tell you I am an 'anarchist' then you already have an idea what I believe even though you may have never actually shook hands with an anarchist. Or maybe you think I am a radical socialist PETA bombthrowing type.

I just believe that it is always wrong for one man to initiate force against another man or his property. The state makes the claim that they and they alone have a monopoly on the use of violence against people. Watch Mr. Obama make this claim word for word here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewQl-qAtNwQ

I oppose people who claim that they have the right to stick a gun in my ribs and demand my paycheck, or tell me what I can smoke, or tell me that if I choose to run a business that I must only hire people worth $8.00 an hour. Or that I must send my kid to their school for 12 years. These people are acting in a fundamentally evil way, and they aren't looking our for you. If they were they would not have that gun in your ribs in the first place.

I used to use the term anarchist, but I prefer terms like libertarian, Rothbardian, or even voluntaryist. Libertarian gets me the farthest.

Errors even in the players favor should be fined, because if not, there are too many ways a casino could manipulate the numbers. Take some shills, a room which simply appears private, generous slots with high max bets, and the worst casino in the world could be made to look like the best.

Quote: onenickelmiracle

Errors even in the players favor should be fined, because if not, there are too many ways a casino could manipulate the numbers. Take some shills, a room which simply appears private, generous slots with high max bets, and the worst casino in the world could be made to look like the best.

Not sure I understand the point you are trying to make here.