Casino Ethics: Gambling

To follow up on kp's threads, is Gambling itself ethical? I'm talking about the act of YOU going to a B&M casino to gamble.

Yes:
- it's my money to do with what I please
- it's entertainment
- I'm supporting employees in my community
- casinos are ethical and therefore my play is ethical.
- I have stock in the gambling corporations and I'm just supporting them.
- it's my way of making a living.

No:
- it leads to problem gambling and more crime for a small segment of the population
- crime around the casino increases
- property values around the casino decreases
- it's against God's wishes and values (?)
- advantage play is unethical

I want to qualify my NO vote to include only those casinos that do not offer a single positive EV game.

I take objection to what's implied by choice #4.

Dan's ethical stance may be unpopular, but it's legitimate.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

I take objection to what's implied by choice #4.

Dan's ethical stance may be unpopular, but it's legitimate.

How do U know it's unpopular before seeing the voting result? Be patient, give it a couple of days. May be "Every one loves Dan".

Quote: UCivan

How do U know it's unpopular before seeing the voting result? Be patient, give it a couple of days. May be "Every one loves Dan".

Dan does not even vote here.

I think casinos are like banks. Taking money from the losers, giving money to the winners and keeping some for themselves. Banks take money from depositors and lend to debtors, making money on the rate differences. This is why casinos have cashers. Slots are like Bank's ATM machines, except that they don't pay 1 to 1. The reason: if slots pay the predictable 1 to 1, no one will play.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

I take objection to what's implied by choice #4.

Dan's ethical stance may be unpopular, but it's legitimate.

You should be equally unimpressed by choice #3.

I put PaiGowDan's name there because we all know his stance on casino ethics and that if you share his beliefs, you should pick it. I was also putting some lightness to the question. Despite our differences, I actually really like PaiGowDan. Alot. Not that he cares.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Dan's ethical stance may be unpopular, but it's legitimate.

I agree for the most part. I think Dan has good ethics. I think he goes a bit overboard where is feels everything unethical is also cheating and illegal. But he does have a good ethical sense of what is right or wrong as far as player actions go, and beyond counting (which I do not do), I have yet to find one that I disagree with. I only disagree with the vehemency of his reaction.

Where I do think Dan's ethical stance is skewed is where it comes to the casinos. He thinks they can do no wrong beyond an individual misguided employee. Here I disagree. I believe any business has the capacity to act unethically. Every commercial business has profit as a driving force, which can lead to greed, and then to unethical behavior to achieve more and more profit. Just look at the state of Wall Street today for numerous examples.

This is why I started the polls. I wanted to look at the casinos as close as Dan looks at the players in order to see both sides. I took many of the popular beliefs to put them under the microscope (his idea actually). So far, personally, I've only voted in two of the polls, one for and one against. I'm still undecided on the rest but leaning towards "ethical" on a couple of them.

Where I'm having difficulties, is deciding if behavior is unethical just because you had ulterior motives, but the behavior itself is beguine. Examples range from no clocks in a casino to a dark side player yelling "come on seven" at the craps table. Neither affects the outcome, but the motivation behind the action was impure. Did Jimmy Carter sin by having lust in his heart?

KP,
thanks, I really do appreciate your input. I am more steadfast and plain old fashion stubbord than vehement, but view me as you wish, just don't call me late to work!
I review and consider casino actions, having seen it for years in the front-line casino pit, and I think they're fair in their game offerings, House edge, and promotions in loyalty programs and perks without it being a major conspiracy issue on their ethics.

Jimmy Carter didn't sin by having lust in his heart, neither did Bill Clinton, although Clinton's adultery was a sin, and a BJ from Monica Lewinsky is sex and adultery (not a Blackjack here).

Quote: Paigowdan

I review and consider casino actions, having seen it for years in the front-line casino pit, and I think they're fair in their game offerings, House edge, and promotions in loyalty programs and perks without it being a major conspiracy issue on their ethics.

What have you seen over the years where you thought a management action or policy was unethical?

You know, a lot of it may be "acclimation and adaptation" to gambling house practices and POV as a casino worker and gambler.

Quote: Paigowdan

Jimmy Carter didn't sin by having lust in his heart, neither did Bill Clinton, although Clinton's adultery was a sin, and a BJ from Monica Lewinsky is sex and adultery (not a Blackjack here).

Jimmy Carter admitted sin--he lusted in his heart for another. That would be a sin according to his religious beliefs. "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife" was the one he violated.

Bill Clinton sinned also.

I have sinned way too much...so I am in no way judging either one!

Quote: kp

What have you seen over the years where you thought a management action or policy was unethical?

How about constantly moving the $5 black jack pit from one quite obscure area to another, so that people cannot find it?
They advertise "24/7 $5 black jack", but do not mention that the rules/HE are worse than on all other tables, and keep moving the pit all over the casino to make it as hard to find as possible. And if you ask an employee where it is, they usually send you in a wrong direction (probably, unintentionally ... yeah, right!). I think, this is is quite unethical.