Casinos, Indians and Beer

Wednesday was my virgin experience at the “The Antient and Honourable John Adams Society, Minnesota's Conservative Debating Society,” which is sort of a Society for Creative Anachronism for those whose day jobs and families don’t leave time for Dungeons and Dragons. It was, nonetheless good for me. I hope they still respected me Thursday morning.

And indeed, Thursday morning at the John Adams Blog, a debate was continued over the issue of expanding casino gambling. JAS member Chris wrote --

Last night, after the debate caucus, a group of us retired to Brit’s Pub as is traditional (actually we went to Sweeney’s. Lying about where we go is also traditional). There I argued with Craig Westover and TFB from Jo's Attic about Indian casinos and whether the state should be involved with gambling. As I am wont to do over beers, I wasn’t as clear (or polite!) as I should have been. So here, upon the sobriety of day, is why I think we should license non-Indian casinos.

Chris stated his case, I responded, he’s responded, and I just sent off my rebuttal. Check it out.

BTW -- Chris is a research economist, and consequently his analysis of casino gambling is, as economic analysis is wont to do, based on many situational assumptions. . . .

An physicist, engineer and economist were alone on a deserted island with on a book of matches and a can of beans. They puzzled over how to open the can of beans.

The physicist suggested building a fire, heating the can of beans until the can expanded to the point where the seams were about to break, then carefully breaking open the can.

The engineer agreed and set about calculating projected stress points of the can based on its size and the density of the beans.

The economist started waving his hands wildly in the air. “Wait, wait, I have the solution.” As the physicist and engineer looked at him expectantly, he began: “Assume we have a can opener . . . .”

For a more informative perspective on economics check out Economics in One Lesson.