Reason #29 to VOTE NO on ISSUE 3
CLICK THIS TEXT TO VISIT THIS BLOG'S CURRENT SITE
Because of the very definition of "to gamble."
From Merriam-Webster Online:
Main Entry: 1gam·ble
Pronunciation: 'gam-b&l
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): gam·bled; gam·bling /-b(&-)li[ng]/
Etymology: probably back-formation from gambler, probably alteration of obsolete gamner, from obsolete gamen to play
intransitive verb
1 a : to play a game for money or property b : to bet on an uncertain outcome
2 : to stake something on a contingency : take a chance
transitive verb
1 : to risk by gambling : WAGER
2 : VENTURE, HAZARD
Let's start with "to play": "to play" means, according to the same source,
Main Entry: 1play
Pronunciation: 'plA
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English plega; akin to Old English plegan to play, Middle Dutch pleyen
1 a : SWORDPLAY b archaic : GAME, SPORT c : the conduct, course, or action of a game d : a particular act or maneuver in a game: as (1) : the action during an attempt to advance the ball in football (2) : the action in which a player is put out in baseball e : the action in which cards are played after bidding in a card game f : the moving of a piece in a board game (as chess) g : one's turn in a gameplay>
Hmm, game? "Game" means, also from M-W Online,
Main Entry: 1game
Pronunciation: 'gAm
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English gamen; akin to Old High German gaman amusement
1 a (1) : activity engaged in for diversion or amusement : PLAY (2) : the equipment for a game b : often derisive or mocking jesting : FUN, SPORTgame of a nervous player>
2 a : a procedure or strategy for gaining an end : TACTIC b : an illegal or shady scheme or maneuver : RACKET
3 a (1) : a physical or mental competition conducted according to rules with the participants in direct opposition to each other (2) : a division of a larger contest (3) : the number of points necessary to win (4) : points scored in certain card games (as in all fours) by a player whose cards count up the highest (5) : the manner of playing in a contest (6) : the set of rules governing a game (7) : a particular aspect or phase of play in a game or sport game> b plural : organized athletics c (1) : a field of gainful activity : LINEgame> (2) : any activity undertaken or regarded as a contest involving rivalry, strategy, or struggle game> game of politics>; also : the course or period of such an activity game> (3) : area of expertise : SPECIALTY 3 game>
4 a (1) : animals under pursuit or taken in hunting; especially : wild animals hunted for sport or food (2) : the flesh of game animals b archaic : PLUCK c : a target or object especially of ridicule or attack -- often used in the phrase fair game
synonym see FUN
Reads to me as though anyway you define "to gamble," it's not looking good. If anything, reading these definitions makes me realize just how well these words describe the addictions and passions of the business people involved in everything related to gambling.
In fact, let's focus on that for a minute: what, exactly, is the gamble being taken by the business people who will profit from Issue 3?
Well, they're playing a game with Ohioans. And with the numbers (duh - that's what gambling is about in the first place). And with the future of Ohio's kids and workforce and public money coiffers that will need to go to services for whatever percentage of Ohioans will become addicts or will be affected by the addicts.
The game they're playing with Ohioans? A bet that Issue 3 is an irresistible package - or at least enough of a carrot that the stick of future debt won't discourage enough Ohioans from voting for the proposal.
Anyone know if these business folks can write off the costs incurred in trying to get Issue 3 passed as a business expense, when it fails to pass?
Other than these somewhat rhetorical bets, I can't think of anything Issue 3 backers have risked - I mean, really risked, the way the people going into casinos and pouring down money into slots risk. And even "risk" is a suspect word since everyone agrees that no one gets into the business of running gambling operations because it might be a losing endeavor.
Now, I view these business folks as having already given up their souls (with a small "s" - this isn't about religion or morals per se and anyone who has been reading these reasons against gambling knows that) since they've decided to seek 31,500 slots for Ohio by telling Ohioans that it's the only way to make Ohio college affordable and, if Ohioans are willing to lose their money in other states, they might as well lose it in Ohio. So I can't even say that they're betting their souls - those are gone - they've made their swap on that issue already.
So, really? I don't see a single gamble being made by the business folks that would be analogous to the unconscionable gamble Issue 3 asks Ohioans to play.
I'm all for amusement and diversion, although a few people who know me might beg to differ. But I expect more from these business people - they should be ashamed of themselves for trying to convince Ohioans that the best this state can do, that the best we should hope for when it comes to improving college affordability is to rely on games of chance.
No matter how hard the business folks try to portray Issue 3 as the surest of bets, Issue 3 remains the haughtiest of scams.
Previous reasons to vote no on Issue 3:
Reason 30
Reason 31
Reason 32
Reason 33
Reason 34
Reason 35
Reason 36
Reason 37
Reason 38
Reason 39
Reason 40
Reason 41
Reason 42
Reason 43
Reason 44
Reason 45
Reason 46
Reason 47
Reason 48
Reason 49
Reason 50
Reason 51
Reason 52
Reason 53
Reason 54
Reason 55
Reason 56
Reason 57
Vote no on Issue 3.
From Merriam-Webster Online:
Main Entry: 1gam·ble
Pronunciation: 'gam-b&l
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): gam·bled; gam·bling
/-b(&-)li[ng]/Etymology: probably back-formation from gambler, probably alteration of obsolete gamner, from obsolete gamen to play
intransitive verb
1 a : to play a game for money or property b : to bet on an uncertain outcome
2 : to stake something on a contingency : take a chance
transitive verb
1 : to risk by gambling : WAGER
2 : VENTURE, HAZARD
Let's start with "to play": "to play" means, according to the same source,
Main Entry: 1play
Pronunciation: 'plA
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English plega; akin to Old English plegan to play, Middle Dutch pleyen
1 a : SWORDPLAY b archaic : GAME, SPORT c : the conduct, course, or action of a game d : a particular act or maneuver in a game: as (1) : the action during an attempt to advance the ball in football (2) : the action in which a player is put out in baseball e : the action in which cards are played after bidding in a card game f : the moving of a piece in a board game (as chess) g : one's turn in a game
Hmm, game? "Game" means, also from M-W Online,
Main Entry: 1game
Pronunciation: 'gAm
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English gamen; akin to Old High German gaman amusement
1 a (1) : activity engaged in for diversion or amusement : PLAY (2) : the equipment for a game b : often derisive or mocking jesting : FUN, SPORT
2 a : a procedure or strategy for gaining an end : TACTIC b : an illegal or shady scheme or maneuver : RACKET
3 a (1) : a physical or mental competition conducted according to rules with the participants in direct opposition to each other (2) : a division of a larger contest (3) : the number of points necessary to win (4) : points scored in certain card games (as in all fours) by a player whose cards count up the highest (5) : the manner of playing in a contest (6) : the set of rules governing a game (7) : a particular aspect or phase of play in a game or sport game> b plural : organized athletics c (1) : a field of gainful activity : LINE
4 a (1) : animals under pursuit or taken in hunting; especially : wild animals hunted for sport or food (2) : the flesh of game animals b archaic : PLUCK c : a target or object especially of ridicule or attack -- often used in the phrase fair game
synonym see FUN
Reads to me as though anyway you define "to gamble," it's not looking good. If anything, reading these definitions makes me realize just how well these words describe the addictions and passions of the business people involved in everything related to gambling.
In fact, let's focus on that for a minute: what, exactly, is the gamble being taken by the business people who will profit from Issue 3?
Well, they're playing a game with Ohioans. And with the numbers (duh - that's what gambling is about in the first place). And with the future of Ohio's kids and workforce and public money coiffers that will need to go to services for whatever percentage of Ohioans will become addicts or will be affected by the addicts.
The game they're playing with Ohioans? A bet that Issue 3 is an irresistible package - or at least enough of a carrot that the stick of future debt won't discourage enough Ohioans from voting for the proposal.
Anyone know if these business folks can write off the costs incurred in trying to get Issue 3 passed as a business expense, when it fails to pass?
Other than these somewhat rhetorical bets, I can't think of anything Issue 3 backers have risked - I mean, really risked, the way the people going into casinos and pouring down money into slots risk. And even "risk" is a suspect word since everyone agrees that no one gets into the business of running gambling operations because it might be a losing endeavor.
Now, I view these business folks as having already given up their souls (with a small "s" - this isn't about religion or morals per se and anyone who has been reading these reasons against gambling knows that) since they've decided to seek 31,500 slots for Ohio by telling Ohioans that it's the only way to make Ohio college affordable and, if Ohioans are willing to lose their money in other states, they might as well lose it in Ohio. So I can't even say that they're betting their souls - those are gone - they've made their swap on that issue already.
So, really? I don't see a single gamble being made by the business folks that would be analogous to the unconscionable gamble Issue 3 asks Ohioans to play.
I'm all for amusement and diversion, although a few people who know me might beg to differ. But I expect more from these business people - they should be ashamed of themselves for trying to convince Ohioans that the best this state can do, that the best we should hope for when it comes to improving college affordability is to rely on games of chance.
No matter how hard the business folks try to portray Issue 3 as the surest of bets, Issue 3 remains the haughtiest of scams.
Previous reasons to vote no on Issue 3:
Reason 30
Reason 31
Reason 32
Reason 33
Reason 34
Reason 35
Reason 36
Reason 37
Reason 38
Reason 39
Reason 40
Reason 41
Reason 42
Reason 43
Reason 44
Reason 45
Reason 46
Reason 47
Reason 48
Reason 49
Reason 50
Reason 51
Reason 52
Reason 53
Reason 54
Reason 55
Reason 56
Reason 57
Vote no on Issue 3.
JBlog Me
2 Comments:
Jill,
Thanks for noticing. I think that one thing that left and right can agree on - we don't need a poor tax to finance a middle class subsidy.
At some point, as I get further into the series, I'll link to your 257,859 reasons not to vote for issue #3.
Thanks for doing the heavy lifting; I'm embarassed that I don't have the time or energy to go into the detail as you did
No worries, really. The only thing that really baffles me is the intersection of business interests and social ills when it comes to something like gambling. How is it that the hope of making so much money overrides all other expectations of a social contract?
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home