Welcome to the People's Republic of Illinois, Comrade

[XMan]

Simply amazing.

 

[Alistar7]

Makes you want to start or keep your profitable business there........

 

[shiner]

GOVERNOR - Rod R. Blagojevich (Democrat)

 

[zephyrprime]

What the heck? What legal authority can they have to do that? I know there's such a thing as emminent domain but this isn't exactly in the public interest.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Actually the governor is arguing it is in the public's interest for the state to be solvent. The casinos operate with the consent of the state government . . . the government's needs (mo money) outweigh the private right to profits.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Actually the governor is arguing it is in the public's interest for the state to be solvent. The casinos operate with the consent of the state government . . . the government's needs (mo money) outweigh the private right to profits.

Every business operates with the states consent, why not take all the rights to private profit.

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Actually the governor is arguing it is in the public's interest for the state to be solvent. The casinos operate with the consent of the state government . . . the government's needs (mo money) outweigh the private right to profits.

Fine, when you start a medical practice and become successful at it, why not let the state you live in come in, take all of your profits, and pay you a small fee to run your own business? That's what is being proposed here.

 

[JellyBaby]

Every business operates with the states consent, why not take all the rights to private profit.

No kidding.

And technically I think IL would be labled fascist not communist since we're talking coporate collusion instead of 100% government ownership/control.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Every business operates with the states consent, why not take all the rights to private profit.

I'm just playing devil's advocate but the states (and feds) regulate all kinds of commerce. Sometimes they explicitly limit the amount of profit which may be extracted from consumers. Your analysis is the extreme but it is in a state's interest to find the happy median between being attractive to business while extracting maximum return from business activities.

Fine, when you start a medical practice and become successful at it, why not let the state you live in come in, take all of your profits, and pay you a small fee to run your own business? That's what is being proposed here.

I have no plans to ever enter private practice. I chose medicine as a service not an occupation/income. A good friend's father used to have a big time Ob-Gyn practice in PA. He retired b/c he was only earning 0.14 on the dollar after paying practice expenses. He didn't think it was worth his time/effort. Today he volunteers his service periodically.

The casinos are not arguing they can't make any money if the state takes over. They are arguing they cannot make as much as they want if the state takes over or increases license fees. Well cry me a mofo river. Industry produces jobs but it's not like these people build houses or make books. Some would argue that IL would be better off without the casinos b/c the economic benefits do not outweigh the moral issues. Regardless as long as gambling wants to have a presence in IL they better learn to bow down. According to the article IL casinos tallied $1.83B in PROFITS during a recession . . . the state could just lop off the 1 . . . and the nine casinos would still average almost $100m profit EACH.

Yes the governor is being a lazy, greedy hypocritical bastard but don't act like the casino industry is Lil' Red Riding Hood being stalked by a wolf.

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Every business operates with the states consent, why not take all the rights to private profit.

I'm just playing devil's advocate but the states (and feds) regulate all kinds of commerce. Sometimes they explicitly limit the amount of profit which may be extracted from consumers. Your analysis is the extreme but it is in a state's interest to find the happy median between being attractive to business while extracting maximum return from business activities.

Fine, when you start a medical practice and become successful at it, why not let the state you live in come in, take all of your profits, and pay you a small fee to run your own business? That's what is being proposed here.

I have no plans to ever enter private practice. I chose medicine as a service not an occupation/income. A good friend's father used to have a big time Ob-Gyn practice in PA. He retired b/c he was only earning 0.14 on the dollar after paying practice expenses. He didn't think it was worth his time/effort. Today he volunteers his service periodically.

The casinos are not arguing they can't make any money if the state takes over. They are arguing they cannot make as much as they want if the state takes over or increases license fees. Well cry me a mofo river. Industry produces jobs but it's not like these people build houses or make books. Some would argue that IL would be better off without the casinos b/c the economic benefits do not outweigh the moral issues. Regardless as long as gambling wants to have a presence in IL they better learn to bow down. According to the article IL casinos tallied $1.83B in PROFITS during a recession . . . the state could just lop off the 1 . . . and the nine casinos would still average almost $100m profit EACH.

Yes the governor is being a lazy, greedy hypocritical bastard but don't act like the casino industry is Lil' Red Riding Hood being stalked by a wolf.

So are you saying if you have a very success business, that the government should have a right to intervene with the way you run your business and take some of their earnings away? Punishing the success of a business is what the democratic platform is generally about. They don't want you to think that you can do anything without the assistance of the government.

KK

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I assume you mean big 'D' Democratic platform? Well, I wouldn't know since I've never read a Democratic platform but I've read many Republican ones. The first platform that I know of which advocated responsible business regulation was TR and the Bull Moose. Tell me one industry or company in America that thrives WITHOUT the assistance of government? I don't know of a single major company which has moved to my state (NC) in the past decade without getting a bonanza of subsidies from state and local government. During these hard times some companies have deserted communities that made massive infrastructure investments.

In the broader context, our system of government puts relatively few constraints on business activity while often providing a supportive environment for business to flourish. Your argument (and correct me if I'm mistaken) is "business has a right to as much dough as it can shake from consumers". My argument is that even though corporations do not have the rights/freedoms of individuals they often provide tremendous benefits to communities . . . in such that they must reflect the needs/ethos of the community/state . . . the state/local government is relatively free to regulate business activity to the extent necessary to insure ALL corporations are good citizens. In this case, when times are tight you don't increase property taxes on farms, state income taxes, or fees . . . you make consumption of naughtiness more profitable for the state (alcohol, tobacco, and gambling).

Punishing the success of a business is what the democratic platform is generally about. They don't want you to think that you can do anything without the assistance of the government.

Dude, I could go to AL and open a toxic waste dump, gun shop, and liquor store next to a school but a 7" dildo violates the states moral principles (and law). Daimler-Chrysler is in Alabama b/c the state agreed to subsidize ALL utilities, forgo taxes, and committed to buying a set number of MLs each year. There's all kinds of calculus that goes into evaluating what business costs and what business produces. Don't believe the hype sold to you on Kudlow & Cramer or a Bush diatribe. In the end casinos will not lose their heads to the state of IL . . . the governor is just planning to give them a trim.

 

[Conky]

Blagojevich is a freaking retard. I can't wait to get out of this communist state. This time next year I will be out of IL and in FL.

 

[MadRat]

In my state, Nebraska, the state takes the biggest share of legal gambling profits on paper and they still can't ever manage to grab any of the money. The casinoes just start operating at deficits due to all the "overhead costs"... All gambling eventually sinks down to a level where the only profit is to organized criminals. Organized crime isn't always mafia, its anyone that bilks the system.

 

[MadRat]

Originally posted by: charrison
Every business operates with the states consent, why not take all the rights to private profit.

Actually, no, you got that wrong. Every STATE GOVERNMENT operates with the PEOPLE'S CONSENT. Business is personal property owned by real people with real rights. If the people who own the casinoes do not have residency within the borders of the state then they got a problem with representation. If Illinois people own the casinoes then the problem falls under their state constitution and the governor has every right to do exactly as he proposed.

 

[308nato]

IfI didn't own farmground in Illinois I would be gone as well. Its embarassing to live here now.

Chicago politics and politicians used to be something we downstaters laughed at. Now they rule us all.

I must stop here due to an imminent banning if I go on.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I don't doubt that your state government needs to go on a diet . . . but what would you prefer for increased revenue . . . increasing property taxes on EVERYONE or trimming gamblings profits?

 

[Corn]

but what would you prefer for increased revenue . . . increasing property taxes on EVERYONE or trimming gamblings profits?

I would prefer the increase of taxes on EVERYONE instead of the confiscatory scam being proposed. Let the citizens pay in the form of taxes for the "benefits" their government provides.

According to the article IL casinos tallied $1.83B in PROFITS during a recession . . . the state could just lop off the 1 . . . and the nine casinos would still average almost $100m profit EACH.

You would make a fine Democrat BBD. Without reading their "platform", you've just about nailed it--a natural if you will.

Let the state take the casinos....what business do the casinos have making this obscene amount of profit anyway? I bet the state could also make a killing confiscating the assets of private medical practitioners, and then hiring the Dr's back at their current "salary", well, after lopping off some income by moving the decimal point a mere digit to the left. That sounds fair. After all, what business do medical professionals have making 6+ figures anyway?

I wonder what other business make "obscene" profits during recessions that would be good targets for confiscation.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Actually the governor is arguing it is in the public's interest for the state to be solvent. The casinos operate with the consent of the state government . . . the government's needs (mo money) outweigh the private right to profits.

Socialism, anyone?

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I don't doubt that your state government needs to go on a diet . . . but what would you prefer for increased revenue . . . increasing property taxes on EVERYONE or trimming gamblings profits?

Why should they even consider increasing revenue? Why is that the answer to everything?