why i might vote for Arnold.....

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: Drakkon
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I'd like to know if the average Indian gets anything from the casinos? I assume that the developers are the ones reaping the huge benefit...the Indians end up paying them back for the first 10-20 years of the casino.
In arizona the indian take is HUGE....I'd say a good 90% of the navajo community gets a pretty good chunk of the money cause theres a lot that have practically no job (family sheephearding) and yet they drive brand new dually trucks. My roomate for example is one of the tribal council members or something along those lines....he drives a brand new silverado while his wife drives a brand new saturn and then on top of that they have 5 kids and another 3 cars to boot older but nothing past 2001 at least...he makes 25K a year...wife does community service and goes to class...neither is on welfare...yet they have enough money to afford a pretty decent lifestyle....and this is just one example...i've scene a ton more every time i drive out to the reservation...a shack in the middle of nowhere yet theres 2 or 3 brand new 2002/2003 duallys parked outside...I think they got their land, they got their opportunity, they got their prosperity, and now its time to integrate with the rest of us again. We may get some money from the taxing of their vehicles but its insginifigant compared to the ammount of money these casinons are making and handing out to just this little set group...

I'm 1/16 Blackfoot indian...how can I get in on this action?
 

Darkstar757

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2003
3,190
6
81
Originally posted by: kermalou
I am a democrat, but one thing that Arnold said that makes me think about voting for him is that he wants to start taxing Indian casinos.

these casinos take our tax paying resources and don't give back a damn penny, other states tax them, why can't california?

DUDE

CALM Down

Society has taken every thing from the Indians Let them have there Casinos.


rolleye.gif
 

tk149

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2002
7,253
1
0
I just want to point out that legally, Indian tribes are treated differently from all other institutions. The Constitution gives Congress the right:

"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes"

Right off the bat, the Constitution recognizes the Indian Tribes as a separate entity from the States. Legally, they're kind of in a limbo situation: they're not quite part of the United States, and they're not quite sovereign nations.

That being said, I think that it's time to start integrating them into current society. If they don't want integration, fine, let them pay directly for all their social services.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: tk149
I just want to point out that legally, Indian tribes are treated differently from all other institutions. The Constitution gives Congress the right:

"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes"

Right off the bat, the Constitution recognizes the Indian Tribes as a separate entity from the States. Legally, they're kind of in a limbo situation: they're not quite part of the United States, and they're not quite sovereign nations.

That being said, I think that it's time to start integrating them into current society. If they don't want integration, fine, let them pay directly for all their social services.
Go after the Religious Institutions first and then maybe we can consider the Indian Tribes.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: tk149
I just want to point out that legally, Indian tribes are treated differently from all other institutions. The Constitution gives Congress the right:

"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes"

Right off the bat, the Constitution recognizes the Indian Tribes as a separate entity from the States. Legally, they're kind of in a limbo situation: they're not quite part of the United States, and they're not quite sovereign nations.

That being said, I think that it's time to start integrating them into current society. If they don't want integration, fine, let them pay directly for all their social services.
Go after the Religious Institutions first and then maybe we can consider the Indian Tribes.

When churches start donating hundreds of millions of dollars to political candidates, then you can start looking their way. ;)
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: tk149
I just want to point out that legally, Indian tribes are treated differently from all other institutions. The Constitution gives Congress the right:

"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes"

Right off the bat, the Constitution recognizes the Indian Tribes as a separate entity from the States. Legally, they're kind of in a limbo situation: they're not quite part of the United States, and they're not quite sovereign nations.

That being said, I think that it's time to start integrating them into current society. If they don't want integration, fine, let them pay directly for all their social services.
Go after the Religious Institutions first and then maybe we can consider the Indian Tribes.

When churches start donating hundreds of millions of dollars to political candidates, then you can start looking their way. ;)
Fsck that, they have been getting a free ride way to long. They should be taxed like any other business!

 

chowderhead

Platinum Member
Dec 7, 1999
2,633
263
126
Originally posted by: tk149
I just want to point out that legally, Indian tribes are treated differently from all other institutions. The Constitution gives Congress the right:

"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes"

Right off the bat, the Constitution recognizes the Indian Tribes as a separate entity from the States. Legally, they're kind of in a limbo situation: they're not quite part of the United States, and they're not quite sovereign nations.

That being said, I think that it's time to start integrating them into current society. If they don't want integration, fine, let them pay directly for all their social services.

I have thought of Indian tribes as quasi- sovereign nations. I think they should be subject to the same state and federal laws regarding campaign fianance which is that foreign nationals/entities cannot donate to campaigns. IF they want to, they have to give up their sovereign nation status i.e. casinos. There are battles with local gov't whenever Indian interests want to build a casino on federally recognized lands. I think the vast majority of the time, the Indian tribes will win. They are not subject to state or local zoning, environmental or labor laws. They do negotiate payments to state and local entities for operating a casino and they do pay some federal taxes I believe on wages and sales tax.
I don't like Indian gaming but if they want it, the tribes that have it should not be allowed federal/state subsidies i.e. welfare, food stamps, education, health care, etc. They should pay for it themselves as distinct "sovereign nations"

I really don't think you can "tax" Indian casinos but you can negotiate payments i.e. compacts with the tribes for a piece of the profits. I'll give Arnold props for going after Indian gaming but Arnold's campaign is fiananced by a lot of agri-business and large corporations and other special interest groups which he attacks.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
these casinos take our tax paying resources and don't give back a damn penny, other states tax them, why can't california?

bingo. those people get extra rights by being allowed to run casinos when americans in california cannot. that is beyond unfair. not paying taxes and using our infrastructure to support these casinos... thats far too much charity for my tastes. not to mention unlike reno or vegas, they are not regulated. they can do whatever the hell they want with their machines.

the only reason states allow gaming is because they hope the tax revenue will be greater then the burden to society that casinos bring. with indians we've legalized a crack dealer that pays no taxes, no thanks man.

i sent in my absentee ballot. no for recall, yes for arnold.

sorry, business opportunities and tax exemption based on race, f*ck that.

yes, i'm a democrat