Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
The problem with casino smoking bans is that casinos rely on stupid people to pay the rent, and a disproportionate number of stupid people smoke.
I'm a non-smoker so I don't have a dog in this hunt but I think your comment is ignorant.
There are likley very few who would argue the dangers of smoking in this day and age. This would ironically include those in the smoking community. That's not of issue.
The OP raised the issue on the merit/viability of of a non-smoking casino.
Other States have experimented with this, tried it and reversed course. Illinois is a recent example:
“Ladies and gentleman, if we’re serious about our budget crisis in Illinois, let’s be real. This is not about the smoking issue. This is about the money,” said Rep. Dan Burke (D-Chicago), the bill’s House sponsor.
Burke said the smoking prohibition has cost the state $800 million in lost casino-tax revenues since the imposition of the ban and has caused East St. Louis, home of the Casino Queen, to lay off municipal workers."
Just a week ago as Sue points out, the NV legislature reversed a three year old decision that prevented smoking in bars that serve food provided they don't serve patrons over the age of 21.
You may not like it, but there are economic and competitive realities that show that now isn't the time for a non-smoking casino. My bet is that the Palace casino in Biloxi will reverse their position in within 2 years; assuming they don't go bust before then.
The bottom line is that if this was viable concept, casino's would be doing it. It's all about the Benjamins.
Dan