[dynimagelv]

geeeeesh....people are sooooo sensitive
































mod interpose: i can anticipate that this conversation is going to veer off into a political debate that is not necessarily directly related to Las Vegas. we'll keep this thread open a bit longer but if it gets too specific to debating political agendas of general U.S. politics, we will close it and ask participants to take the conversation over to our Politics and Other Controversies forum. thanks. --'r

[MadManofBethesda]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

The rest of your post is orthogonal to my points.

Without getting into the substance of the debate, I just want to "chime in" (to borrow a phrase ) and give you props for the use of orthogonal. In fact, I'm gonna rep you for that!

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda

Without getting into the substance of the debate, I just want to "chime in" (to borrow a phrase ) and give you props for the use of orthogonal. In fact, I'm gonna rep you for that!

However the right angle was only in his mind. It was actually right down the old middle.

Or perhaps his argument is obtuse?

[MadManofBethesda]

Originally Posted by olecapt

However the right angle was only in his mind. It was actually right down the old middle.

Or perhaps his argument is obtuse?

An informal use/def is also "irrelevant."

[RinVegas]

I will never forget how in 2006/2007 in the midst of an OBVIOUS (to me) housing bubble it was nearly impossible to find experts, analysts, or media that actually realized and reported the ridiculous events taking place.

The new trend is to research and argue the strength of the recession. Everyone is getting so good at arguing how bad things are now and will be in the future. We are already moving out of the recession and those of you who are falling victim to the latest trend are going to miss the boat.

[SportyandMisty]

Here is an interesting observation. The following was in a newspaper editorial in California:

It's no surprise that the National Education Association was the nation's biggest political lobbyist in 2007 and 2008, dishing out $56.3 million in federal and state campaigns.

But a new study reveals that the next three top donors were — hold on — American Indian tribes with gambling interests. Two of them are from California.

Americans need to follow that money and see what it's buying.

Six of the top 10 largest donors to political causes nationwide were Indian tribes, spending a total of $160 million, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics study. By comparison, the powerful Service Employees International Union spent $35 million and the National Association of Realtors dished out $28 million.

What's at stake?

At the federal level, the debate rages over whether Congress should legalize Internet gambling, which Indian tribes favor if they — not offshore companies — control the licenses. Encouraging Internet gambling would be a mistake, leading to increased gambling addiction and criminal activity.

But the lure of hundreds of millions in tax revenue is a powerful temptation for lawmakers.

Closer to home, the California Legislature is exploring a separate proposal by the Morongo Band of Mission Indians to license Internet poker in state. Supporters believe it could generate more than $50 million in taxes, but that's relatively little compared with the cost of dealing with an array of additional social problems.

Ten years ago, Indian casinos took in just more than $100 million a year in this country, mostly at bingo halls.

Today, Indian casinos are a $25 billion business.

With the tribes' new financial power, voters have to wonder if gaming issues will be decided based on the merits or on the amount of money contributed to lawmakers' campaigns.

The reason I posted the above is that of course, Las Vegas economy is dependent on gaming & related tourism.

Clearly, more and more people in the USA are heading to their local Indian Casinos. The other 49 states have of course been envious of the tax revenue generated by gaming, and to a certain extent, they encourage their citizens to visit local gaming venues (where tax revenue flows to their own coffers) rather than visit Las Vegas.

IF the data cited above are accurate - that over 10 years Indian gaming went from $100 Million of revenue to $25 BILLION of revenue, well, a large chunk of that extra $24.9B of revenue would have come to Las Vegas if the other states hadn't rationally decided they wanted a piece of the action.

If the USA legalizes/endorses some form of legalized Internet gaming, my personal guess is it will be even more $$ out of Las Vegas' economy. Surely Las Vegas would then get an even smaller slice of the pie, but the question is would legalized internet gaming increase the overall pie enough for Las Vegas to see a net increase in revenue. I don't know. No one does. Somehow I doubt it.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by RinVegas

I will never forget how in 2006/2007 in the midst of an OBVIOUS (to me) housing bubble it was nearly impossible to find experts, analysts, or media that actually realized and reported the ridiculous events taking place.

The new trend is to research and argue the strength of the recession. Everyone is getting so good at arguing how bad things are now and will be in the future. We are already moving out of the recession and those of you who are falling victim to the latest trend are going to miss the boat.

Richard Tedlow is a professor of business history at Harvard; he's famous for saying "I only predict the past, and so far, I'm batting 100%"

[RinVegas]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Richard Tedlow is a professor of business history at Harvard; he's famous for saying "I only predict the past, and so far, I'm batting 100%"

Great quote.

We've all heard Warren Buffet's famous quote, "Be fearful when others are greedy and greedy only when others are fearful."

So many people have been paralyzed by all the pessimism they are missing out on great opportunities that exist right now. Not just in investing, but also in the job market. I recently changed jobs and was surprised how many great opportunities exist out there right now.

To the OP, why would you wait for everything to turn around before you made your move? Now is a great time. Be greedy when everyone is fearful.

[thetruth123]

it has everything to do w/ it

[Spraynard Kruger]

Vegas has built to the point that our efforts to bring in more tourists is diluted. The net effect of someone spending a dollar is diluted.

I think Vegas will reach a flatline with modest growth in the 2-3% neighborhood but when is anyone's guess. The formula that made Vegas boom is not the same equation that will make Vegas work over time. The Casinos will continue the current price war to lure visitors. Nevada and Clark County have to fix their broken tax structure while providing increasing services and incentives for businesses to move here. Our growth was never sustainable and I think people need to get over this idea of a recession and start looking at it more in light of a correction because to imply that the boom times are coming back doesn't fly in the face of reality.

I think Vegas will stay much the way it is now for a decade or longer. We have replaced professional and trade wage earners with service employees making a fraction of what they did and it does not appear that those professional jobs are coming back anytime soon.

Whether or not we are in a recession is largely a personal perspective at this point, based on what industry you work in. I don't really think a construction worker that put roots down here could not have smelled the coffee because it was always a temporary situation. As those people who fell off the gravy train make their exodus from Vegas, the better off we will be because the demand for services will follow them. Affordability has returned as a result and hopefully we wont see a proliferation of urban decay, but that is likely as well. In fact, nothing I have said here is a surprise, its 20/20 hindsight and much of it has already happened.

Once unemployment reaches 5-6%, largely everyone that wants a job will have one but I am more concerned about the GDP of the population base over time rather than simple job creation.