0

Casinos

Wichita Night Life

Well, two new counties are now on the list for casinos in Kansas. Ford and Wyandotte counties both overwhelmingly voted in legislation last night approving casinos in their county. Well, I say "overwhelmingly" in terms of their population since Ford county only had some 8,000 voters. However, this puts Wichita in a tough position, doesn't it?

Boot Hill and Kansas City will both now have casinos drawing people to them. Boot Hill out of it's noteriety and nostalgia from the rootin-tootin days of the Cowboy, gunslingers, and drunken shoot-outs over poker games. Kansas City out of its accessibility and already established popularity as a destination.

Now Sedgwick faces a vote on August 7th as to whether or not we should bring casinos to the sedgwick county area. I would say at this point, while I am strongly opposed to gambling personally, we are put into a position where we will actually LOSE what tourism we have in favor of these other destinations in Kansas because of them. Why would you come to Wichita if you can stay in Kansas City on the river and gamble at the casinos up there?

What do you think? Does competition on this scale effect Wichita?

~Dubya

Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Dubya, if anyone thought that having a casino in Wichita would increase tourism given the close proximity of Kansas City and the boats, and the new casino in Newkirk, I want what they're smoking. That would not have been true, IMHO, five years ago, but now I see a casino in Wichita as having no effect in any material way on tourism.

Yes, the proximity of Dodge City might affect visits to Wichita to gamble (if there is a casino in Wichita). I just don't think it will be that great. The casino in Dodge City would just give those who were going to visit there for Boot Hill, etc., another diversion.

I really don't understand the Wyandotte County vote at all. Its close proximity with KC Mo will dilute any positive effect a casino there might otherwise have. I suspect the allure of the boats in KC will overcome any benefit of a casino in Wyandotte County.

If the voters decide there should be a casino in Sedgwick County, so be it. Just don't look for any economic boom therefrom.
 
posted 877 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Danny said:
 
My thoughts are similar in line to Vaughn. However, I do see a partial gain to be had still. People who were traveling to KC more frequently, may choose to do some or most of their gambling now in Wichita.

I suspect that maybe we might see some economic gain from some of the surrounding areas(Winfield, El Dorado, and the like) if the casino is done right. I just don't see alot of interstate commerce occuring because Wichita gets one. Just more of our state dollars now staying in state.

I'm not really for or against it otherwise.
 
posted 877 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
rm6046 said:
 
O', ye of little faith. The proposed casino in Wichita will be an overwhelming success. The overflow of the masses flocking to new arena alone will surely bring in hundred of millions annually!
 
posted 877 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Dubya said:
 
/sarcasm off ?
 
posted 876 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Greyhoundpark worker said:
 
I am from Boluxi Ms and the casinos there did a wonder for the city. This city went from bad beaches and bad economy to a booming city. Unfortunatly when the hurricane took it away, there is not much left. The casinos are what is turning this city back in to a great tourism. I work in a position in which slots and a casino would be better for me. When yes vote is placed, there will be so many new jobs availiable to people who need them.
We do need in the county tourism.
 
posted 864 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Catherine said:
 
(at the end I compare Las Vegas to central Kansas)

As a former resident (engineer) of Las Vegas, Nevada, I find that some of the anti-casino talk is way off base. While there were a few negative aspects, just like any type of businesses, there were also some positive aspects. A city with gambling generally has to spend up to 60% of the gambling generated income on law enforcement. But there were many local support businesses, such as building maintenance, that were not directly involved gambling and yet brought in legitimate income and professional workers.

Las Vegas also saw some international trade grow there. Las Vegas had the highest proportion of churches per capita of any US city at that time. The maintenance and hotel workers were the ones attending those congregations. And in addition, those residents were very friendly to strangers, lot more than what I have seen here recently (as a native-born citizen of Wichita).

In New Mexico, we saw the Indian tribes distribute their gaming income to all of their members, especially helping the elderly and college student needing scholarships. How about using gaming income for things that we don't see most churches doing?

Some anti-gaming people make a big point about gambling additions. The rampant drug additions in Kansas towns validates the fact that even illegal activities go on while most Christians don't pitch in. In New Mexico, there were many people who helped addicts out with mineral therapies (zinc and magnesium). But where are these same Kansas anti-gaming voices to personally help out addicts? There are several methods that can help addicts out, if people get personally involved.

But don't expect the anti-casino to personally get involved -- just protest things they don't like and then walk away.

P.S. At Las Vegas, on three separate times I lost my wallet, checkbook, and keys. All three times they were returned to me with nothing missing. But here in south central Kansas, I lost my wallet and some A-hole has to do nasty and illegal things with the contents and never return anything to me. Explain that!!!
 
posted 836 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 

Search