OPINION

Casino crime

Re: "Govt holds off on casino bill", (BP, April 9) & "Casino bill could land govt in hot water", (BP, April 7).

Every day, there's talk in the Bangkok Post about casinos, but precious little hard data about the pros and cons. So, I did some research on the crime rate for casinos. I found that the State of New Hampshire in the US did a very thorough study. Here is the summary conclusion:

Conclusions: Our analysis of the relationship between casinos and crime is the most exhaustive ever undertaken in terms of the number of regions examined, the years covered, and the 43 control variables used. Using data from every US county from 1977 to 1996 and controlling for over 50 variables to examine the impact of casinos on the seven FBI Index I crimes (murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, and auto theft), we concluded that casinos increased all crimes except murder, the crime with the least obvious connection to casinos. Most offenses showed that the impact of casinos on crime increased over time, a pattern very consistent with the theories of how casinos affect crime.

The study showed that after a period of years the crime rate for casino counties was about double the crime rate for non-casino counties. Among the reasons the crime rate increases over time is that law enforcement tends to gradually pays less attention, while crimes associated with gambling and addiction tend to increase.

Of course, crime is only one factor in any decision about casinos; economic and social effects need to be weighed and considered. But it would be nice to have studies such as the one mentioned above to provide real data.

Twin bias

Re: "Time to dump Trump's flawed negotiation playbook", (Opinion, April 5) & "Slanted cartoons", (PostBag, April 5).

The author of this utterly biased piece is Michelle Gelfand, a cossetted academic who is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, a leftist/socialist think tank whose members have financially contributed to such luminaries as Kamala Harris and Adam Schiff.

Writing for the leftist, Soros-funded Project Syndicate, she makes reference to the typical socialist and emotionally based psychology of diplomacy, long established norms, and employs a variety of emotionally charged terms like "threats," "retaliation," "losses," and "combative" to substantiate her claim that US President Donald Trump is not a good negotiator.

Providing zero evidence of anything substantive, she imagines the experience of sitting in a classroom and interacting with students has qualified her to critique a man with the most extensive experience at the highest levels the world has to offer.

Meanwhile, I agree with PostBag contributor Gary Fox that cartoonist Matt Davies is biased.

Economic warfare

Re: "Agencies probe causes of building's collapse", (BP, April 9) & "Dig deeper, DSI", (PostBag, April 9).

In his satirical letter "Dig deeper, DSI", H Dumpty wonders whether the Department of Special Investigation will settle for reeling in local small fry or go after the big fish. Is it mere coincidence then that China has suddenly announced it is once again rejecting Thai durian exports, ostensibly over lab results?

Recall that in early 2000, when Australia petitioned the World Health Organization to launch an enquiry into the origins of Covid-19, China reacted by banning the import of Australian beef and slapped an 80% tariff on Aussie barley. While the world focuses on Trump's senseless trade tariffs, let us not forget that China has been at the forefront in coercing other countries through the threat of economic warfare.