[Skookum]

What? I thought this was like the Japanese and math! Are you sure you can't even deal blackjack?

i find fireworks loud, obnoxious, and boring too.....

 

[LordOpie]

i find fireworks loud, obnoxious, and boring too.....

i'm gonna have to question your manhood now.

fire fire fire

 

[MikeD]

Last night, I came home, and my g/f was watching the Family Guy episode where Lois bets the car at the casino, and Peter has to go on a vision quest to get it back. It was pretty funny. His spirit animal is The Fonz.

MD

 

[Damn True]

Are Indian Casinos on tribal lands?

Well IF the Casinos were funded and operated ONLY by Indians (They arent) and IF the revenue ONLY went into the hands of Indians (it dosen't) and IF that revenue never made it back into the non reservation ecomonmy (it does) then certainly, they should not be taxed.

However, the overwhelming majority of the Casinos are funded by offshore (some cat from the UAE is the biggest financier) or NV Casino ownership groups. The majority of Casino employees are non-indian.

That revenue is padding the pockets of those financiers. Indian gaming is like a $15b industry. The tribes sure as hell aren't seeing that money. It is getting into the non reservation economy and therfore ought to be taxed.

 

[Damn True]

Isn't that what i wrote? I do pay my taxes...... ALOT of taxes trust me.
If you buy a candy bar in Oregon, i'll hold you accountable if you don't pay taxes on it when you return to California..... because that's your logic not mine.....

I may have misunderstood you.
I thought you were asserting that you should not be taxed regardless of where your income is generated or spent.

 

[MikeD]

However, the overwhelming majority of the Casinos are funded by offshore (some cat from the UAE is the biggest financier) or NV Casino ownership groups. The majority of Casino employees are non-indian.

That revenue is padding the pockets of those financiers. Indian gaming is like a $15b industry. The tribes sure as hell aren't seeing that money. It is getting into the non reservation economy and therfore ought to be taxed.

My point about corruption exactly. I can see how the Indians needed external funding to start up the casinos, but I think they had to give up a lot to do it. Yet another deal with the devil.

MD

 

[Skookum]

Well IF the Casinos were funded and operated ONLY by Indians (They arent) and IF the revenue ONLY went into the hands of Indians (it dosen't) and IF that revenue never made it back into the non reservation ecomonmy (it does) then certainly, they should not be taxed.

However, the overwhelming majority of the Casinos are funded by offshore (some cat from the UAE is the biggest financier) or NV Casino ownership groups. The majority of Casino employees are non-indian.

That revenue is padding the pockets of those financiers. Indian gaming is like a $15b industry. The tribes sure as hell aren't seeing that money. It is getting into the non reservation economy and therfore ought to be taxed.

Hmm interesting. You know you got a great point here. Tribes should tax non tribal members and make more money.

 

[MikeD]

And, if I may contradict myself slightly, I guess the Indians, as soveriegn nations, should be able to make deals offshore with whomever they want. It's not really the US's responsibility to make sure that wealth is evenly distributed within the nation, is it?

sorry, thinking out loud here.

Also, I think the idea of a genetic test to determine if you're in the tribe is ludicrous. It's a cultural thing, and you're either living as a member of the tribe or are not. Then again, I guess lots of people are born off a reservation and aren't taught much about their heritage...so they discover it and try to reclaim it later. Just happens that it's very profitable to do so in some cases, it seems.

Skooks, how many people actually manage to 'join' a tribe after the fact? Is it successful, generally? Does it mean a significant amount of money for said individual?

MD

 

[golgiaparatus]

We have 2 huge casino's (Creek Nation has the newest one, Cherokee is the oldest one) in my town now... on the river. Its funny, they started as massive bingo places, then they added Slot machines and Video Machines, then blackjack... now the Creek Nation has a full blown Casino with everything Bring on the hookers and the sleeze.

 

[DRB]

And, if I may contradict myself slightly, I guess the Indians, as soveriegn nations, should be able to make deals offshore with whomever they want. It's not really the US's responsibility to make sure that wealth is evenly distributed within the nation, is it?

Most tribes do a decent job of sharing their gains amongest their own. The problem arises in that folks see the financial success of the Pequots (Foxwood) and think that most Indians are enjoying that level of success which is far from the case. Additionally, since each tribe is a nation in its own there is no sharing from tribe to tribe (or least not very often).

Skooks, how many people actually manage to 'join' a tribe after the fact? Is it successful, generally? Does it mean a significant amount of money for said individual?
MD

A friend of mine that is Cherokee gets about $6000 a year. So compared to Skookum's $500 that a lot but compared to the Pequots it ain't squat. He gets all bent out of shape when the Pequots come up because they somehow still get assistance from the BIA and HUD at the expense of poverty stricken tribes.

Edit: He donates his $6000 a year to some college scholarship fund for Indians (Native Americans?)

 

[Skookum]

Skooks, how many people actually manage to 'join' a tribe after the fact? Is it successful, generally? Does it mean a significant amount of money for said individual?

MD

i don't work in enrollement or know much about the council (they decide) but i do know that for my tribe it's rare to none... All tribes are different but here's the basics of my tribe. To be a tribal member you have to have at least 25% Indian blood from one of the bands/tribes that are part of the Colville Confederated Tribe. Any other blood regardless of other tribes or non-native blood doesn't count to that percentage. I've never heard of someone being enrolled into the tribe when they're 40 or whatever....

A friend of mine that is Cherokee gets about $6000 a year. So compared to Skookum's $500 that a lot but compared to the Pequots it ain't squat. He gets all bent out of shape when the Pequots come up because they somehow still get assistance from the BIA and HUD at the expense of poverty stricken tribes.

Edit: He donates his $6000 a year to some college scholarship fund for Indians (Native Americans?)

Yes how much revenue is raised from varied tribes depends on how big tribal membership is(monies are divied up to more people). Also location, how close is the res from metropolitan areas. Many reservations were placed far far away from cities so the lucky few that had cities grow around them, well looks like they win the "jackpot" . More power to em.....
i don't donate my per capita.... it's mine ALL MINE AAAHHAAAHAHAHA!!!
but believe me i don't do handouts either.....

 

[s1ngletrack]

We have 2 huge casino's (Creek Nation has the newest one, Cherokee is the oldest one) in my town now... on the river. Its funny, they started as massive bingo places, then they added Slot machines and Video Machines, then blackjack... now the Creek Nation has a full blown Casino with everything Bring on the hookers and the sleeze.

Geez - You use the words hookers and sleaze like they are bad things :evil:

 

[Damn True]

I may have misunderstood you.
I thought you were asserting that you should not be taxed regardless of where your income is generated or spent.

 

[Skookum]

I may have misunderstood you.
I thought you were asserting that you should not be taxed regardless of where your income is generated or spent.

Jesus posted that and i was going along with him hypothetically, hey if enough people agree to it hell i'll run with that campaign! woo hoo. But come on, nobody here can see that happening whether it's justified or not.
As with the issue, it would defocus the argument that was on the board. Should tribes pay the state of California an inflated cut. Well they very well might just do it to keep their workers tied into the the states benefits. Just like Post and Pole in the small town of Inchelium Washington. But to me it's just a way for a european fraud with massive charisma finding a quick fix for fiscal irresponsibility of Californians over the years at the expense of peoples who most Californians could give a rat's fart over......

 

[DRB]

As with the issue, it would defocus the argument that was on the board. Should tribes pay the state of California an inflated cut.

That's the answer I can't find, why in his (Arnie's) opinion should the Tribes pay MORE than any other corporation would.

I don't think they personally should have to pay any but if they are the same seems fair enough.

 

[Damn True]

My understanding is that they are currently paying on the personal income tax schedule and the plan on the ballot would make them pay at the corporate schedule.

Is Arnie's gig something completely different?

Personally, I think that certain things (alcohol, tobbaco, and yes, gambling) should be taxed at higher rates. Call it a sin tax or a luxury tax, whatever. I think we all can agree that booze, smokes, and gambling are bad for people. If people have discretionary income enough to use on things that are bad for them we oughta be able to take it more.

And I mean tax the people consumer AND the producer of the commodity so yes, tax Phillip Morris, Anhauser Bush, and Ceasers Palace MORE than we would tax General Motors.

 

[Skookum]

My understanding is that they are currently paying on the personal income tax schedule and the plan on the ballot would make them pay at the corporate schedule.

Is Arnie's gig something completely different?

My whole point is the state really has no say and shouldn't. Tribes are only accountable to taxes on the federal level. They don't HAVE to participate in state benefits.
Look i really don't know anything about this particular circumstance but i'm guessing the tribes in Cali are using and dealing with the state in terms of employment on the reservations. Doesn't mean they HAVE to participate, but they'll lose the benefits Labor and Industries, Unemployment so on and so forth for their workers. it's all about money and i'm sure both parties will come to the table and work something out. But Arnie is comin into the bargaining table with a reckless hardline stance that reeks, but will look good to his constituents, especially ones who somehow feel entitled and somehow feel robbed, by the very fact that Indians are making money.
When you get the balance budgeted down there you can thank the Indians whose reservation falls within your state yet again, since you started out for free on "prime" Indian land in the beginning. Thank the Indians.... HA HA yeah right.....

 

[Damn True]

Ya know, there is a school of thought that says most of the "plight" of native Americans would be solved if they didn't live out in the middle of nowhere where there are no jobs.

I think they have the right to live where-ever they please, however I think that one should have to deal with the ramifications of ones choices.

On a side note, there are assloads of Americans who intentionaly live in desolate areas so that they can remain on public assistance. Apparently there is a loophole in the system that allows public assistance to continue indefinitely if one lives more than "X" number of miles from "X" number of available jobs.

 

[Silver]

especially ones who somehow feel entitled and somehow feel robbed

You've just described every white conservative in California, you know...

 

[Skookum]

Ya know, there is a school of thought that says most of the "plight" of native Americans would be solved if they didn't live out in the middle of nowhere where there are no jobs.

If those thinkers were taught the real deal in "school" they'd have learned that reservations were stuck out in the middle of nowhere on purpose, while the prime real estate like West Seattle was used by settlers.
Just one example Duwamish Tribe, Chief Sealth, whom Seattle was named after, his tribe was promised a reservation on West Seattle. The tribe still isn't federally recognized, therefore they are Indians without a tribe.... Maybe the next Indian you see passed out in the street has a story of why he/she's there.... hmm.....

I think they have the right to live where-ever they please, however I think that one should have to deal with the ramifications of ones choices.

Sheesh how does anyone respond to crap like this?
Ok here goes.... Not sure you're making any point other than to paint Indian people as lazy, welfare dependant people. But IF i were to buy into it i can easily reverse the logic and reflect it back on any race or class of people. Trailer Parks, Projects.... Damn these people for being POOR!!!!
Indians were told to move to reservations, now you're telling me they should move out? <insert middle finger here>
Home is home, everybody can understand that. There are jobs at home, now Casino jobs are available and people get their panties in a wad, because Indians actually are getting a good deal? What the fu$k dude?!?
And i know plenty of Indians working outside of the reservation, doing great work within the community outside of the reservation, just as there are Indians and people of all races working and LIVING on the res, but of course let's just ignore all of that...

On a side note, there are assloads of Americans who intentionaly live in desolate areas so that they can remain on public assistance. Apparently there is a loophole in the system that allows public assistance to continue indefinitely if one lives more than "X" number of miles from "X" number of available jobs.

Your message is sad, untrue, and pathetic. Thank you don't come again bye bye now.....

 

[Damn True]

Chill out cowboy, and consider an edit if not an apology.

I didnt say I agree with the assertion that indians should move to the city I said there are those who think that way. Its a matter of geography and economy not race, history and politics.

Here is where you began insulting me, I'll keep my reply on higher ground.
If it were me in that position, I think I would move. Mainly because I don't get all that attached to "places" and I'm materialistic as hell. The opportunity to live the way I want is greater in a city than it would be in avery rural area. However, if I chose to live somewhere far less urban than where I am now I would have to be willing to give up the opportunity to have a job that affords me the lifestyle and things I enjoy.

My message in regard to people intentionaly living in such a way as to take advantage of public assistiance is 100% true. There are rural communities in the Sierra's in which over 75% of the population is on public assistance. They are allowed to remain so because said towns are greater than "X" number of miles from a town with an appreciable amount of jobs. The overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of those towns aren't from there. The people that were from there moved out when the mining went in the toilet. These people moved there to take advantage of a loophole in the law. BTW, these people are overwhelmingly white.

 

[DRB]

My understanding is that they are currently paying on the personal income tax schedule and the plan on the ballot would make them pay at the corporate schedule.

Is Arnie's gig something completely different?

Personally, I think that certain things (alcohol, tobbaco, and yes, gambling) should be taxed at higher rates. Call it a sin tax or a luxury tax, whatever. I think we all can agree that booze, smokes, and gambling are bad for people. If people have discretionary income enough to use on things that are bad for them we oughta be able to take it more.

And I mean tax the people consumer AND the producer of the commodity so yes, tax Phillip Morris, Anhauser Bush, and Ceasers Palace MORE than we would tax General Motors.

He is against the initiative.

Schwarzenegger spokesman Vince Sollitto said the governor's comments about Indians "ripping us off" referred to tribes that back Proposition 70, which would allow the expansion of casinos in return for payments on par with state corporate taxes.

The other side of it would be that it would nullify agreements that he made with tribes already. I'm guessing that the amounts must be higher than the corporate rate.

I'm all for consumer based taxes especially on so called sin items. BUT if you are going to implement them don't just pick on the Indians.

 

[MMike]

If history is any indication.... I haven't read any of this thread, but I'd bet that I would agree with SKookum and disagree with True...

And I'm I the only who caught the irony of True calling an indian (native american), "cowboy"?

 

[MMike]

Damned indians just hand out SARS infected blankets anyway...

 

[Skookum]

Damned indians just hand out SARS infected blankets anyway...

From an Internet post by Mary Ritchie (ritchie@cs.uwp.edu) Fri, 2 Jul 1993. She addressed the question of whether Smallpox was really spread by blankets to American Indians


This reference [for the story of American Indians and deliberate smallpox spreading ]is from American Indian Holocaust and Survival: A Population History Since 1492, by Russell Thornton, 1987 (Norman: U. of Oklahoma Pr.) pp.78-79

It is also during the eighteenth century that we find written reports of American Indians being intentionally exposed to smallpox by Europeans. In 1763 in Pennsylvania, Sir Jeffrey Amherst, commander of the British forces....wrote in the postscript of a letter to Bouquet the suggestion that smallpox be sent among the disaffected tribes. Bouquet replied, also in a postscript,

"I will try to innoculate the[m]...with some blankets that may fall into their hands, and take care not get the disease myself."

....To Bouquet's postscript, Amherst replied,

"You will do well as to try to innoculate the Indians by means of blankets as well as to try every other method that can serve to extirpate this exorable race."

On June 24, Captain Ecuyer, of the Royal Americans, noted in his journal:

"Out of our regard for them (i.e. two Indian chiefs) we gave them two blankets and a handkerchief out of the smallpox hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect."

(quoted from Stearn, E. and Stearn, A. "Smallpox Immunization of the Amerindian.", Bulletin of the History of Medicine 13:601-13.)


Thornton goes on to report that smallpox spread to the tribes along the Ohio river.

 

[Toshi]

that was some mighty advanced thinking about disease for 1763... europeans were still bloodletting, sheesh i am far too lazy to look up original sources but i suspect much handwaving on the part of "fuzzy" anthropologists in there.