The Diluted Economics of Casinos and Crime: A Rejoinder to Grinols and Mustardâ€™s Reply
In their reply to my comment (Walker 2008) Grinols and Mustard explained that in their original study (2006) their interest was â€œin the costs to the host county associated with a change in crime from whatever sourceâ€ (Grinols and Mustard 2008, p. 22). In this rejoinder, I explain that the estimated costs of crime attributable to casinos will be overstated if the estimated crime effects are based on the â€œundilutedâ€ crime rate used by Grinols and Mustard (2006). I also discuss why this issue is important, in the context of â€œsocial cost of casino gamblingâ€ estimates that are frequently quoted in political debate and by the media.
Volume (Year): 5 (2008)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Enterprise Hall, Room 354, 4400 University Drive, 3G4 Fairfax, VA 22030|
Phone: (703) 993-1151
Web page: https://econjwatch.org/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ejw:journl:v:5:y:2008:i:2:p:148-155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jason Briggeman)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.