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: |
Phone: (703) 993-1151
Web page: http://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)The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Jason Briggeman to update the entry or send us the correct address
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.