The diluted economics of casinos and crime: A rejoinder to Grinols and Mustard’s reply

Abstract

In their reply to my comment {(Walker} 2008) Grinols and Mustard explained that in their original study (2006) their interest was in "the costs to the host county associated with a change in crime from whatever source" {(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 "undiluted" crime rate used by Grinols and Mustard (2006). I also discuss why this issue is important, in the context of "social cost of casino gambling" estimates that are frequently quoted in political debate and by the media.

Problem with this document? Please report it to us.