Mr. Chuck Zellers, you are correct (letter, Aug. 8)! There are quite a few facts about gambling that are unknown to Nebraska voters.

I have played keno and pickle cards and the lottery, scratch-off games and Powerball.

Now that’s gambling!

I have also been a keno manager and saw many a folk cash their check, and in one or two hours it was gone!

I have been to the casino in Iowa, and here’s the difference:

I enjoy the drive, no kids. (I like kids, just not in an adult environment, especially with parents who don’t watch them.)

I have taken less money to the casino than I used to spend on keno, and I have stayed there for four to six hours on the same cash, because I do not take plastic. I have been fed a great meal, had a greater variety of games to choose from, free soft drinks or coffee, because I do not drink, and those who do drink and get out of hand are dealt with.

Oh, and way less tax when I do win, which I have.

If Nebraska is so concerned about gambling addiction, then how come the state has not increased the 1 percent of gambling proceeds that go to treat gambling addiction?

Mary Brumbaugh, Lincoln

Don’t get expectations up

A bit of clarification regarding the letter from Carita Baker (Aug. 7): The letter states “in order to qualify for the CTC, a family must have a minimum income of $12,050.”

CTC (a nonrefundable credit) is based on tax liability — if there is no tax liability, the taxpayer receives no CTC.

The “minimum income level” that is quoted is one of several factors that are considered when determining whether the taxpayer qualifies for any Additional Child Tax Credit (a refundable credit).

Reducing the minimum income threshold will help some people, but probably not 66,000 kids — and the majority of those people will not receive $1,000 for each qualifying child.

This letter is not meant to be a comment on the balance of the letter from Carita Baker — it is only an attempt to caution people against having unrealistic expectations when having their taxes prepared.

Sonia Heckel, Lincoln

Avoid running dogs in heat

I saw a woman running two beautiful, spotted hunting dogs along the bike path near Old Cheney. The temperature that afternoon was 91 degrees and the humidity 57 (considered high); the heat index was 100 degrees. I hope the dogs made it home safely.

I’m sure she loves her dogs, but she evidently doesn’t realize that exercising dogs in heat and humidity is very dangerous. Contrary to what most people believe, dogs are much more susceptible to heatstroke than humans.

Dogs don’t sweat like we do, and panting is not nearly as effective as sweating to dissipate heat. Walking dogs in the heat of the day is not advised, much less running them. Many dogs will go until they drop if their master asks them to.

Heatstroke is deadly to dogs and can happen very quickly. Most don’t survive, and those who do frequently have major health problems as a result of damage to internal organs.

It is sad and unnecessary to lose a dog to heatstroke. People should not take a chance with their best friend!

There is great information available about dogs and heatstroke on the Internet. Every dog owner has a responsibility to be informed.

Joyce Wheeler, Lincoln