Suffolk Downs Casino?

The colonel is a cynical sadist who preys on the obese and the ig'nant.
 
Then you're all for getting rid of the lottery too, right?

Oh wait, I forgot; the lottery doesn't bring cars onto your local highway.
 
It's not all about me, Shepard. It's about the tens of thousands of people who live in the communities that will be adversely impacted if they build out the Suffolk Downs site like Foxwoods of Mohegan Sun.

And do you not see a difference between dropping $10 on some scratch tickets at the White Hen and blowing a week's pay at a casino?
 
I do understand why residential communities wouldn't want a casino nearby. Like sewage treatment plants, casinos are one of the very legitimate nimby concerns. But I don't think the argument should be couched in terms of ethical concerns, "people blowing a week's pay" ... those who want to gamble most likely already do - whether online, in CT, or cladestinely. Maybe some people's lives will get worse from proximity to it. But people's lives also get worse from proximity to KFCs that serve Double Downs. We can't always protect people from themselves, especially when the means of hurting themselves through gambling are so easily available anyway.

Also, while I understand the economic argument that casinos don't add new productive value to a region, I don't buy it. In a vacuum, yes - it's true that a casino itself mearly collects economic rents. But within the broader ecosystem, it does add value. How? By adding more diversity to entertainment options - making the city more competitive when it comes to attracting and retaining young talent. By growing more tourism, increasing the dollars flowing to restaurants, hotels, and non-gaming attractions. (And yes, a transit-accessible casino will tip the scales in favor of Boston for some tourists deciding where to vacation.)

But back to the nimby point. I do think that Eastie is the wrong place. Why has the seaport not been seriously considered? No residents to speak of, thousands of conventioneers, nothing else getting built... I know I'm hardly the first on this board to mention it, but I'm really truly wondering why this isn't on the table.
 
Shepard said:
But back to the nimby point. I do think that Eastie is the wrong place. Why has the seaport not been seriously considered? No residents to speak of, thousands of conventioneers, nothing else getting built... I know I'm hardly the first on this board to mention it, but I'm really truly wondering why this isn't on the table.
Click to expand...
'


Simple....because it isn't in DeLeo's district.
 
Shepard said:
I do understand why residential communities wouldn't want a casino nearby. Like sewage treatment plants, casinos are one of the very legitimate nimby concerns.
Click to expand...

Winthrop already has one of those. On a similar note, Logan is widely recognized as an economic engine for the entire region -- twenty-six million passengers every year. That's a lot of guests in my neighborhood, and none of them stopped by my place with a six-pack and a pizza. Maybe we don't need anyone else stopping by...

Shepard said:
But I don't think the argument should be couched in terms of ethical concerns, "people blowing a week's pay" ... those who want to gamble most likely already do - whether online, in CT, or cladestinely.
Click to expand...

That's fair. And I agree in spirit, but then there's reality:
Beton Brut said:
I believe people need to take responsibility for themselves and their families. Inevitably, some people will behave irresponsibly. Who pays for that? Not the casino owners...
Click to expand...

Shepard said:
Maybe some people's lives will get worse from proximity to it. But people's lives also get worse from proximity to KFCs that serve Double Downs.
Click to expand...

As a direct result of gambling, or due to some other aspect of the facilities operation?

Shepard said:
I do think that Eastie is the wrong place.
Click to expand...

The words "resort" and "oil tank farm" don't really belong in the same sentence.

Shepard said:
Why has the seaport not been seriously considered? No residents to speak of, thousands of conventioneers, nothing else getting built...I know I'm hardly the first on this board to mention it, but I'm really truly wondering why this isn't on the table.
Click to expand...

That's a political question. The legacy of the Brothers Bulger is still strong there. In my experience, Southie gets what Southie wants. Logic would tell you that the Seaport is its own thing, but brother, it's Southie.
 
^^ You make good points, I still respectfully disagree on some things. All and all Deer Island is a nice walk.
 
Yea I imagine sometimes 10 story stacks of shit can stink. I guess everytime I've been there the wind was blowing out to sea.
 
Beton Brut said:
And do you not see a difference between dropping $10 on some scratch tickets at the White Hen and blowing a week's pay at a casino?
Click to expand...

You are clearly blinded by your anti-casino position if you cannot recognize that the vast majority of scratch ticket players don't just "drop $10 on some scratch tickets at White Hen." These folks are spending a hell of a lot more than just $10 every few days. Many of them buy several of the $5-$10 tickets at a time.

But go ahead and keep thinking that casino players will blow a weeks pay while scratch ticket players merely throw down the occasional ten spot.

I can't believe intelligent people actually think that casinos will have more adverse effects on Massachusetts' citizens than our current lottery games have. To those people I suggest spending some time in a convenience store, packy or keno parlor in a lower income area. The problems are already there. Casinos are not going to make them significantly worse.
 
BosDevelop said:
You are clearly blinded by your anti-casino position if you cannot recognize that the vast majority of scratch ticket players don't just "drop $10 on some scratch tickets at White Hen." These folks are spending a hell of a lot more than just $10 every few days. Many of them buy several of the $5-$10 tickets at a time.

But go ahead and keep thinking that casino players will blow a weeks pay while scratch ticket players merely throw down the occasional ten spot.

I can't believe intelligent people actually think that casinos will have more adverse effects on Massachusetts' citizens than our current lottery games have. To those people I suggest spending some time in a convenience store, packy or keno parlor in a lower income area. The problems are already there. Casinos are not going to make them significantly worse.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm pretty sure it is not a vast majority and even so, I'm am sure that people would lose more money at a casino than at a scratch ticket. I draw all this from my cousin's experience who once lived in Las Vegas. The first thing they noticed when they lived there was that there were a huge number of beggars and homeless people, much greater than the city of Boston. So yes, there is a possibility that casino can make things significantly worse.
 
Kent, I don't think that's a fair parallel. Vegas is a gambling mecca - and an economy based on gaming -in a way which Boston will never, ever, be; as such it attracts the desperate, the already homeless, and the gambling addicts. I'd wager that the vast majority of homeless people in Vegas were not hardworking cactus farmers one day, and the next day, after the casino moved in, penniless and sleeping in a ditch.
 
BosDevelop said:
You are clearly blinded by your anti-casino position if you cannot recognize that the vast majority of scratch ticket players don't just "drop $10 on some scratch tickets at White Hen." These folks are spending a hell of a lot more than just $10 every few days. Many of them buy several of the $5-$10 tickets at a time.
Click to expand...

I've observed this behavior. The compulsion is similar, but the atmosphere is a bit different. Casinos are engineered to remove as much money from the guest as possible; convenience stores are only a point-of-sale for the lottery.

BosDevelop said:
But go ahead and keep thinking that casino players will blow a weeks pay while scratch ticket players merely throw down the occasional ten spot.
Click to expand...

I have a close friend who'd bet his last dollar on a cockroach race. My great-uncle was a prosperous bookmaker in East Boston. My mom, in her late seventies, loves 3-card poker. I won a bunch of money on Gonzaga in 1999. I know a little bit about gambling in all its forms.

BosDevelop said:
I can't believe intelligent people actually think that casinos will have more adverse effects on Massachusetts' citizens than our current lottery games have...The problems are already there. Casinos are not going to make them significantly worse.
Click to expand...

Wanna bet?
 
portnorfolk said:
monaco/monte carlo. for your shaken martini, of course. what is strange though is Monaco's own citizens are not allowed to gamble in the casinos. And no income tax. How perfect is that!
Click to expand...

Not only that, but one of their two colleges is almost entirely focused on training citizens for jobs within the casino. I represented Monaco at a Model UN conference, once. Good time, I managed to pass a resolution by offering each delegate who voted in my favor a weekend retreat at Monte Carlo.

Like Statler, I've got no horse in the race. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. On the one hand, I like the idea of all the potential development a casino could bring. I'd like to see a compromise - and anything even close to Monte Carlo would absolutely make me ecstatic. Of course - the entire model of Monte Carlo is different from American casinos. They are entirely focused on that one casino, whereas a casino would mostly be a side project here. I have a feeling that the only type of casino that would truly be socially "safe" would be a luxury one, it's very hard to imagine a "regular" casino that would be a positive contribution to an urban environment.
 
I'm technically not entirely against it. I guess you can say, if the bill does not pass I will be happy with it, and if a casino goes through then I don't really care.
 
BosDevelop said:
1) We already have numerous legal ways for Massachusetts citizens to gamble. Why is a scratch ticket ok but a hand of blackjack is not? Why is the lottery ok but pulling a slot machine is not? What's next, beer and wine are ok but no more hard liquor?
Click to expand...
For many of the same reasons I've given, but in different measures, I'm fine w/we put a stop to scratch tickets and slots. You've got my vote.


BosDevelop said:
2) how can the anti-casino folks continue to argue against casinos when the facts are that Massachusetts residents are spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year in other New England casinos? This is not going to stop. Why should we let Connecticut and Rhode Island reap all the benefits when Massachusetts citizens make the decision to spend their money at casinos? I am sick of seeing all this money go south simply because people think one form of gambling is more ethical or moral than others or one form of gambling will cause social problems more than others. Sorry folks but no form of gambling in this state will ever have as many adverse effects as scratch tickets, keno and lottery numbers.
Click to expand...

So, maybe we should encourage MA businesses to kick start an import substitution drive so that we can stop sending our dollars overseas for our Asian-manufactured Nike duds?

I'm thinking not. Why would we want to run the clock back to the 1800s when the US was a textiles powerhouse? You agree? Same thing applies to casinos -- these are last century's dead-end jobs generating low-multiplier sycophantic revenues. Terrific if you want to be a world class prostitute like Vegas, Macau, and Monaco but not much of a consolation prize to the economy that invented the microcomputer, the telephone, radar, general anesthetic and Lego Mindstorms.

Let the damn money go south and let CT & RI specialize their economies to what is essentially part of the nail salon and tattoo parlor sector. We should be focusing on building our economy towards the future, not fighting for a share of what is now, or will soon be under the proposed scenario, a slowly deflating pie. It's not about stopping the loss, it's about focusing our attention on creating far more new wealth.

We're talking about businesses in CT & RI that are doing virtually nothing to bring high wage, high skill jobs to those economies. And w/o high skill, high wage jobs you don't get lower skill, high wage, or craftsman-skill, high wage jobs pulled through. Instead you get a declining tax base, an incrementally less effective workforce, greater cost to existing businesses, greater social problems in general, and all the specific negatives of the licensed highway robbery that is gambling. I.e. everyone loses.

You up for all that in exchange for a few acres of development in a low rent part of town? Cause I'm not.

Or was it the solid fiscal foundation that casinos are supposed to build for the state coffers according to the self-interested businessmen and short-term, next election is mine and devil take the hindmost thinking of our much vaunted state officials?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top