Does Toronto Need A Casino? - Page 3

Tony · #41 Posted **Apr 17, 2013, 6:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso

Does a city need a casino? Does a city need alcohol or night clubs? No, but it helps.

Helps what? Jobs? Is that all it provides?

isaidso · #42 Posted **Apr 18, 2013, 7:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tony

Helps what? Jobs? Is that all it provides?

Of course not.

- Jobs
- Entertainment
- Tourism
- Increased tax base

Those are the primary benefits, but does one really need any more? Demand should be enough all by itself. If demand warrants a casino we should build one. I have zero interest in living in a nanny state. Besides, its about time we shed our conservative image and injected more fun/glamour into our city. TIFF and our theatre scene have been a big boost in that direction, this would be another major piece of the puzzle.

The days of Presbyterian Toronto when we couldn't drink on Sundays is long gone and good riddance. Or maybe its rearing its ugly head once again?

Stryker · #43 Posted **Apr 30, 2013, 2:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso

Of course not.

- Jobs
- Entertainment
- Tourism
- Increased tax base

Those are the primary benefits, but does one really need any more? Demand should be enough all by itself. If demand warrants a casino we should build one. I have zero interest in living in a nanny state. Besides, its about time we shed our conservative image and injected more fun/glamour into our city. TIFF and our theatre scene have been a big boost in that direction, this would be another major piece of the puzzle.

The days of Presbyterian Toronto when we couldn't drink on Sundays is long gone and good riddance. Or maybe its rearing its ugly head once again?

Nanny state, it's a city not wanting a bad element inside it's borders. You want freedom there's a whole country out there where your free to do what you want.

Comparing a gambling center to a theater is a powerfully different.

Seriously I can't tell if some of you are just naive, or simply uncaring of the social effect these places bring.

Toronto's one strong suite is it's relatively clean image, the last thing you need is a little vegas sketch.

Stryker · #44 Posted **Apr 30, 2013, 2:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coral Builder

I think you are kind of missing my argument (thanks for moving this to the right thread though I believe this discussion is integral to the development itself, as one will not happen without the other, as per Oxford's announcement..).

My main point is that there are right ways and a wrong ways to build a casino in a major city, and if you don't think Casino's can be harmful to society I suggest you do a little reading such as the following:

Taken from a recent municipal study in Columbus, Ohio (2005) on the effects of a potential Casino development there (sanctioned by pro-casino municipal government):

Source: http://www.communityresearchpartners...%201-21-10.pdf

"The literature shows that the most clear social impact of casino development is the increase in problem gambling that results. It is estimated that 1.2% of U.S. adults are pathological gamblers at some point in their lifetime and that another 1.5% are problem gamblers. The likelihood of being a pathological or problem gambler is double for a person living within 50 miles of a casino. (This would include most of the GTA if the Casino is located downtown)

100,000 lives destroyed so we can have another building to gawk at?

Seriously some of yall should do a test for sociopathy.

Anyhow bring on the personal freedom argument, where it's people own stupid fault.., which equates to I really view people of low intelligence as second class people.

LeftCoaster · #45 Posted **May 21, 2013, 9:00 PM**

Largely anticipated, but the casino was decisively defeated today.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013...rds_dream.html

Don't know why the Star called it Ford's dream, he had nothing to do with it's inception, but any excuse to take a swipe I guess.

taal · #46 Posted **May 22, 2013, 12:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Largely anticipated, but the casino was decisively defeated today.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013...rds_dream.html

Don't know why the Star called it Ford's dream, he had nothing to do with it's inception, but any excuse to take a swipe I guess.

So any insight on when / if / how Oxford may go ahead with the expansion anyway ?

Tony · #47 Posted **May 22, 2013, 2:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Don't know why the Star called it Ford's dream, he had nothing to do with it's inception, but any excuse to take a swipe I guess.

It might not be Ford's dream or his idea - god knows he doesn't have a lot of ideas swimming around in that cavernous smoke filled head of his - but he sure wasted no opportunity in the past several weeks pushing his support of it and mentioning it along with his standard "respect the taxpayer" sign-offs.

I wonder why that is... what exactly did Mr. Mayor and MGM have a discussion about before this was formally proposed hmm?

easy as pie · #48 Posted **May 22, 2013, 3:57 PM**

yeah, you "don't know why" they'd say it's his dream? maybe because the guy has been fanatically, even abusively, pushing that casino as his panacea solution to toronto's problems, basically counting on it to make up for funding shortfalls that he seems to want to engineer. any reason to go after the guy...

trueskiller · #49 Posted **May 22, 2013, 11:53 PM**

rumours are since toronto said no mississauga is up next...malton area

LeftCoaster · #50 Posted **May 23, 2013, 3:15 PM**

I'd imagine it will go somewhere out in the burbs, but my bet wouldn't be on Mississauga...

Ford was an ally of the casino no doubt but he had more or less nothing to do with it's inception or actual development, he was simply an avid supporter. It's really his kinda project if you think about it, big money, glitzy but ultimately a little hollow. If the news wants to take a swipe it should be at MGM or Oxford/Cadillac, but I dont understand why they would. It was a proposal to build something that ultimately the citizens said they didnt want, so it wont be built. No hard feelings.

LeftCoaster · #51 Posted **May 23, 2013, 3:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by taal

So any insight on when / if / how Oxford may go ahead with the expansion anyway ?

Market driven of course. I'd say several years at best if you want my guess.

Richlord11 · #52 Posted **May 24, 2013, 11:58 AM**

I am no puritan, but I hate gambling and casinos in general. I don't think that casinos offer anything of worth for a customer. The only good thing are possible job opportunities.

Danny D Oh · #53 Posted **Aug 30, 2013, 5:38 AM**

Just visited Toronto on a trip where I saw Ottawa, Chicago, Cleveland and the Twin Cities. The only one that had a prominent casino downtown was Cleveland, and it was by far the most depressed, least interesting downtown to me as a tourist. Whether or not that is related to having a prominent downtown historical building (Tower City, old train station) developed into a casino, I do not know. An interesting waitress who served us in Cleveland identified the casino as an act of desperation for the city when we asked about places we should check out.

HTania · #54 Posted **Sep 28, 2013, 4:12 AM**

Casino can provide a good income for the city. Even we do not build a Casino in Toronto, people will still gambling somewhere. So building a casino is a good idea.

andrewwentz · #55 Posted **Oct 6, 2014, 10:12 AM**

Yes, Toronto does not need a casino.

isaidso · #56 Posted **Oct 6, 2014, 11:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewwentz

Yes, Toronto does not need a casino.

Or clubs
Or restaurants
Or cinemas
Or theatres
Or sports teams
Or an aquarium
Or a zoo
Or performing arts
Or the LCBO
Or wine stores

But these things add to our quality of life, provide jobs, entertainment, a tax base, increase tourism, and we don't live in North Korea so I don't want the government telling me what types of amenities I get to enjoy and which ones I don't. Don't like something, then don't go to it.

Puritan nanny state? No thank you. (And I don't gamble at all and never will.)

Tony · #57 Posted **Oct 9, 2014, 4:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso

Or clubs
Or restaurants
Or cinemas
Or theatres
Or sports teams
Or an aquarium
Or a zoo
Or performing arts
Or the LCBO
Or wine stores

But these things add to our quality of life, provide jobs, entertainment, a tax base, increase tourism, and we don't live in North Korea so I don't want the government telling me what types of amenities I get to enjoy and which ones I don't. Don't like something, then don't go to it.

Puritan nanny state? No thank you. (And I don't gamble at all and never will.)

FYI, just randomly comparing every form of entertainment in a city does not help your argument. It just shows you are completely blind to the ill-effects caused by downtown casinos as noted earlier in this thread. It has nothing to do with wanting some "puritan nanny state" notion that you constructed in your head. It's more to do with not wanting the bad stuff that comes with casinos affecting a few blocks of our downtown.

It's not like just because we don't build a casino, everything in your pointless list will suddenly vanish.

WhipperSnapper · #58 Posted **Oct 9, 2014, 4:50 PM**

Increased tourism? Again, a bunch of ranting and raving without taking reality into account. The northeast market has been saturated now that every backwater has been allowed to build a casino. Demand has reached its peaked and each casino is experiencing declining revenue as new ones continue to open.

I swear no one would care about any of this if the rendering looked less Foster and more like the conference hotel being built on the CNE grounds. There are casinos all over Toronto. Go to them.