[Thanos]

Sure, it can be nice. But there are a whole slew of other ways create "destinations that everyone could enjoy, provide many jobs, and attract tourists"--that are less inherently T.A.C.K.Y. And there's nothing like the kinds of big casino-type "entertainment destinations" to even render the so-called "nice" inherently tacky.

And maybe a point with the posted image is this: Toronto needs your kind of "entertainment attraction" like a hole in the head, just like Forest Hill needs those kinds of McMansion teardowns like a hole in the head. Even if "millions of people" might find that architecture pleasing, or even preferable (in aesthetics, at least) to this

And let that "taste of millions" speak for (or rather, against) itself.

You're like the Hitler of architecture. If you like it then it must be an architectural marvel that will last the test of time and be admired by generations. If you don't like it we should tear it down because it should never have been built to begin with. Does this mentality remind you of a 50s-60s Toronto where everything was torn down just because the people in power did not like it.
Just because in your opinion something is tacky and ugly does not mean you have the final say and everyone must agree with you.

 

[howl]

'Real' cities don't need casino's.



But if Torontonians have so little confidence in their city that they decide they need to jump on the Casino bandwagon, so be it.

 

[coolcanadian]

'Real' cities don't need casino's.



But if Torontonians have so little confidence in their city that they decide they need to jump on the Casino bandwagon, so be it.

Enough of this! New York has a casino, is it not a 'real' city? Are Montreal, Vancouver, and Calgary not 'real' cities? Los Angeles, Miami, Melbourne, London, Berlin, Philadelphia, San Diego, ?

That is a bad argument to make. Toronto does not need a casino, but the decision to place one in the region has been made. Also, there is a casino in Toronto at the CNE during the summer.

We now have the option to build just that -- a casino -- or something greater. We have the option to create thousands more jobs, or not as many. We have the option to create a great addition to the skyline, waterfront, and tourism.

The question is, do we want another grand attraction in our city that has a casino in 5% of it, or do we want a gaming facility in a suburb?

 

[Lenser]

This thread is starting to sound very circular very sound to starting is thread this

 

[AKS]

Go check out the slots facilities. Work with the Responsible Gaming Council. Work with addictions counsellors. You won't find a lot of their clients (and potential clients) accessing underground poker, but you will find them buying Nevada tickets and spending countless hours at slot machines because the facilities we currently have make it more accessible. And of course there are a lot of people who have fun gambling and spend $20 here or there, but there are also a lot who can't control their spending. I've just spent too much time watching those folks lately, and I find it sad that our government is involved in wrapping it all up in a pretty package and marketing it the way they do. But hey, I found Vegas one of the most depressing places I've ever been. To me all the glitz and glam is nothing more than lipstick on a pig. I've never been a fan of slot facilities or casinos, and I've never seen anything in all the year's we've have them in Ontario to change my mind. But hey, I know I'm in the minority.

There's a lot of ways to gamble even without casinos. I'm not much of a casino or lottery gambler but I've gotten burned on stocks before. That's another form of gambling. Some gamble their savings on lottery. Maybe we should ban lottery and stock trading? Max keeps hitting 50 million or close to it every week lately. There's online gambling as well. I have friends who gamble online. There's underground gambling casinos. That could ruin lives too. I do understand the feeling of gambling and it can be like an "adrenaline rush". But it's having self control that will prevent you from falling into addiction. Those without self control will need to seek help, whether there's a casino or not.

 

[coolcanadian]

There's a lot of ways to gamble even without casinos. I'm not much of a casino or lottery gambler but I've gotten burned on stocks before. That's another form of gambling. Some gamble their savings on lottery. Maybe we should ban lottery and stock trading? Max keeps hitting 50 million or close to it every week lately. There's online gambling as well. I have friends who gamble online. There's underground gambling casinos. That could ruin lives too. I do understand the feeling of gambling and it can be like an "adrenaline rush". But it's having self control that will prevent you from falling into addiction. Those without self control will need to seek help, whether there's a casino or not.

That is very true. There are many other forms of gambling in Toronto, even without a casino.

Of course, there are (1.) slots in Toronto. (2.) Horse racing at Woodbine is also gambling. There are so many different (3.) lotteries in Toronto, at almost every store. The (4.) stock exchange is also gambling, even if it may be more 'professional'. From almost anywhere, (5.) online gambling can be used. More dangerously, (6.) illegal gambling takes place in the city.

Isn't almost everything in life a gamble? Look at a show like Dragon's Den. People put all their money into a product that they thing will make it, only to lose everything. Is that not similar to gambling?

Some people on this forum believe that putting a casino in Toronto will be the single thing that brings gambling to our city. The fact is, there is already so much gambling in our city. We have a casino at the CNE during the Summer! as I have said many times before, and it does not ruin our city!

Even if it is not built downtown, a casino is being built somewhere in the GTA. Not to say that, even if it weren't, the closest casino is only a short drive away.

We do not need a casino in Toronto. Whether we build one downtown or not, gambling will always take place in our city. I think it is logical to want the casino to be as beneficial as possible. If this were just about an entertainment complex/hotel (with no casino) coming to Toronto, I do not think anyone would be complaining about the jobs created, the tourists attracted, and the new attraction that could be enjoyed by everyone. The fact that 5% of this will be a casino should not matter, especially because a casino is coming to the GTA no matter what. Even is that 5% is the spine of the complex, we are still getting a complex.

A casino would also probably decrease the amount of illegal gambling in Toronto. It is better to have it regulated, of course.

People make it sound like everyone who enters the casino gambles away their life. Just because you hear about those stories in the media. The truth is, most people who goto a casino are smart about it, and just play a little for fun. It is unfair to say that everyone who gambles, or even most people who do, have an addiction.

What would be the problem with having a Marina Bay Sands or Crown complex in Toronto?! I see many positives, but what is the major negative?

 

[PinkLucy]

Hey, I'd ban lotteries and online gaming too. I've seen too many people with no grocery money thanks to Nevada tickets and lottery tickets. I know most peoplemdon't agreed with me, but hey, I'm just expressing my opinion based on years of personal experience. Casinos will be built and gambling will happen; there will also be social repercussions that can't be ignored or blithely dismissed by suggesting that offering some other entertainment will take care of the problem. Of course I also understand that the enthusiastic OP's experience with casinos seems to be limited to walking through one to get to his hotel room

 

[coolcanadian]

Hey, I'd ban lotteries and online gaming too. I've seen too many people with no grocery money thanks to Nevada tickets and lottery tickets. I know most peoplemdon't agreed with me, but hey, I'm just expressing my opinion based on years of personal experience. Casinos will be built and gambling will happen; there will also be social repercussions that can't be ignored or blithely dismissed by suggesting that offering some other entertainment will take care of the problem. Of course I also understand that the enthusiastic OP's experience with casinos seems to be limited to walking through one to get to his hotel room

I understand that you are against it. Many people are (as well as many aren't). But it has come to a conclusion that a casino is going to be built in the GTA. Whether we like it or not. I'm not necessarily suggesting that a casino with an entertainment complex attached will have less of a negative social impact than a casino without one. However, with the addition of the complex, we will be providing more jobs, attracting tourists, and creating something for more than just gamblers.

If both a casino downtown and in Markham have the same negative social effects, why not build it downtown where we can increase the positive effects, such as job creation, tourist dollars, and entertainment options?

It's not like our government would be the ones spending billions on this. It's a private company! If they want to give us more than a casino, why not!?

 

[MetroMan]

What would be the problem with having a Marina Bay Sands or Crown complex in Toronto?! I see many positives, but what is the major negative?

Actually, Marina Bay Sands would be the perfect template for a Casino @ Ontario Place + Exhibition Place.

A low rise MGM casino complex would be built on the parking lots fronting Ontario Place, with underground parking many times replacing the capacity at the surface lot.
Just north of this on Exhibition Place land, you'd have the hotel towers with Lakeshore Blvd. running between the two parts of the complex. MGM would be responsible for building pedestrian friendly connections over or under Lakeshore. In one scenario, I can see the complex decking over Lakeshore with parks and other hotel/casino amenities open to the public. This would connect Ontario Place to the city north of Lakeshore at no cost to taxpayers other than land which would be leased or purchased anyway.

 

[coolcanadian]

Actually, Marina Bay Sands would be the perfect template for a Casino @ Ontario Place + Exhibition Place.

A low rise MGM casino complex would be built on the parking lots fronting Ontario Place, with underground parking many times replacing the capacity at the surface lot.
Just north of this on Exhibition Place land, you'd have the hotel towers with Lakeshore Blvd. running between the two parts of the complex. MGM would be responsible for building pedestrian friendly connections over or under Lakeshore. In one scenario, I can see the complex decking over Lakeshore with parks and other hotel/casino amenities open to the public. This would connect Ontario Place to the city north of Lakeshore at no cost to taxpayers other than land which would be leased or purchased anyway.

Uh oh, Metroman!! You posted a picture! How dare you! adma is probably going to get mad now!!

I agree with you! This would go great at Ex/OP and would be at no cost to citizens!! It has already been said that they are looking at Marina Bay as inspiration

For those who say that OP needs to stay as a family place, this type of complex would still attract families! It would just have a much wider ranger of visitors than just kids.

 

[Automation Gallery]

Nothing to get mad about, but it sure would be amazing for Toronto...i say bring it on
.. hahaha i can see all my south Parkdale neighbours all loosing their minds over something like this

 

[AKS]

It would be nice to get a promenade that looks something like this with small boutique stores.

 

[adma]

What would be the problem with having a Marina Bay Sands or Crown complex in Toronto?! I see many positives, but what is the major negative?

Less is more.

Y'know, like there are lots of so-called positives to cheap supersized meals, or pizza "with the works", or dating a Victoria's Secret model...

 

[coolcanadian]

Less is more.

Y'know, like there are lots of so-called positives to cheap supersized meals, or pizza "with the works", or dating a Victoria's Secret model...

That is probably one of the worst arguments I have ever heard. This would be in no way a "cheap super sized meal"! You are making it sound like the developer is being forced to add an entertainment complex is they want to build a casino, therefore it will be cheap. That is simply not true. It's not like the city place bridge, which was forced upon the developer.

In this case, less is not more at all. That is just stupid. I am not calling you stupid, but saying that is.

If this were just for an entertainment complex at The Ex with hotels, restaurants, shows, shops, a spa, and other attractions, I don't think anyone would be against it. I think if someone wanted to spend $6 billon on an entertainment complex at the Ex, everyone would be extremely excited, especially if it were a private company!

The fact that a casino is attached to this, one that will be coming to the GTA anyway if we do not build this, means we should go for it.

The tourists, jobs and entertainment would be unrivalled. We are the entertainment capital of Canada.

This is not a super sized casino. It's an entertainment complex. There is nothing wrong with entertainment complexes. Having the rest of the complex attached will not make more people gamble. However, it will provide more jobs, attract tourists, and provide more entertainment for Torontonians.

It's not even like 40% of this is a casino... Only 5% is a casino! That is a fact! MGM wants it like that. They want to build a great destination for Toronto.

 

[spider]

Originally Posted by coolcanadian

What would be the problem with having a Marina Bay Sands or Crown complex in Toronto?! I see many positives, but what is the major negative?

12" of snow?