[TOperson]

This is precisely why a ban for lower-income locals and the unemployed should make sense for this particular casino.

I doubt this would be legal. In practice, I think this would be very hard to enforce. How would you do it, ask people to bring their tax returns?

But anyway, casinos don't cater to low-income or unemployed people. Seniors with a lifetime's savings, a rich pension and lots of time on their hands - THAT'S the target market. Seniors can get addicted to gambling like anyone else, and they do, and casinos bleed them dry.

I don't have a link, but several years ago a Toronto man did a documentary on gambling addiction in Ontario. One of the key points was how quiet the whole thing has been kept, because governments are addicted to gambling too.

 

[MadMax]

Rama is cottage country, it does make sense to have a casino there. When the economy booms people are buying cottages/secondary properties, retiring, spending weeks or months of summer up there or renting to friends and family and strangers. This is a place for people with wealth.

The only thing Windsor has going for it is the lower drinking age, 18-20 year old Americans flock across the border but youth bring little money to spend. I also can't imagine the crushing strength of the CAD$ is attracting many high rollers from the great lakes region.

Obviously an anecdote, but the Canadian "whales" I know don't have the slightest interest spending their $2 million/year poker budget in NF, Toronto and especially not Windsor. They want proper venues and get set up with free flights to Vegas. The climate in downtown Toronto is cold, there are no golf courses just a modest driving range at Polsen Pier, there is no place for kids to play, hotels & restaurants are overpriced and serve small selections and meager quantities of food, Hazleton Lanes has been in decline for years, the closest high-end retail experience besides Bloor St is a non-convenient day trip to Sherway Gardens or Yorkdale.

Downtown Toronto is mostly composed of young and working class people, look no further than the tenants at the Eaton Centre. People here don't have money to gamble, they are trying to advance careers, paying down mortgages or renting and saving. At MTCC they will just be busing in seniors from different area codes all day, don't think MGM raised concerns about transportation for no reason.

I'm fine with building a casino operated by OLG, I just think building the "largest" casino in the world right here is a lofty and egregious idea.

Haha...people in Toronto don't have money??? Tell that to the donk stock brokers, doctors, and lawyers at my Thursday night game that think J7 offsuit is a good poker hand! There is a lot of money in the core, especially this part of downtown.

 

[000]

Only third rate bankers and lawyers would use a dinky local casino, real ones take a weekend in Vegas. You don't have to gamble either, at least in Vegas you're guaranteed to get more value for your $$.

 

[MadMax]

Yeah but who says its going to be dinky? I think we should wait until more details of the proposal(s) come to light before jumping to any conclusions...correct? I think this location would be perfect because it will blend in with all of the other office, convention, and retail that is being proposed. It wouldn't be so in your face a la MGM Grand in Vegas if it were at OP, Woodbine, or the Portlands. I'm thinkin this new project can give what the provincial gov't wants and what the city needs to liven up this part of the city after dark. The casino itself can be very subdued and classy if the correct developer for the casino is chosen. All the other elements I don't think anyone in their right mind would be opposed to.

 

[pman]

Yeah but who says its going to be dinky? I think we should wait until more details of the proposal(s) come to light before jumping to any conclusions...correct? I think this location would be perfect because it will blend in with all of the other office, convention, and retail that is being proposed. It wouldn't be so in your face a la MGM Grand in Vegas if it were at OP, Woodbine, or the Portlands. I'm thinkin this new project can give what the provincial gov't wants and what the city needs to liven up this part of the city after dark. The casino itself can be very subdued and classy if the correct developer for the casino is chosen. All the other elements I don't think anyone in their right mind would be opposed to.

I agree we should wait for the facts before jumping to conclusions, which is why I don't think the City should be in any hurry to approve a casino in exchange for the shiny bauble of a Norman Foster branded redevelopment of the site. The casino's opponents make some powerful data-driven arguments against putting one anywhere in 416, and we need to give their objections serious thought. The fact that Oxford made the proposal suggests that some kind of redevelopment and expansion of the Convention Centre is going to happen, whether or not we choose to emulate Las Vegas and Atlantic City.

 

[MadMax]

I agree we should wait for the facts before jumping to conclusions, which is why I don't think the City should be in any hurry to approve a casino in exchange for the shiny bauble of a Norman Foster branded redevelopment of the site. The casino's opponents make some powerful data-driven arguments against putting one anywhere in 416, and we need to give their objections serious thought. The fact that Oxford made the proposal suggests that some kind of redevelopment and expansion of the Convention Centre is going to happen, whether or not we choose to emulate Las Vegas and Atlantic City.

I would also go one step further...the Casino should be contingent on Oxford providing the city with exactly what they have proposed including the large park over the railyard lands. If this is not agreed to, then they can kiss their casino goodbye. The only thing that I don't get is the elitist attitude of a lot of Torontonians who say that it's not ok to put a casino in the 416 but it is ok to put it anywhere else. Why? Are you so much better than someone from Sauga, Brampton, or Markham? It's this artitude that I despise. Also always comparing us to Atlantic City just seems silly to me, its like comparing NY to Cleveland in my opinion. Totally different dynamics!

 

[Hanlansboy]

I would also go one step further...the Casino should be contingent on Oxford providing the city with exactly what they have proposed including the large park over the railyard lands. If this is not agreed to, then they can kiss their casino goodbye. The only thing that I don't get is the elitist attitude of a lot of Torontonians who say that it's not ok to put a casino in the 416 but it is ok to put it anywhere else. Why? Are you so much better than someone from Sauga, Brampton, or Markham? It's this artitude that I despise. Also always comparing us to Atlantic City just seems silly to me, its like comparing NY to Cleveland in my opinion. Totally different dynamics!

Totally agree Madmax! 416, or 905, how can it make any difference? They're basically saying its ok to turn the citizens in the burbs into gambling addicts, just not downtown, that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard! Beside, if their argument is based on the assumption that they're worried it will create addicts, prostitution, mafia (you know, all the stereotypes that cities like Vegas depict), how on earth is putting it a mere 10 kilometres from the core going to stop any of that? I may be a tad ignorant, or foolishly optimistic, but I really don't see that happening. If living here my entire life has taught me anything, it's that if the Ontario government is involved in it, it will be regulated to death. I just can't buy into so many stereotypes, besides, if a casino was that dangerous, then why isn't Niagara Falls full of crime? A very good friend of mine use to be a black jack dealer at Casino Niagara, according to him, there is about a million different rules and regulations to maintain a safe and happy environment for all, plus, he mentioned that the OLGC constantly had undercover inspectors keep everything legit, maybe a casino here can work, despite so much criticism. Everyone against it keeps throwing figures around of how much it costs society to treat gambling addicts, drug addiction and the like, under that logic, how much does the province spend on alcoholics since the LCBO is government run? With an issue like this there seems to be no in between, you're either for it or not. You can have a million statistics in the world on either side of the argument, it still doesn't mean it will happen here. I think what it will boil down to is if it's economically beneficial or not, it's rare governments base their decisions on emotions, moreover on profit, right or wrong, it's the one deciding factor. If that's the case here, then I'm confident it will happen, how big and by whom remains a mystery. My hunch is the convention centre, if they follow through with it, the casino aside, having a bigger convention centre will create a ton of new business for the city (many trade shows and conventions turn Toronto down simply because our convention centre is just too small), plus, I love the idea of a park covering the GO tracks, time will tell, if anything, it's given us a lot to talk about! Cheers!

 

[pman]

I would also go one step further...the Casino should be contingent on Oxford providing the city with exactly what they have proposed including the large park over the railyard lands. If this is not agreed to, then they can kiss their casino goodbye. The only thing that I don't get is the elitist attitude of a lot of Torontonians who say that it's not ok to put a casino in the 416 but it is ok to put it anywhere else. Why? Are you so much better than someone from Sauga, Brampton, or Markham? It's this artitude that I despise. Also always comparing us to Atlantic City just seems silly to me, its like comparing NY to Cleveland in my opinion. Totally different dynamics!

Uh...how exactly is saying no to a casino in Toronto equivalent to saying yes to a casino somewhere else, and how do you manage to conclude anyone who opposes a casino in Toronto thinks they're better than people from outside the 416?

 

[adma]

I just can't buy into so many stereotypes, besides, if a casino was that dangerous, then why isn't Niagara Falls full of crime?

Well, actually, away from the insulated environment of the central tourist zones, much of NF does have a fairly bleak and trashy-vicey no-go ambience...but that existed pre-casino as well, largely a byproduct of the cheap-honeymoon/quickie tourist economy, seedy motel strips and all. (Plus the fact that aside from the tourist economy, NF has traditionally been a fairly blue-collar town.)

And of course, it's all amplified once we come to grips w/Niagara Falls NY...

 

[TOperson]

Totally agree Madmax! 416, or 905, how can it make any difference? They're basically saying its ok to turn the citizens in the burbs into gambling addicts, just not downtown, that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard! Beside, if their argument is based on the assumption that they're worried it will create addicts, prostitution, mafia (you know, all the stereotypes that cities like Vegas depict), how on earth is putting it a mere 10 kilometres from the core going to stop any of that? I may be a tad ignorant, or foolishly optimistic, but I really don't see that happening. If living here my entire life has taught me anything, it's that if the Ontario government is involved in it, it will be regulated to death. I just can't buy into so many stereotypes, besides, if a casino was that dangerous, then why isn't Niagara Falls full of crime? A very good friend of mine use to be a black jack dealer at Casino Niagara, according to him, there is about a million different rules and regulations to maintain a safe and happy environment for all, plus, he mentioned that the OLGC constantly had undercover inspectors keep everything legit, maybe a casino here can work, despite so much criticism. Everyone against it keeps throwing figures around of how much it costs society to treat gambling addicts, drug addiction and the like, under that logic, how much does the province spend on alcoholics since the LCBO is government run? With an issue like this there seems to be no in between, you're either for it or not. You can have a million statistics in the world on either side of the argument, it still doesn't mean it will happen here. I think what it will boil down to is if it's economically beneficial or not, it's rare governments base their decisions on emotions, moreover on profit, right or wrong, it's the one deciding factor. If that's the case here, then I'm confident it will happen, how big and by whom remains a mystery. My hunch is the convention centre, if they follow through with it, the casino aside, having a bigger convention centre will create a ton of new business for the city (many trade shows and conventions turn Toronto down simply because our convention centre is just too small), plus, I love the idea of a park covering the GO tracks, time will tell, if anything, it's given us a lot to talk about! Cheers!

The reason people think a casino in Toronto will increase gambling addiction is because increased access to gambling ALWAYS leads to increases in gambling addiction. This has been studied to death, there is a ton of evidence showing this, just do some googling and you'll find it. There already is a gambling addiction problem in Ontario, and it basically didn't exist before casinos started opening here in the 90s.

 

[MadMax]

The reason people think a casino in Toronto will increase gambling addiction is because increased access to gambling ALWAYS leads to increases in gambling addiction. This has been studied to death, there is a ton of evidence showing this, just do some googling and you'll find it. There already is a gambling addiction problem in Ontario, and it basically didn't exist before casinos started opening here in the 90s.

So do you think that the hundreds of LCBO's on the corners of every major intersection in the GTA cause addiction to alcohol? And the thousands of convenience stores selling cigarettes cause addiction to smoking? Should we ban the opening of all Mac's Milks, 7/11's, and LCBO's? Come on now, lets be somewhat realistic. You can't have it both ways, banning some "so called" addictive places and not others like liquor stores and beer stores that are much more addictive and unhealthy than a casino. Am I right?

 

[TOperson]

So do you think that the hundreds of LCBO's on the corners of every major intersection in the GTA cause addiction to alcohol? And the thousands of convenience stores selling cigarettes cause addiction to smoking? Should we ban the opening of all Mac's Milks, 7/11's, and LCBO's? Come on now, lets be somewhat realistic. You can't have it both ways, banning some "so called" addictive places and not others like liquor stores and beer stores that are much more addictive and unhealthy than a casino. Am I right?

Those examples show what a pickle we've gotten ourselves into. For all kinds of cultural and historical reasons, and more recent economic ones (govts really don't want to give up the tax revenue from those products) we have decided to allow certain addictive substances and behaviours but not others. Now we live with the consquences of those choices, and some of them are very costly to society. That is all the more reason to question the wisdom of permitting another addictive thing into our communities.

It's not like anyone NEEDS to gamble. It's not a human right, people don't die without it, Ontarians got by without it for a very long time. Whatever problems a Toronto casino is expected to solve (if any - has anyone heard of one?) could probably be solved another way or could be superseded by the new problems the casino would introduce.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

So do you think that the hundreds of LCBO's on the corners of every major intersection in the GTA cause addiction to alcohol? And the thousands of convenience stores selling cigarettes cause addiction to smoking? Should we ban the opening of all Mac's Milks, 7/11's, and LCBO's? Come on now, lets be somewhat realistic. You can't have it both ways, banning some "so called" addictive places and not others like liquor stores and beer stores that are much more addictive and unhealthy than a casino. Am I right?

Max - that be one of those 'straw man' argument thingies. So, no, you're not right.

 

[MadMax]

Even if it is...the hypocrisy still exists, there is no denying that!

 

[MadMax]

Prohibition has never worked and thats what bonehead councillors like Vaughn and others are promoting. It didnt work with alcohol, cigarettes, and its not working in other areas that I'm not going to get into. As far as solving a major problem, how about the hundreds of underground games that are going on as we speak.