By Progressive Maybe on Thu, 05/14/2009 - 11:12am.
So which one is it - does Susan have a passion to effect change or a passion to tell us what we want to hear? Is she a "Yes" when it comes to sponsoring Casino Legislation or just when it means a labor endorsement is at stake? Perhaps telling us that she would support casinos the way she seems to now be defensively telling the South End News might have been a bit more honest. I am sure that like me, many others who support her were under the impression that her concerns over resort gaming and casinos as a source of revenue would hardly make her an admitted "sponsor" of casino legislation. I would have appreciated knowing this information sooner.
The casino issue is very complicated as an issue, and even a sane person can have 6 competing views on the topic. Of course certain people want NO casinos, at which point they become one sided. Its easier for a politician to just say NO to everything, but most people fall soemwhere in the middle with a mix of the 6 criteria.
Likes/Dislikes racinos
Likes/Dislikes stand alone casinos
Likes/Dislikes resort casinos
Likes/Dislikes casinos, but NOT there
Likes/Dislikes casinos based off of payements to local cities and towns to combat negative side effects
Likes/Dislikes casinos based off of extra development in the area
By independentminded on Thu, 05/14/2009 - 12:35pm.
Casinos, imho, are the last thing that's needed here in Boston and in the Bay State, generally. Casinos won't create jobs. It may create more prostitution and other cheap ways of earning money, and we don't want Boston or any other Bay State cities to become another Atlantic City or Mohegan Sun.
If Casinos do not create jobs, then who works at Casinos?
Its one thing to oppose them for any number of reasons, but its obvious that a Casino needs people to work. Therefor it creates jobs, and unless it is tearing down an active factory or giant office building thats full with offices then it is not destroying any jobs either. I for one am still in support of turning the Hynes into a casino (which has been dropped as a choice by most sane people years and years ago.)
Casinos may create jobs, but that number needs to be reduced by the number of jobs eliminated from existing restaurants, bars, and entertainment venues who lose business to the casinos. It's possible that the net is zero or negative.
East Boston/Revere have a very low Restaurant-Population number compared to other parts of Boston and Cambridge. Some neighberhoods in Cambridge have more places to dine then all of Revere does. There are downtown areas in some nicer smaller towns (less then 20,000 people) with more places to eat then East Boston. Currently the public is not coming to this area in droves, it is catering to locals for the most part. These new places would cater to new people coming in. Different market.
up
Voting closed 0
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
You must be kidding me!!!!!
So which one is it - does Susan have a passion to effect change or a passion to tell us what we want to hear? Is she a "Yes" when it comes to sponsoring Casino Legislation or just when it means a labor endorsement is at stake? Perhaps telling us that she would support casinos the way she seems to now be defensively telling the South End News might have been a bit more honest. I am sure that like me, many others who support her were under the impression that her concerns over resort gaming and casinos as a source of revenue would hardly make her an admitted "sponsor" of casino legislation. I would have appreciated knowing this information sooner.
The casino issue is very
The casino issue is very complicated as an issue, and even a sane person can have 6 competing views on the topic. Of course certain people want NO casinos, at which point they become one sided. Its easier for a politician to just say NO to everything, but most people fall soemwhere in the middle with a mix of the 6 criteria.
Likes/Dislikes racinos
Likes/Dislikes stand alone casinos
Likes/Dislikes resort casinos
Likes/Dislikes casinos, but NOT there
Likes/Dislikes casinos based off of payements to local cities and towns to combat negative side effects
Likes/Dislikes casinos based off of extra development in the area
What do we need casinos here in the Bay State for?
Casinos, imho, are the last thing that's needed here in Boston and in the Bay State, generally. Casinos won't create jobs. It may create more prostitution and other cheap ways of earning money, and we don't want Boston or any other Bay State cities to become another Atlantic City or Mohegan Sun.
If Casinos do not create
If Casinos do not create jobs, then who works at Casinos?
Its one thing to oppose them for any number of reasons, but its obvious that a Casino needs people to work. Therefor it creates jobs, and unless it is tearing down an active factory or giant office building thats full with offices then it is not destroying any jobs either. I for one am still in support of turning the Hynes into a casino (which has been dropped as a choice by most sane people years and years ago.)
Net creation of jobs?
Casinos may create jobs, but that number needs to be reduced by the number of jobs eliminated from existing restaurants, bars, and entertainment venues who lose business to the casinos. It's possible that the net is zero or negative.
East Boston/Revere have a
East Boston/Revere have a very low Restaurant-Population number compared to other parts of Boston and Cambridge. Some neighberhoods in Cambridge have more places to dine then all of Revere does. There are downtown areas in some nicer smaller towns (less then 20,000 people) with more places to eat then East Boston. Currently the public is not coming to this area in droves, it is catering to locals for the most part. These new places would cater to new people coming in. Different market.