|
|
|
OLG Toronto/GTA casino proposal (where to put it?)
- Thread starter spider
- Start date
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
I think that statement (however lame as an argument for a casino) is probably the most logical point Mammoliti has ever made. If you truly wanted to combat gambling addiction monitoring local use of a gaming facility would be one of the best ways. Accept a) no one is going to do that and b) privacy and other such legislation would never allow that kind of information and monitoring to occur.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
LOL
...Funny cause these are the same councillors that are going to fight the Billy Bishop airport runway expansion
Left's anti-casino stance all about snobbery
They were at executive committee Monday whispering amongst themselves, jumping up and down, sending tweets, making rude comments, and laughing uproariously at those who want to invest in Toronto with a casino.
A tag team of Leftist Snobs/Arrogant Know-it-Alls/Obstructionists/Kindegarten Kiddies on council -- Adam Vaughan, Gord Perks, Joe Mihevc, Janet Davis, Shelley Carroll, Mike Layton and Sarah Doucette -- couldn't wait to land into anyone who dared support a casino resort development for the investment dollars it will bring into the city.
Vaughan, clutching sweatily to reports he's used to make outrageous allegations about MGM's ties to the mob, questioned the three gentlemen from MGM and Cadillac Fairview -- who've proposed a casino resort development at Exhibition Place -- as if they were hostile witnesses.
Their answers, as reasonable as they were, didn't matter, mind you.
It was all about the show and spreading the myths for the Tag Team, who were too busy looking at their smartphones, smirking at the presenters, talking to like-minded leftist bureaucrats and walking disruptively back and forth.
Carroll made herself busy, in between loudly declaring what she thought of some of the answers that didn't suit her, passing around cookies.
When they finished their delicious game of beating up on the casino investors and supporters, the Tag Team (except for Sister Doucette) disappeared from the room.
It was really quite remarkable, actually, considering the Tag Team are supposed to be good friends of the union brothers and sisters -- and John Mandarino, representing the Labourers International Union of North America, was up to speak.
But throughout his three-minute talk about how a casino resort development in Toronto would bring all kinds of construction and hospitality jobs and spin-off work on roads and transit systems to the city, Vaughan, Perks, Carroll, Layton and Mihevc were AWOL.
More......http://www.torontosun.com/2013/04/15/lefts-anti-casino-stance-all-about-snobbery
...Funny cause these are the same councillors that are going to fight the Billy Bishop airport runway expansionLeft's anti-casino stance all about snobbery
They were at executive committee Monday whispering amongst themselves, jumping up and down, sending tweets, making rude comments, and laughing uproariously at those who want to invest in Toronto with a casino.
A tag team of Leftist Snobs/Arrogant Know-it-Alls/Obstructionists/Kindegarten Kiddies on council -- Adam Vaughan, Gord Perks, Joe Mihevc, Janet Davis, Shelley Carroll, Mike Layton and Sarah Doucette -- couldn't wait to land into anyone who dared support a casino resort development for the investment dollars it will bring into the city.
Vaughan, clutching sweatily to reports he's used to make outrageous allegations about MGM's ties to the mob, questioned the three gentlemen from MGM and Cadillac Fairview -- who've proposed a casino resort development at Exhibition Place -- as if they were hostile witnesses.
Their answers, as reasonable as they were, didn't matter, mind you.
It was all about the show and spreading the myths for the Tag Team, who were too busy looking at their smartphones, smirking at the presenters, talking to like-minded leftist bureaucrats and walking disruptively back and forth.
Carroll made herself busy, in between loudly declaring what she thought of some of the answers that didn't suit her, passing around cookies.
When they finished their delicious game of beating up on the casino investors and supporters, the Tag Team (except for Sister Doucette) disappeared from the room.
It was really quite remarkable, actually, considering the Tag Team are supposed to be good friends of the union brothers and sisters -- and John Mandarino, representing the Labourers International Union of North America, was up to speak.
But throughout his three-minute talk about how a casino resort development in Toronto would bring all kinds of construction and hospitality jobs and spin-off work on roads and transit systems to the city, Vaughan, Perks, Carroll, Layton and Mihevc were AWOL.
More......http://www.torontosun.com/2013/04/15/lefts-anti-casino-stance-all-about-snobbery
Riverdale Rink Rat
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,775
- Reaction score
- 273
- Location
- Back to East York... Alas!
LOL
Wow, SAL is a crappy writer! But, beyond that, what're you trying to get at, AG? Being anti-casino and anti-airport expansion would be... consistent, no? Are you trying to intimate something else?
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Perhaps SAL just haven't talked to the right type of "the right" - the God-fearing, morality police loving ones. Got to love how
this has been painted as a "left-right" issue. I am really quite curious how many of those who are pro would stay in that stance if the facility is relocated to their ward.
AoD
this has been painted as a "left-right" issue. I am really quite curious how many of those who are pro would stay in that stance if the facility is relocated to their ward.
AoD
Torontovibe
Senior Member
LOL
Left's anti-casino stance all about snobbery
They were at executive committee Monday whispering amongst themselves, jumping up and down, sending tweets, making rude comments, and laughing uproariously at those who want to invest in Toronto with a casino.
A tag team of Leftist Snobs/Arrogant Know-it-Alls/Obstructionists/Kindegarten Kiddies on council -- Adam Vaughan, Gord Perks, Joe Mihevc, Janet Davis, Shelley Carroll, Mike Layton and Sarah Doucette -- couldn't wait to land into anyone who dared support a casino resort development for the investment dollars it will bring into the city.
Vaughan, clutching sweatily to reports he's used to make outrageous allegations about MGM's ties to the mob, questioned the three gentlemen from MGM and Cadillac Fairview -- who've proposed a casino resort development at Exhibition Place -- as if they were hostile witnesses.
Their answers, as reasonable as they were, didn't matter, mind you.
It was all about the show and spreading the myths for the Tag Team, who were too busy looking at their smartphones, smirking at the presenters, talking to like-minded leftist bureaucrats and walking disruptively back and forth.
Carroll made herself busy, in between loudly declaring what she thought of some of the answers that didn't suit her, passing around cookies.
When they finished their delicious game of beating up on the casino investors and supporters, the Tag Team (except for Sister Doucette) disappeared from the room.
It was really quite remarkable, actually, considering the Tag Team are supposed to be good friends of the union brothers and sisters -- and John Mandarino, representing the Labourers International Union of North America, was up to speak.
But throughout his three-minute talk about how a casino resort development in Toronto would bring all kinds of construction and hospitality jobs and spin-off work on roads and transit systems to the city, Vaughan, Perks, Carroll, Layton and Mihevc were AWOL.
More......http://www.torontosun.com/2013/04/15/lefts-anti-casino-stance-all-about-snobbery
What a useless, badly written article. What is the point of it? That some council members have values that that go beyond money? Is that a bad thing or is money the only thing that matters in this city? Not everybody can be bought out by a few bucks.
Peepers
Banned
What I wonder about is if city council rejects a Casino for downtown - as now appears likely - what is stopping the province from building a Casino at Ontario Place? This is Provincial land and as far as I am aware the Province does not need approval from the city to build on its own land ( I could be wrong).
Of course Queen's Park would have liked to have agreement from the city but they couldn't have counted on so many idiot Councillors voting against it. I think public sentiment is in favor of a Casino so there were be no political downside for the province going against the city.
Of course Queen's Park would have liked to have agreement from the city but they couldn't have counted on so many idiot Councillors voting against it. I think public sentiment is in favor of a Casino so there were be no political downside for the province going against the city.
I don't think public sentiment is in favour -- the results of the city-commissioned survey showed that.
TOareaFan
Superstar
For one, it would be a pretty serious back tracking on a previous promise to not impose a Casino on any municipality that did not want one. I know that governments reverse decisions all the time but that sort of reversal would put the Liberals in a tough spot in Toronto at the next election when their NDP and Tory opponents could say "they promised to respect the city's wishes, then when they did not get the decision they wanted, they forced a casino on you."
I think the Province/OLG are being honest when they say that they will not force a casino on Toronto if Toronto says it does not want one....but I don't think they will then look to Ontario Place....they will look to find a location in the 905 with good access to Toronto.
sixrings
Senior Member
isn't Ontario place where they are putting the 2024 Olympic games?
intoronto1125
Active Member
No that would be the Portlands. For 2008 the Molson Amphitheatre was the proposed site for weightlifting however.
I think the best place would be where the failed woodbine live development was supposed to be built. It will rejuvenate a part of the city that needs the help.
I think the best place would be where the failed woodbine live development was supposed to be built. It will rejuvenate a part of the city that needs the help.
TOareaFan
Superstar
That may be true but each of the casino companies have said (and it may be posturing) that their interest in the Rexdale area is very limited and that, certainly, they would not be interested in a full scale "resort/destination" type casino of the sort they are pitching for downtown.
nfitz
Superstar
Ontario Place is the location of the triathlon for the Pan-Am games according to- http://www.toronto2015.org/lang/en/the-games/sport-program/triathlon.html - so one might think it would be for 2024 as well. But that's only 2 days.
sixrings
Senior Member
I was only making a joke with my 2024 Olympic fantasy although it would be nice minus the cost. Id take transit over Olympics any day.
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
I don't really understand the mechanics of how the casino file is being handled other than the non-sensical yes or no vote that will be under consideration at council; However, since the No camp will clearly win at council how about this compromise:
-Council says no to a casino in Toronto but makes an amendment that allows for the Woodbine Lands to be exempt
-This way Ford can still possibly get his casino while some other councillors can still say they saved downtown or Toronto or whatever, and a few centrist or rationalist councillors can accept this as Woodbine is effectively already a big-box gambling facility
-An argument can also be made that Woodbine would be "saved" from a suburban casino across the municipal border line. The proposition of Toronto saying no to a casino on moral grounds while the province builds one just across said border line that will impact Toronto residents regardless, and the irony that Toronto already has a big box gambling facility that just isn't called a casino, can all be brought into harmony.
-Council says no to a casino in Toronto but makes an amendment that allows for the Woodbine Lands to be exempt
-This way Ford can still possibly get his casino while some other councillors can still say they saved downtown or Toronto or whatever, and a few centrist or rationalist councillors can accept this as Woodbine is effectively already a big-box gambling facility
-An argument can also be made that Woodbine would be "saved" from a suburban casino across the municipal border line. The proposition of Toronto saying no to a casino on moral grounds while the province builds one just across said border line that will impact Toronto residents regardless, and the irony that Toronto already has a big box gambling facility that just isn't called a casino, can all be brought into harmony.