Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. Casinos anywhere to raise revenue for the state seems so 1970ish.
2. I really hate it when our legislature cannot decide on things and offer it to the voters to decide. I mean, isn't that why we elect folks to go to Trenton and decide things like this?
Sure but at the same time don't you ever want a direct say in things? I like when certain issues are put to a vote. On a similar but unrelated note I wish we directly voted for our president and got rid of the electoral college. Popular vote only and nothing else. We'd be a true democracy then.
I agree with your first point. It does seem outdated to me as well. I don't think we need them up here. Also, it's dense and crowded enough as it is.
I've been to places with unfettered casinos and let me tell you..you don't want that. I was recently in a town in SD that had 17, yes 17 "casinos" in a town with 2500 people. It was weird and creepy. Again, you don't want that here.
All that being said, I haven't read this particular bill and the restrictions around it. I'll have to do that before I decide.
Great idea, open casino's in North Jersey, a year later casinos open in NYC.
I have a state run casino 30 feet from my house, where retards line up to buy scratch offs where the house take is an unbelievable and unconscionable 35%. And 45% for the $1 tickets. Does anyone realize that there isn't a casino in existence anywhere on the planet that would attempt such robbery? The absolute insanity of this is sublime. Gambling is illegal and destructive and immoral. Unless it is run by the state. And if the mob were running a casino, it would never DREAM IN A MILLION YEARS of a 45% "vig". They know that would kill the golden goose. But the state doesn't give a crap. They have a monopoly. The typical scratch off/Lotto player is dumber than a rock. You see them in front of you at the convenience store, buying fistfuls of the damned scratch offs. And literally RIPPING UP MONEY and HANDING IT TO THE STATE to the tune of a 45% vig.
But guess what? There is no competition! The state protects itself with the "police power" and its monopoly on the use of force, to monopolistically insulate itself from having to compete with casinos which typically would charge 1% to 5% on most games. NOT EFFING 45%! with legislative protection. So gambling is wrong and illegal and immoral unless practiced by the state. And monopoly is wrong, illegal, and immoral. Unless operated by the state.
Are the citizens of our "free" country so incredibly dumb as to not see this? Apparently so.
And when the state does allow a casino, they overtax it in such a way to guarantee the state an obscene and enduring upfront profit. In fact they tax revenue, not income, to make sure THEY GET PAID FIRST. And of course, the casinos are forced to adjust all the games and all the machines to rip off the gamblers so that the insane state fees can be paid, after which the casino has to try to make a profit.
So the referendum in November is the dopiest irrelevancy you can imagine. We already have casino gambling on virtually every block in the state. And on the Internet also. So it's dramatic and pivotal to worry about a couple of new buildings and the motor vehicle traffic they are going to cause? The idiocy is spectacular!
Too much traffic.
My neighbor loses his money.
I don't like where the revenues go.
It's cheaper to go to Vegas (?)
"This guy drives down to AC a couple of times each month--where he proceeds to lose all of his money-- and apparently he sees some advantage to being able to drive a shorter distance in order to lose all of his money. I guess that spending less on gasoline and tolls is an advantage for the inveterate gambler..." So what! It's his money and his enjoyment. Why belittle him!?
"I am going to vote against it. The tax revenue being allocated to help horse racing, senior citizens and disabled people is just not a good use of the funds."...So if the tax revenue was allocated to go somewhere else, you would say it's a good thing?
"If they couldn't even be successful with AC, how's will they make northern NJ anymore successful." You do realize that there are more people in North Jersey then in southern NJ and NY also borders northern NJ.
"The last thing they need are more cars trying to get to some place on weekends. And I am really opposed to destroying more wetlands to build casinos." Have you been on the Parkway on a summer weekend?
"you can go to vegas cheaper than AC you lose." It costs me $4.50 in tolls and another $10 for gas. The money I save by not going to Las Vegas, I can use to gamble in NJ.
"I used to live in the area, and getting anywhere on rt. 3 or rt. 17 in the Clifton, Lyndhurst, Rutherford, East Rutherford area on the weekends was a nightmare." What about the weekdays when you are working? People do go to the casinos during the week. The casinos are open 24/7/365.
If you gamble in casinos now a days, you might as well just give the casino your money. Don't even bother playing.
If they couldn't even be successful with AC, how's will they make northern NJ anymore successful. I don't even like the fact that they have casinos in philly now.
They know what they have to do to make AC successful, they don't have the balls to do it.
They were successful in AC, then CT opened Foxwoods, which advertised "closer to NYC". Now PA has casinos in Bethlehem, so the Philly gamblers go there instead of AC. There's just a lot more choices for casinos.
If they really want tax revenue, legalize pot! Look at Colorado, got more tax money than they know what to do with. It also takes the so-called "gateway drug", (which is really alchohol) out of the illegal drug trade so resources could be concentrated on opoids.
If they really want tax revenue, legalize pot! Look at Colorado, got more tax money than they know what to do with. It also takes the so-called "gateway drug", (which is really alchohol) out of the illegal drug trade so resources could be concentrated on opoids.
You are trying to compare apples to oranges. It's not all about the tax revenue, it also about convenience. Why should North New Jersey gamblers have to travel further to gamble? Why should AC have a monopoly on gambling? Most of folks here reasons for voting against are pretty flimsy.
Casinos aren't the problem. Congestion is the problem.
Voting no... not because I oppose casinos but because I oppose congestion. So a handful of elites can make monstrous profits, we've been sold this insanity of cramming more and more people onto less and less real estate.
The result? Urban Sprawl is destroying the quality of life in Northeast Jersey. Fifteen lanes on the New Jersey Turnpike — all jammed to a standstill during rush hour. Really?
How about a three story height limit on any new construction, maybe even mandating a parking garage be built underneath? Nah! That would be too... suburban.
Voting no... not because I oppose casinos but because I oppose congestion. So a handful of elites can make monstrous profits, we've been sold this insanity of cramming more and more people onto less and less real estate.
The result? Urban Sprawl is destroying the quality of life in Northeast Jersey. Fifteen lanes on the New Jersey Turnpike — all jammed to a standstill during rush hour. Really?
How about a three story height limit on any new construction, maybe even mandating a parking garage be built underneath? Nah! That would be too... suburban.
And not having a couple casinos will miraculously change all that? We are still going to have urban sprawl and traffic jams either way.
Voting no... not because I oppose casinos but because I oppose congestion. So a handful of elites can make monstrous profits, we've been sold this insanity of cramming more and more people onto less and less real estate.
The result? Urban Sprawl is destroying the quality of life in Northeast Jersey. Fifteen lanes on the New Jersey Turnpike — all jammed to a standstill during rush hour. Really?
How about a three story height limit on any new construction, maybe even mandating a parking garage be built underneath? Nah! That would be too... suburban.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjinnj
And not having a couple casinos will miraculously change all that? We are still going to have urban sprawl and traffic jams either way.
That's a rather thoughtless and supercilious reply to my post. Where did I state or even imply that "not having a couple of casinos will miraculously change all that"? Of course it won't change all that.
Agreed, "we are still going to have urban sprawl and traffic jams either way". But more development, especially high-rises, whether casinos or other buildings, will make congestion worse.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Casinos aren't the problem. Congestion is the problem.
