Queens Casino Escorted to Back Room, Hands Hammered

1.

Bloomberg is lying. "Regressive" he claims - if he's really worry about casinos being regressive how in the world can he allow the lottery. Could anything be more regressive than the lottery? Plus, the lottery pays out 50 cents on the dollar - slot machines pay out 97 cents.
Dennison's research shows that most people who play in casinos (especially the gaming tables) have incomes above the median!!! Table games are clearly progressive.
I don't play cards -never will - one takes on risk without the proper reward -but for Bloomberg to call casinos regressive at the same time he allows the lottery is intellectually irresponsible.
Bring on the casinos - require table minimums of $10 - and require slot minimums of $1. Or get rid of the lottery - otherwise Mr. Bloomberg you speak out of both sides of your mouth.

2.

You guys who want gambling are real idiots. Do we want to pretend even for a moment to go down that road? Stop this dead in its tracks. Gambling is a bad thing, hurts the neighborhood, poisons the people.

3.

Well, the city does not create or sponsor the lottery, and frankly gets little of the revenue benefit (ust like our state tax base).

I have long favored a different approach for the Shinnecocks that is far simpler than this. The Shinecocks are sitting on 800 acres of waterfront property in Southampton and Hampton Bays. Even figuring in the cost of putting infrasructure, at current Hamptons pricing that parcel is worth somewhere around $1.0-1.2 billion. There are currently about 150-200 Shinnecock's living on the reservation.

While perhaps I am insensitive to the "sacredness" of the land, the reservation is only as "sacred" as the pact that moved the indians from the mainland to the reservation 150 years ago. Moreover, if anyone wants to facilitate the Shinnecock's casino aspirations, the tribe should be moved to the old Grumman plant facility in Riverhead now owned by Suffolk County, which includes some 1,100 acres of land (that Suffolk wants to turn into some bizzare fake ski mountain) with direct highway access. This would not only free up billions in capital, it would give the Shinnecocks an amenity that no other casino in the world can claim -- a private airstrip on the grounds (the Grumman plant built F-14s and other military jets until the 1980s).

My fee for brokering this deal is 10%

4.

#1 you must be at least mildly retarded. You're pro-casino and anti-Bloomberg. You should move out of town. I hear Atlantic City calling your name.

5.

10%? How 'bout you suck my Shinnecock instead?

6.

The lottery and the off-track parimutuel betting only hurt poor people. If they weren't gambling their money away, they would be spending it on drugs, hookers, expensive cars, or gold jewelry anyway. At least with the gambling some goes to help educate their children.

7.

The point in post 1 (it seems) is that the city can't logically be pro-lotto and anti-casino - it doesn't make sense. Either gambling is bad for a city or it's not. Outlaw both is my vote, but if you allow one there is no REASONABLE explanation as to why you would disallow the other.

8.

Too bad nurse Bloomberg thinks gambling is bad for me. Thanks for letting the people of NYC make adult decisions. But I guess you know better than everyone being an egocentric, control freak, billionaire.

9.

This proposal is nothing but a load of silliness anyway; Aqueduct is up to its ears in controversy with the renewal of NYRA and the existing property claims that the State has to resolve. This is nothing but promotion for the Shinnecock Indians.

10.

I agree that Bloomberg and the anti-gambling crowd are hyprocrites. It's legal to gamble on lotto and horseracing and church sponsored bingos. The odds can be much worse than betting on sports such as basketball or betting on poker. How many buses to AC and flights to Law Vegas leave everyday? By legalizing it you eliminate the mob influence in illegal gambling and you keep money in the city.