Category: casino

04/19/06 12:25 - ID#35760

casino talk

As further reference to just how close the proposed casino will be to poverty, please reference the Google map below. I obtained the map by googling municipal housing, buffalo, ny (GOOGLE - municipal housing, buffalo, ny). Result D, which is shown on the map, is the Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority Employment Opportunity Center (though sadly it's actually mispelled). The casino would be less than a block from multiple housing projects. (e:joshua,142)

metalpeter writes at 07:05:53 04/19/06 - Comment #6631: Downtown is a perfect spot for a casino for a bunch of reasons. Close to the projects and south buffalo plus people are moving into lofts bass pro may be coming and Downtown may be growing. Plus there are a bunch of Buses from all over the city that end in Downtown Buffalo. Plus if they decide to try and get tourism dollars people who fly into buffalo can take a shuttle from the airport right downtown.

joshua writes at 01:56:28 04/19/06 - Comment #6623: I'm prone to believe after looking at the evidence that the location of the casino was chosen primarily because it was cheap and available land. Yes, there is more than one run down area in the city to build in, but what makes one run down area better than another run down area? To me that is splitting hairs. Why? Because no matter where you put it people are going to complain, ESPECIALLY in this city. Just more evidence that nobody really wants this except for the developers and the politicians.

I get to see alot of casinos because of how much I travel. I don't think there is any evidence whatsoever that casinos explicitly target low income areas for any reason other than cost. Somebody please explain to me why the WOULDN'T choose an area that has available and cheap land... what are the Senecas supposed to do; build in Amherst or Clarence because a few people think that if they don't they are trying to victimize low income people? BALONEY. Naturally that implies that if they target low income areas that they are targeting low income people - now we are back in Mike Niman territory. If some of you argue that even if casinos wanted to build in more affluent areas that residents and politicians would try to stop it, then you're in an area that I think I'm in agreement with you on. Did anybody ask the residents of Perry St. what they thought about the casino?

Around our country casinos outside of AC or LV are built primarily on tribal land or along bodies of water - I see this all the time. Some are riverboats. Just like any business, casinos are built where a) a high amount of traffic takes place and b) where is most affordable. A combination of these two factors is considered, with the possible exception of tourist attraction areas just like Niagara Falls.

Lets remember that the only reason this casino is even being considered is because of the potential to draw tourists from NF - people wouldn't ever come to Buffalo explicitly to gamble. This is a very "Buffalo" thing - people are in agreement about the casino being a terrible idea yet people are still arguing about WHY its a bad idea.

matthew writes at 01:12:52 04/19/06 - Comment #6619: I think it's common knowledge that casinos target low income areas. Also, there is more than just one run down area of the city with cheap and available land.

scott writes at 12:00:46 04/19/06 - Comment #6618: I can agree with anyone that the casino's probably a bad ide, but I really don't think it's a conspiracy against the poor. It's business venture designed to maximize profit for the casino owners. The city's benefit (or detriment) is not a concern. I don't think there's an intention to do harm, or an intention to do good. Just profit, that's all that matters in a business venture.

With that in mind, the choice of location is most likely due to the fact that it's easier to grab a lot of land cheap near the less desirable neighborhoods. (i.e. public housing)

There's always the "added benefit" that those with less means (and less access to transportation) can still reach the casino. (That way they can pour their resources down the drain like everyone else.)

We can't legislate fiscal responsibility, so I guess it's their choice whether or not to support the "new business" in their back yard.

ajay writes at 11:51:59 04/19/06 - Comment #6616: I'm not so sure that the site was chosen for the proximity to the projects.

The city wanted a run-down, depressed neighborhood so that it would be easier to take peoples' homes and generally push people around; and where there was lots of land available.

Guess where the projects are typically put? In a depressed neighborhood...

joshua writes at 11:01:23 04/19/06 - Comment #6614: I see what you mean. Are you suggesting that the proximity to housing projects was nefariously selected in order to take advantage of the poor?

Permalink: casino_talk.html
Words: 72