Comments on: Jack Healey – casino magnet

By: DeLeo, slots, and Middleboro | Bellicose Bumpkin

DeLeo, slots, and Middleboro | Bellicose Bumpkin — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 13:06:33 +0000

[...] casino is not feasible due to the massive infrastructure required in the IGA. The tribe has been nosing around in the Fall River area and the Commission on Indian affairs is talking about taking the Wampsutta [...]

By: bumpkin

bumpkin — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 12:37:14 +0000

GK - note that I didn't say they should get a casino - only that they should get one if the state legalizes casinos and is determined to have one with a "tribal component". I think the idea of legalizing casinos is foolish and so is the idea of giving casinos to people with no demonstrated ability to manage such a project simply because they are of indian descent. I've got several hundred posts detailing my opposition to casinos - largely due to their failure to pass a cost benefit analysis.

By: Gladys Kravitz

Gladys Kravitz — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:44:01 +0000

Well, that’s an interesting, though unsurprising casino connection.

BTW:

That said, they’ve been waiting longer and should get a piece of any tribal casino – presuming of course that the state legalizes casinos and is determined to have one with a “tribal component”.

This comment reminds me of how I’ve heard people say something like, “It’s only fair that the Indian’s get a casino after all they’ve gone through.”

Instead, how about… “No one should have a casino in Massachusetts. Casino are bad for local economies, cause crime and addiction, hurt the environment, require major costly infrastructure improvements and regulatory agencies, and fail on their promises to produce many good, well-paying jobs. There is nothing ‘fair’ about that for any of the people of the Commonwealth.”

By: Wally Glendye

Wally Glendye — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 14:28:46 +0000

You are too funny!