Just heard that British Land (that owns Meadowhall) and MGM Mirage (who own the MGM Grand in Las Vegas) are going to build a £250m casino, hotel and leisure complex at Meadowhall... THey are looking to make Sheffield the 'Las Vegas of the North' according to the BBC website...Sounds good to me... what does everyone think????????

Interesting. It says it could create upto 6500 jobs if it managed to get the go ahead.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/3456717.stm

Heard about it this morning, i'm just suprised anything like this has been chosen for Sheffield, not really going to have the glamour of Las Vegas with the Tinsley viaduct and the cooling towers in the background or are they (the cooling towers) to go in the plans?

Can't complain on the jobs that will be created if they give the majority to local people.

I hope it happens if it brings new jobs & investment to the city. But with similar plans just over the road in Roterham (by Rother Valley Country Park) will it all happen? Or will we get two half projects?

Yes Project, Rotherham (http://www.rido.org.uk/asp/news-detail.asp?id=41)

well, they tried this about 5/6 years ago to no avail, cant see it happening this time

I think this is probably the third attempt - I think the last one was called Bourbon St?

I thought there was a thread on this a couple of months ago???
But, I can also tell you that the Vegas of the East, is commonly known as SkegVegas!!!
And I LOVE it!
:P

Is there anywhere left that isn't going to become the "Las Vegas of the North"? Scarborough, Blackpool, now Sheffield.

Darned lazy journalistic clichés...

I think I would prefer to see Blackpool get the title - it is a pain in the arse to go to anyway so I wouldn't be upset at all!

Not sure about Sheffield. I suppose it is a good place to put it, easy enough to get to without upsetting the masses?

Moon

Originally posted by Moon Maiden
I think I would prefer to see Blackpool get the title - it is a pain in the arse to go to anyway so I wouldn't be upset at all!

Not sure about Sheffield. I suppose it is a good place to put it, easy enough to get to without upsetting the masses?

Moon What with all that extra congestion coming off the M1.
Nope, forget that, its bad enough now when theres a concert at the Hallam Arena.
It will cause mayhem and to be quite honest Sheffield can do without more white elephants.
Blackpool is the obvious location for this and the only simularity between Sheffield and Vagas is that there both inland.

I agree entirely with Cycleracer.

Plus, I don't want money within the local community to be gambled away and transferred out of the region!

I thought the main atraction of Las Vegas was that it is one of only a few places in America that has legalised gambling. If we can gamble anywhere we like, why would we want a Vegas style thing in England?

Originally posted by RPG
well, they tried this about 5/6 years ago to no avail, cant see it happening this time

Don't remember this, was it the same people and the same piece of land back then?

so many ppl seem to be against the idea! o.O i'm surprised! shouldnt it be a good thing? it will make sheffield richer, probably giving us a better city centre and a better sheffield, shouldnt it?

Originally posted by dcg2003
Just heard that British Land (that owns Meadowhall) and MGM Mirage (who own the MGM Grand in Las Vegas) are going to build a £250m casino, hotel and leisure complex at Meadowhall... THey are looking to make Sheffield the 'Las Vegas of the North' according to the BBC website...Sounds good to me... what does everyone think????????

Eh?! Last I heard, Blackpool had the "Las Vegas of the North" gimmick?!

In the early 80s, Melbourne was a third rate Australian city, always in Sydney's shadow. The local authority decided that to boost the economy, they should build the biggest casino in the east. They did it, and the city's revival began from that. Money poured in from outside and other ventures started up.

The trick with this one, provided it gets the go ahead, is to get some of the profits out of MGM so that they can be ploughed back into Sheffield.

It's true that everywhere seems to be jumping on the Las Vegas bandwagon, nowhere more than Blackpool, but as far as I'm aware, this is the first solid commitment to Britain by one of the world's leading casino chains. If it goes ahead, I think it would be great news for Sheffield, if only to raise our profile nationally.

Jesus H Christ.

Cant believe so many residents seem in favour of this; just another nail in Sheffield's coffin. And this place was so GOOD around the turn of the millenium.

Sounds good to me. The location will also allow many outsiders to come to Sheffield as it will be just off junction 34 of the M1. It should attract people to Sheffield as well as giving locals jobs and a new entertainment venue.

Sounds bad to me. It will have the same cause and effect as Meadowhall - to suck cash out of the city centre. A casino so far out is a disaster for the centre.

There is a parallel plan to build one at Don Valley Stadium, which is much closer in and would combine to bring the stadium back to life with concerts and events.

Meadowhall and the whole district around it is so sterile :mad:

Originally posted by Tony
Sounds bad to me. It will have the same cause and effect as Meadowhall - to suck cash out of the city centre. A casino so far out is a disaster for the centre.

Yeah, but if people reckon the M1 wouldn't be able to cope with the extra traffic what chance would Sheffields' city centre ringroads? Something like that has to be situated out of town, whatever the town in question was.

I think it's a good idea. They wouldn't do it if there wasn't a demand, plus the creation of 6,500 jobs can only be a good thing and, as already said, it will attract more business and money into the area.

I can't wait! It's going to be a bit different to Nap's!

There is rather a large fly in the ointment of this scheme that no one appears to have mentioned yet and it is this :


"But developers say for the scheme to get off the ground, UK gaming and tax laws would need to be modernised."
(From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/3456717.stm)

So, does anybody know what needs to be changed, how it needs to be changed and when (if ever) it is likely to be changed?

Nomme

The legislation is almost guaranteed to go through either this parliament or the next. It's government policy to remove the restrictions on gaming. Gordon Brown needs to do something to fill the massive hole in his calculations, and he's decided this is the way to do it. Having said that, we all know how much manifesto commitments are worth.

As for sucking jobs etc out of the city centre, we don't have a city centre casino, so I don't think anyone need worry. Transport infrastructure is a problem, but it's unlikely that peak hours for getting to the casino will clash with peak hours for getting to work.

Aren't plans already afoot for widening the M1 at M'Hall anyway?

Maybe a planning condition could be applied that the casino have to pay a subsidy for the Supertram to operate between City Centre and Meadowhall through the night (except Sunday night) that way the same night out could incorporate a bar, club or restaurant in the city centre, either before or after the casino.

I know currently people going to the casinos at Owlerton and Ecclesall Road normally head there late on after doing something else first.

I think for the proposed complex there is no choice but to build it out of town, due to the amount of land required for the size of the complex and car parking.

[i]As for sucking jobs etc out of the city centre, we don't have a city centre casino, so I don't think anyone need worry. [/B]

dont we have a casino next to the ice rink and mcdonalds near castle college? =P

Originally posted by Zamo
Yeah, but if people reckon the M1 wouldn't be able to cope with the extra traffic what chance would Sheffields' city centre ringroads? Something like that has to be situated out of town, whatever the town in question was.

Casino’s operate during the evening and early hours. Wouldn’t worry about the traffic. Did you ever see traffic jams outside Nap’s?

Originally posted by Zamo
I think it's a good idea. They wouldn't do it if there wasn't a demand, plus the creation of 6,500 jobs can only be a good thing and, as already said, it will attract more business and money into the area.

Spin, spin, spin. There won’t be 6,500 jobs, that I guarantee. It won't attract any other jobs or businesses either. What support businesses or jobs does a casino need? I supprt the idea of a new casino, but just not in that position.

Originally posted by Zamo
I can't wait! It's going to be a bit different to Nap's!

Well anything has to be better than Nap’s. It is now utterly awful. Full of blokes in jeans and trainers getting off their faces upstairs.

Originally posted by hounsfieldjr
As for sucking jobs etc out of the city centre, we don't have a city centre casino, so I don't think anyone need worry. Transport infrastructure is a problem, but it's unlikely that peak hours for getting to the casino will clash with peak hours for getting to work.

Aren't plans already afoot for widening the M1 at M'Hall anyway?

Please quote me correctly. I said that it will suck CASH out of the city centre, not jobs. It will affect the restaurants, bars and shops of the centre.

Originally posted by Andy C
Maybe a planning condition could be applied that the casino have to pay a subsidy for the Supertram to operate between City Centre and Meadowhall through the night (except Sunday night) that way the same night out could incorporate a bar, club or restaurant in the city centre, either before or after the casino.



Not a chance! Like someone else said, another nail in the city centre coffin. The city centre is not especially financially vibrant, and the council seems to be doing all it can to haemorrhage it with this plan. Perhaps it has something to do with the licensing charges that the council will be able to levy?

Originally posted by Andy C
I think for the proposed complex there is no choice but to build it out of town, due to the amount of land required for the size of the complex and car parking.

There are lots of places in the city centre that can site a large casino complex. For the operator, the attraction of Meadowhall is quite simply the M1, not Sheffield.

Originally posted by Tony
Please quote me correctly. I said that it will suck CASH out of the city centre, not jobs. It will affect the restaurants, bars and shops of the centre.

I wasn't quoting you, don't be sensitive. I really don't see how non-competing businesses will suffer. I simply see the benefits of money coming into the city from outside. Remember that it's still Sheffield.

People who go to restaurants and bars elsewhere in the city are as likely to go to the new casino as they are to go to those pretty awful restaurants in Meadowhall. It's unlikely to be about attracting people to stand-alone restaurants/bars. A big development like this has to cater for its visitors. If it didn't it would fail. I don't understand the reference to shops - how will they suffer?

Jobs-wise, if you read the various articles about the proposal it is made very clear that 4,500 of those jobs are only intended for the construction phase. The permanent figure is estimated at 2,000. Of course, we all know from the experience with Insight that estimates don't always turn out to be true, but I'd rather see a fraction of those new jobs come to Sheffield than see MGM take their investment to Birmingham, Blackpool, Leeds, or any other city.

I too would rather see this development in the city centre but we have to be realistic. There simply is not space, especially if all the other Objective 1 plans are to come to fruition. If we insist on a city centre site, then we lose massive investment and the opportunity both to raise our profile and to increase the number of visitors to our city.

There are complaints on this board about the traffic infrastructure, but if building it next to a motorway is going to cause insurmountable problems, then we may as well wave goodbye to the whole thing. As for traffic outside Napoleons, it's a non-argument. You're talking about a different part of the city, a different road system, and a different establishment.

I find it very surprising that so many people are so reluctant to welcome investment in Sheffield.

Well even the construction jobs quoter is rubbish then.

This is all spin.

The trouble with such organisations is that it doesnt really bring much money into Sheffield at all, in fact the only money it generates for Sheffield is wages. Everything else will just be sucked straight out of the city.

Originally posted by Tony
Well even the construction jobs quoter is rubbish then.

This is all spin.

The trouble with such organisations is that it doesnt really bring much money into Sheffield at all, in fact the only money it generates for Sheffield is wages. Everything else will just be sucked straight out of the city.

what do u mean sucked straight out of the city?
when ppl gamble, they will need to eat too! probably not all of them can afford expensive meals at the casino, so they will spend their money at nearby restaurants. and if they get bored with gambling, they (especially ladies) will go off shopping. i'm sure no one in the world would spend their whole holiday doing nothing else but gamble
=P

Originally posted by Bluelunar
what do u mean sucked straight out of the city?
when ppl gamble, they will need to eat too! probably not all of them can afford expensive meals at the casino, so they will spend their money at nearby restaurants. and if they get bored with gambling, they (especially ladies) will go off shopping. i'm sure no one in the world would spend their whole holiday doing nothing else but gamble
=P
The casino will ensure that it has eating options to suit all pockets so that it maximises its income. The casino operator will not want anyone to spend money off the premises, so these places are geared up to extract the maximum spend per visitor. The income and profits just leaves Sheffield to wherever the casino operators shareholders are based. The only money (virtually) that goes into the Sheffield economy is wages. Even the food and drink will be supplied from out of town, etc. Does that make sense?

Originally posted by Tony
The trouble with such organisations is that it doesnt really bring much money into Sheffield at all, in fact the only money it generates for Sheffield is wages. Everything else will just be sucked straight out of the city.

On this basis we would turn down EVERY investment in the city, whether it is retail, manufacturing, banking & finance or leisure & casinos.

For "The only money it generates for Sheffield is wages" read "what it generates for Sheffield is jobs"

You misunderstand me. I'm all for creating things - I do it for a living.

I was challenging the assertion that it was good for Sheffield, because I firmly believe that it will suck money out of the still fragile city centre.

More importantly, there are also alternative plans that pre-date the Meadowhall idea, by LOCAL companies, to establish a "mega casino" either at Don Valley Stadium and Bramall Lane, both of which would get my support long before Meadowhall which would create no real local wealth other than jobs.

Profits generated by local companies are generally recycled back into the local economy and other local projects, unlike those generated by Meadowhall.

Sheffield Council should be supporting locally led projects. Unfortunately, for Councillors and Senior Officers that isn't as sexy as travelling across the planet to talk to perceived "big hitters".

Did you know that the City Centre Masterplan was carried out by a company in CHICAGO??? :loopy:

In an earlier post I made the comment that the objective should be to get more than just jobs out of this scheme. I don't think anybody would object to the concept that it would be better to support local businesses, but there hasn't been a credible proposal by a local business yet. The only firm commitment is from MGM. If we stick our heads in the sand and wait for a definite local project, we lose the impetus we currently have.

It is also the case that such a high profile project could knock the competition out of the game immediately, making Sheffield the natural home for casinos in the UK. That would enable local projects a better chance of success, and could even make Sheffield a major tourist attraction.

In any case, the arrival of MGM is more likely to benefit local business. It is highly likely that a company with only one base in the UK is going use local services and products, rather than shipping everything in from the USA. There will almost certainly be massive spin-off benefits for professional services firms (lawyers, accountants, architects, recruitment consultants, marketing advisers, security etc) and local food producers.

Business isn't one dimensional. Globalisation isn't going to go away if we ignore it.

Well this is where I have to disagree. Bramall Ln has had planning consent for some time, and the Don Valley Stadium project has a deal with Sun International (yea, the Sun City people) but is being blocked by the Council.

That sounds far in front of the Council / MGM / Meadowhall plan which is basically picking up the pieces from another deal that didn't happen at the old markets site.

Originally posted by dcg2003
They are looking to make Sheffield the 'Las Vegas of the North' according to the BBC website...Sounds good to me... what does everyone think????????


More like Jonny Vegas of the North

Originally posted by Tony
Well this is where I have to disagree. Bramall Ln has had planning consent for some time, and the Don Valley Stadium project has a deal with Sun International (yea, the Sun City people) but is being blocked by the Council.

That sounds far in front of the Council / MGM / Meadowhall plan which is basically picking up the pieces from another deal that didn't happen at the old markets site.

First I've heard about planning consents being granted for any scheme. They've all been mooted in the last week or so, but the reports I read said that they're all theoretical at the moment. Only MGM have signed up to anything (they have an agreement with British Land). The Council are specifically on record as sayng they have formed no view at this stage as to which scheme is preferred because no firm proposal has yet been submitted to them.

The schemes are not mutually exclusive in any event. If MGM/Sun City/SUFC want to develop Sheffield into a gambler's paradise, then building more than one casino would seem to be sensible. That way, people would be attracted into the city. That would, in my view, be preferable to one casino designed to service the local population. The greater the concentration of mega-casinos, the better the prospects of creating a visitor attraction.

Incidentally I believe the MGM plan is an entirely different scheme from the old Warner Village plans for cinemas, bars and gyms on the markets site.

Anyone know what all this talk about a massive £350 million MGM Casino next to Meadowhall is all about?

This is the third site mooted by casino operators in Sheffield.
The others are near the Sheffield Arena and Sheffield United FC
ground.
As the Government intends to relax the Gambling restrictions in the next couple of years, the operators -mostly American -are marking out the sites across the UK.

Re Casino

But all the people with loadsa dosh live in Hallam. Why don't the council just comandeer some school playing fields in Fulwood and build it where the fat cats don't even have to get in there cars to go and squander their money, instead of adding to the traffic chaos elsewhere ?

This subject has already been discussed at length here:

Las Vegas of the North (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=68495)

Mod: Thanks Abdul. Threads merged.

Following todays news that The Gambling Bill is to be fast-tracked through Parliament so it will become law before next year's expected general election, it kicks open the door for the proposed £250million MGM Casino leisure complex consisting of a huge casino, restaurants and hotel would be built next to the city's Meadowhall shopping centre.:thumbsup:

The Gambling Bill
Casinos open 24 hours
Immediate access for public, no 24-hour joining period
Unlimited jackpots in largest casinos
Betting allowed on Good Friday and Christmas Day
A new criminal offence of inviting, permitting or causing a child to gamble
Compulsory age checks by gambling websites operating from the UK
Mystery shopper surveys by the Gambling Commission to check rules followed
Tighter restrictions on betting exchanges
Allowing casinos to advertise for first time

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/3456717.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3754960.stm

Sounds good, I hope this one or the sun city gets planning permission. I don't like the idea of a casino complex near houses which would be the case if Sheffield Uniteds bid was accepted. Also the other two are investing a lot more into areas that do need redeveloping.

A casino would increase your property value, no doubt about it.

Originally posted by Tony
Sounds bad to me. It will have the same cause and effect as Meadowhall - to suck cash out of the city centre. A casino so far out is a disaster for the centre.

There is a parallel plan to build one at Don Valley Stadium, which is much closer in and would combine to bring the stadium back to life with concerts and events.

Meadowhall and the whole district around it is so sterile :mad:

The distance between "Meadowhall" and " Don Valley Stadium " is actually 2.3 miles
What do you mean by "Sterile " ?
deecee

Originally posted by duffman
or are they (the cooling towers) to go in the plans?


As I understand it, the cooling towers can't be removed because of potential damage to the Tinsley Viaduct.

Originally posted by deecee
The distance between "Meadowhall" and " Don Valley Stadium " is actually 2.3 miles
What do you mean by "Sterile " ?
deecee

So that means that Don Valley Stadium is 2.3 miles closer to the City Centre. It also means that a trip to the Casino is a 'positive decision', ie, it's a destination in itself rather than somewhere you pop into along with Meadowhall.

This will help the City in general. It may not have an immediately obvious effect, but the City Centre is in a very fragile state at the moment, and the last thing it needs is another threat, no matter how benign it may initially seem.

The other lovely thing about the Don Valley proposal by Sun City is that it will wipe out the £2m p/a 'subsidy' (from memory) that Sheffield City Council need to pay for the Stadium and it will redevelop the stadium from white elephant into a golden goose. Sun City intend bringing the worlds BIGGEST names to play concerts etc in the stadium. Meadowhall won't do that.

Surely that in itself is reason to turn down the rumoured (& I stress it's a rumour) £25m 'golden handshake' that has been offered to the Council for a casino at Meadowhall.

I think it's a great idea.


and, I'm sure they could demolish those cooling towers with that thing they used on Claywood flats.

There are already casinos in Sheffield to cater for gamblers.
I never thought I'd be in agreement with the Sally Army but I fear for the social consequences..the "glamour" (haha) of these palaces creating hordes of addicts who can't afford to be such.
Then there's Tony's points about money pouring out of the local economy.
How many of these super casinos can the UK sustain? There's this one in Leeds being mooted. We will rapidly reach saturation point and competition will see the operators engaged in all sorts of aggressive promotions to hook the unwary addictive personality:
Free drinks, first bet free, free bar snacks etc

Originally posted by Tony
So that means that Don Valley Stadium is 2.3 miles closer to the City Centre. It also means that a trip to the Casino is a 'positive decision', ie, it's a destination in itself rather than somewhere you pop into along with Meadowhall.

This will help the City in general. It may not have an immediately obvious effect, but the City Centre is in a very fragile state at the moment, and the last thing it needs is another threat, no matter how benign it may initially seem.

The other lovely thing about the Don Valley proposal by Sun City is that it will wipe out the £2m p/a 'subsidy' (from memory) that Sheffield City Council need to pay for the Stadium and it will redevelop the stadium from white elephant into a golden goose. Sun City intend bringing the worlds BIGGEST names to play concerts etc in the stadium. Meadowhall won't do that.

Surely that in itself is reason to turn down the rumoured (& I stress it's a rumour) £25m 'golden handshake' that has been offered to the Council for a casino at Meadowhall.

Absolutely agree the Sun City proposal would be much more advantageous for Sheffield.:thumbsup:

Hope the council thinks this one through and makes the right decision for Sheffield for once, Don Valley Stadium doesnt seem to have hosted a huge concert for ages now, back in the 90s we had Tina Turner, Rolling Stones, U2, Michael Jackson to name a few.

Originally posted by Ned Ludd
There are already casinos in Sheffield to cater for gamblers.
I never thought I'd be in agreement with the Sally Army but I fear for the social consequences..the "glamour" (haha) of these palaces creating hordes of addicts who can't afford to be such.
Then there's Tony's points about money pouring out of the local economy.
How many of these super casinos can the UK sustain? There's this one in Leeds being mooted. We will rapidly reach saturation point and competition will see the operators engaged in all sorts of aggressive promotions to hook the unwary addictive personality:
Free drinks, first bet free, free bar snacks etc

The casinos in Sheffield are at best a bit tacky.

I have actually been to Vegas and they do give you free drinks in the casino, mainly to help part you from your money, but when you run out of money, you run out of money and you go to bed (to develop a massive hangover).
I don't think a casino will make people addicts, people either are or arn't suseptible to gambling, if they are then they are probably betting all their money on the horses or the lottery at the moment.

p.s. The dog track in Hilsborough does a kind of free drink, free food, free bet thing but the last time I went it was hardly packed full of rabid gamblers, it was fun night out though.

There seems to be a lot of complacency about all this with the majority believing it to be a good thing.
What I don't like:
a) The idea of all these super casinos was promoted by a right wing economist, adviser to Thatcher
b) The Casino companies have spent £100m lobbying MPs and ministers(of which the public knew nothing)
c) Tessa Jowell is happy to let the market dictate the number of casinos to be built. (Although Brown and Prescott may have put their foot down)
d) The offer to give huge tax breaks to US casino companies (..denied by the Minister so therefore must have some element of truth in it!)

The whole thing stinks of greed and undemocratic manipulation by powerful (and possibly undesirable) vested interests of our increasingly feeble and impressionable Government

There was a time when the religious wing of the Labour party was concerned with the social welfare of the poor and destitute.
Blair's religious zealotry is infected with this ultra right wing, neo-con lunacy where money, power and the market are to dictate all policies from foreign affairs, to economics, welfare provision etc ..... all by the will of God and the Market! Scary and dangerous.

Some of you guys are misisng the point here. The issue is not about city centre vs out of town development, its about the fact that gambling ruins lives, families etc and if this is made available then life will only get worse for the vulnerable. Its sick, its greedy and is so against traditional Labour values. Blair is a Thatcherite and is only bothered about him and his cronies. You know what to do next election? Either dont vote or vote for someone other than Labour. I am a sheffielder born and bred, from a one parent family and come from a true Labour family. Howeve I will not vote Labour until that charlatan is out on his ear. See my username?...believe it!

If people want to gamble their life away they already can, in the bookies, at the dog track, in ammusement arcades, buying scratch cards.

I've got to agree with Nick2 here. There are plenty of opportunities to spend money, and a new casino won't turn the city into a gambling zone.

I would rather have a government that lets people make their own decisions and treats people like grown ups.

Its just sooo 'old Labour' to try to manipulate peoples lives from state central.

Originally posted by Tony
Its just sooo 'old Labour' to try to manipulate peoples lives from state central.
Better that than multinationals manipulating our lives through lobbying (bribery by any other name) or massaging the all too easily inflated egos of our political class.
Otherwise we should legalise Brothels, Crack-dens, scrap all speed limits, permit smoking anywhere (and with no age restrictions),kids shouldn't have to go to school, any citizen should be able to hunt any wild bird or animal, everyone should be allowed to own a gun etc etc.
Society needs to be regulated for the benefit of the majority and that includes being protected from, at best, amoral multinationals

So, are those who think that relaxing gambling laws is not a problem going to pick up the pieces of ruined families? This is another new labour scheme to hoodwink the people by bleating on about "ooh, it gives people freedom of choice" when its all about making more money to cover for the billions they waste on illegal wars, the creation of irrelevant public sector jobs, jollies (or fact finding missions as they call them) and freebie houses for their MP's? Yes gambling is available already there in forms of bookies but they are only open in working hours so the damage is limited. But the dossholes that the govt are trying to dibilitate us with will be open all hours, making them all the more accessable.

However if the govt continue to mug us of all of our earnings through various taxes, how are people gonna get the money to gamble!? Mugging perhaps?... then will the govt spend the money they get from gambling on more police?!!as if....

You can gamble 24 hours a day on the internet.

Interesting that the government says that we need to save more for our pensions (which is likely to be either plundered or mis-sold!) and then encourages the building of super casinos in every town.... a good example of joined up thinking here!

Originally posted by Ned Ludd
Interesting that the government says that we need to save more for our pensions (which is likely to be either plundered or mis-sold!) and then encourages the building of super casinos in every town.... a good example of joined up thinking here!

Perhaps they should shut all pubs, all non-essential shops, and all theatres and cinemas, they we would have no choice but to sit at home, bored, but rich ?

Nedd, you forget the small fact that casino's and gambling are both legal activities already, unlike brothels and crack dens. There is no comparison in our modern society with the laws that we have in place at this moment.

As for picking up the pieces Tony_BLiar, it's a perfectly fair concern to have, but why is there an issue all of a sudden?

I can't imagine that large casino's are going to have any great impact on those with gambling problems any more than the opportunities that already exist through gambling at race courses, bookies, the internet, dog tracks, amusement arcades, taxi offices, cafes.... and shock of shocks, existing casino's!

Originally posted by Tony
Nedd, you forget the small fact that casino's and gambling are both legal activities already, unlike brothels and crack dens. There is no comparison in our modern society with the laws that we have in place at this moment. I thought the argument was for individuals to have the choice. People wouldn't have to go to brothels or crack-dens anymore than casinos or the cinema....isn't that how the argument goes? Aren't these prohibitions the result of... " 'old Labour' to trying to manipulate peoples lives from state central."?

Originally posted by nick2
You can gamble 24 hours a day on the internet.
Maybe that should be regulated or taxed as well?
Using t'Internet is a largely a solitary vice of some dedication whereas these glamorous gambling palaces will encourage groups to have a regular night out, drink fuelled, egging each other on, impressing the ladies (in the case of male punters), flashing the wad to keep face. These companies know the psychology involved here, no wonder £100m is small beer in oiling the political machinery (not that our politicians aren't oily enough!)
We have allowed the public to exercise choice in enabling them to buy fireworks whenever they want........look at what has happened there. We have also liberalised the drinking laws and look at what's happening there.

Originally posted by Ned Ludd
Maybe that should be regulated or taxed as well?
Using t'Internet is a largely a solitary vice of some dedication whereas these glamorous gambling palaces will encourage groups to have a regular night out, drink fuelled, egging each other on, impressing the ladies (in the case of male punters), flashing the wad to keep face. These companies know the psychology involved here, no wonder £100m is small beer in oiling the political machinery (not that our politicians aren't oily enough!)
We have allowed the public to exercise choice in enabling them to buy fireworks whenever they want........look at what has happened there. We have also liberalised the drinking laws and look at what's happening there.

I think it is taxed, but I don't think it should be regulated.

People have a choice to do something or not, if a brothel opened on our street I'm sure all the men wouldn't be compelled to go in. If casinos will encourage groups of people to go out and enjoy themselves gambling then perhaps bingo should be banned too, as thats what people get upto in bingo halls I believe.

As a said I have been to the casinos in Vegas, and I spent a fortune, it was fun, but since we left Vegas I have never gambled since, I don't even buy lottery tickets, so it's not instantly addictive.

There are always people who will drimk more if you let them, gamble more if you let them, eat more if you let them or shag more if you let them, but thats a minority, why should everyone else who can have sensible fun be denied the chance of doing something ?

Originally posted by Ned Ludd
Maybe that should be regulated or taxed as well?
Using t'Internet is a largely a solitary vice of some dedication whereas these glamorous gambling palaces will encourage groups to have a regular night out, drink fuelled, egging each other on, impressing the ladies (in the case of male punters), flashing the wad to keep face. These companies know the psychology involved here, no wonder £100m is small beer in oiling the political machinery (not that our politicians aren't oily enough!)
We have allowed the public to exercise choice in enabling them to buy fireworks whenever they want........look at what has happened there. We have also liberalised the drinking laws and look at what's happening there.

Well said Ned

Report from The Sheffield Star yesterday indicates that Sheffield will be successful in having a major Casino built within the city because of it's unbeatable central location and catchment area:

http://www.sheffieldtoday.net/ViewA...rticleID=876576

SHEFFIELD is still likely to get a mega casino despite government predictions that most proposals currently on the table will fall by the wayside.

Culture minister Lord McIntosh made clear he expected no more than 40 internationally-backed casinos to open up in Britain as a result of the relaxation of the gambling laws - although there are currently 125 proposals nationwide.

He spoke out after claims were made the Government is about to set a limit on the number of the large gaming resorts to be allowed to open in this country.

The Government's Gambling Bill, which was unveiled last week, sweeps away limits on where and how many casinos may be opened giving rise to fears that the country would become a mini Las Vegas.

But Lord McIntosh said the Government had predicted from the start that at most there may be 40 new casinos.

"I said all the time that I expected 20 or 30 or 40," said Lord McIntosh."The figure of 150 or 250 was built up out of nothing. It has always been fantasy and it is fantasy now."

In seems likely that Sheffield's central location and huge potential punter base will prove irresistible to gaming companies.

Sun International, the South African giant, has already paid more than £11,000 to lodge its planning application. It is eyeing up three UK locations, and Sheffield is considered its number one choice.

US based MGM Mirage is also said to be on the verge of submitting plans for its regional casino, complete with hotel and leisure facilities near Meadowhall.

A third group, Las Vegas Sands, has partial planning permission in place for a casino at Bramall Lane.

Originally posted by Ned Ludd
Aren't these prohibitions the result of... " 'old Labour' to trying to manipulate peoples lives from state central."? No.

All we need now is a desert to bury people in. :hihi:

Maybe if people were working hard all day, they would not have so much time to go out gambling.
People are entitled to what they want with their lives.
I believe that if they can afford to, people can go to the greyhound track to gamble, go to the betting shops, buy a lottery ticket, smoke 2 packs a day cigarettes( in their home, not in the environment), drink a bottle of whisky,,go to the pub and have too much to drink, and as long as they do not break the law ,cause anyone else any distress, or damage the environment, why should we interfere?
it is time that people took responsibility for their own actions and got on with their lives.
People smoke all their lives and then blame hospitals when they are dying of cancer as they cannot save their life.If people want to gamble( as is the same with borrowing money) , they should work out whether they can afford to do it before blowing a large amount of money on something that they can ill afford to do.

Originally posted by espadrille
it is time that people took responsibility for their own actions and got on with their lives. Whoohoo... well said!

Originally posted by espadrille

it is time that people took responsibility for their own actions and got on with their lives.

Originally posted by Tony
Whoohoo... well said!
I can't understand some of your right wing "libertarians"
Taking your argument I can't see why we should legislate against drugs, prostitution,truancy,public nudity, expressing any personal opinion in public, have quotas on immigration/asylum etc . If you don't want State interefernce surely we shouldn't have any at all?We should have a comlete free for all where everyone does what they want, when they want.

Originally posted by Ned Ludd
We should have a comlete free for all where everyone does what they want, when they want.

Provided they don't hurt anyone else then I'm fine with that.

The answer to your question is quite simple Nedd. Some people aren't capable of taking personal responsibility. Therefore society has to do it for them.

Originally posted by Tony
The answer to your question is quite simple Nedd. Some people aren't capable of taking personal responsibility. Therefore society has to do it for them.
Exactly!

Glad we agree :clap:

Originally posted by Tony
The answer to your question is quite simple Nedd. Some people aren't capable of taking personal responsibility. Therefore society has to do it for them.

But I think Ned is suggesting that becasue some people can't be trusted then no-one should be allowed to do it.