BC Place: Stadium Refurbishment | Completed - Page 144

WarrenC12 · #**2861** Posted **Feb 18, 2011, 10:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Wow, it actually looks really nice.

Looks a bit too fancy to have my penny slots, though. Sigh.

Everything is computer controlled. There will be penny slots during weekday morning slow times. Not Friday nights though.

Yume-sama · #**2862** Posted **Feb 18, 2011, 11:02 PM**

Oh, but it's just not the same with the tacky penny decorations hanging from the ceiling.

If there's one thing Vegas excels at it's tacky!

jlousa · #**2863** Posted **Feb 19, 2011, 6:08 AM**

I don't remember anything being posted about the new turf at BC Place. There is an rfp out that hints at the new turg. Fieldturf was the perceived front runner, but it now looks like they have chosen “ polytan ligaturf”. Hopefully they are going with one of their 2star systems and not just the 1star.

The 2star system is superior and allows higher profile games to be played then the 1star system. If the Whitecaps want to go after some topnotch players having the 2star system in place would certainly help somewhat.

SpongeG · #**2864** Posted **Feb 19, 2011, 9:02 AM**

they have some kind of display about teh stadium at richmond centre - probably for the white caps but i didn't look properly only from behind looks like it had some interested people looking at it

metroXpress · #**2865** Posted **Feb 19, 2011, 3:50 PM**

^ I think it's the same one I saw at PNE a while back.

SFUVancouver · #**2866** Posted **Feb 19, 2011, 6:21 PM**

^ It's a road show. They parked the model at the Tourism Vancouver visitor centre last summer during the height of convention season. It was also parked in the lobby of the original convention centre for a while last spring.

nova9 · #**2867** Posted **Feb 20, 2011, 9:36 AM**

the model was at the boat show last week.

canada1824 · #**2868** Posted **Feb 20, 2011, 10:38 PM**

From what I see, Bing Thom is leading a fight against the casino, any remarks on that?

dreambrother808 · #**2869** Posted **Feb 20, 2011, 11:27 PM**

Being against casinos is puritanical malarky, IMO.
What right do people think they have to make such "moral" judgements?
If that's what they're basing their protest on...

ckkelley · #**2870** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 3:27 AM**

I think that the casino detractors are particularly wrong-headed just based on the fact that there's been an existing casino across the street for several years now.

whatnext · #**2871** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 4:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

Being against casinos is puritanical malarky, IMO.
What right do people think they have to make such "moral" judgements?
If that's what they're basing their protest on...

There is no socially redeeming quality to gambling whatsoever. The saddest thing I ever saw was going into River Rock and seeing seniors spending their pension cheques sitting glassy eyed in front of slot machines. Its a fools game, where the odds are always in favour of the house. What's the "entertainment value" in that? There is little unique in a casino that will bring tourists to Vancouver, that's just a crock.

The jobs argument is a weak one. Why not build a nuclear power plant in metro, since it will create jobs as well. I've seen friends driven to scamming money off their elderly parents to support a gambling addiction. Since it doesn't involves shootings etc its not sexy enough to make the news. The city might just as well slap a tax on crack, and then peddle it at Main & Hastings to make a quick buck.

Yume-sama · #**2872** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 4:59 AM**

You could question the socially redeemable merits of almost any popular activity that people take part in (and people try, with the Canucks, Lions, sports stadiums in general). I could make the same argument about bars, nightclubs, pubs, etc., because they're really not my cup of tea. In truth, it's neither yours, or the governments (despite their best efforts) responsibility, to decide what's best for other people. There are plenty of people (the majority) who call it a night out and are responsible. It's not my idea of fun, but I'm not high and mighty enough to try and people what they should be doing with their own time and money

There are more destructive behaviours, though granted, gambling, drugs, etc. seem to go hand in hand.

But so do douchey people with spiked hair and Ed Hardy clothing but we can't outlaw that, either.

dreambrother808 · #**2873** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 6:02 AM**

I spend $20 at a casino once a year, because I also see the pointlessness of gambling. Table games have some decent odds if you're good at them though. My mother, on the other hand, spends about that much every other week. Both are harmless. My mom is a 60something lady who takes pleasure in going to a casino with her friends. What the hell is wrong with that? She is not glassy eyed or stupid. She knows the odds and plays within her limits. It's nice to have the fantasy of winning some extra money when you're a widow who was once used to having a husband with a rather good income.

cornholio · #**2874** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 6:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

There is no socially redeeming quality to gambling whatsoever. The saddest thing I ever saw was going into River Rock and seeing seniors spending their pension cheques sitting glassy eyed in front of slot machines. Its a fools game, where the odds are always in favour of the house. What's the "entertainment value" in that? There is little unique in a casino that will bring tourists to Vancouver, that's just a crock.

The jobs argument is a weak one. Why not build a nuclear power plant in metro, since it will create jobs as well. I've seen friends driven to scamming money off their elderly parents to support a gambling addiction. Since it doesn't involves shootings etc its not sexy enough to make the news. The city might just as well slap a tax on crack, and then peddle it at Main & Hastings to make a quick buck.

Hope.

The glue that holds society together.

cornholio · #**2875** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 6:16 AM**

I should add that I dont gamble. I think to much about the numbers and odds and cant ever find it enjoyable, but im certain im more of a exception than the norm in that regard.

Yume-sama · #**2876** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 6:25 AM**

I can't gamble because I'm cheap

cornholio · #**2877** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 7:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

I can't gamble because I'm cheap

Thanks for reminding me of the second reason why I also dont gamble. I think that saving money for cheap people is a very similar feeling to wining money for gamblers.

whatnext · #**2878** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 7:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

I spend $20 at a casino once a year, because I also see the pointlessness of gambling. Table games have some decent odds if you're good at them though. My mother, on the other hand, spends about that much every other week. Both are harmless. My mom is a 60something lady who takes pleasure in going to a casino with her friends. What the hell is wrong with that? She is not glassy eyed or stupid. She knows the odds and plays within her limits. It's nice to have the fantasy of winning some extra money when you're a widow who was once used to having a husband with a rather good income.

Certainly you and your mum are amongst the lucky ones. Like Yume, I'm too cheap to throw my money away at a casino. Unfortunately there are many for whom it is an addiction, as bad as drugs. Plus, we have the example just across the bridge in Richmond of the kind of criminal behaviour that it encourages. Whether its loan-sharking, car jackings, there's a host of social ills that come with it. Do we really need to encourage that? And all for what?

invisibleairwaves · #**2879** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 8:18 AM**

People can get addicted to anything. Should we run the local video game developers out of town because some people get hooked on that? Or ban any one of the massive list of hobbies that people spent fortunes on?

Yeah, gambling addictions suck. But that's the cost of living in a free society, where the government doesn't swoop in and eradicate anything that might potentially harm someone somewhere. Objecting to a casino (that already exists) to prevent gambling addictions just isn't reasonable. And of course if you fail to provide people with a legal way of doing something, they will do it illegally instead, and all the societal ills that go with it will be far, far worse than they would have been with a legal, accountable, easily policed casino.

whatnext · #**2880** Posted **Feb 21, 2011, 8:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

People can get addicted to anything. Should we run the local video game developers out of town because some people get hooked on that? Or ban any one of the massive list of hobbies that people spent fortunes on?

Yeah, gambling addictions suck. But that's the cost of living in a free society, where the government doesn't swoop in and eradicate anything that might potentially harm someone somewhere. Objecting to a casino (that already exists) to prevent gambling addictions just isn't reasonable. And of course if you fail to provide people with a legal way of doing something, they will do it illegally instead, and all the societal ills that go with it will be far, far worse than they would have been with a legal, accountable, easily policed casino.

Exactly what benefit do you see this greatly expanded casino bringing?