|
page:
<<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>>
of 1 pages
|
< previous page | next page >
|
| Nov 8, 2006 @ 1:00 AM |
Holy s***! No on 1 wins!!!! No casino in W. Warwick
|
|
bitter210
Posts: 19
|
I didn't think there were enough RI'ers smart enough to reject this. Especially with all the advertising done by the casino backers. Truth was it wasn't going to take any business away from Foxwoods, it would just take people away from Lincoln and Newport, which both pay higher taxes than this place was going to, so we would have been screwing ourselves.
Good showing RI!!!
|
|
  |
|
| Nov 9, 2006 @ 5:04 AM |
Holy s***! No on 1 wins!!!! No casino in W. Warwick |
|
starting_again
Posts: 2
|
we all lost the rich do not care and you must be one.
why do you not tell people that if our casinos we have now do not make enought money the state makes up the diffrence. not a bad deal. and i realy would like to have a job so i lose again. and i think of how maney people it would have given jobs to.i think the income taxes would have more than been double what our casinos pay us now.the problem with people today belive to maney liers and cheats. ri state of corruption and they have a monoply on the gambling.
stuff that up your rich nose.
|
| |
|
| Nov 9, 2006 @ 1:53 PM |
Holy s***! No on 1 wins!!!! No casino in W. Warwick
|
|
bitter210
Posts: 19
|
LOL!!!
Please, we were going to get more from a casino owned by Harrahs than we do from Linclon & Newport?
& I am definatly not rich, but thats all who would benifit by this, the rich, the lobbyists and the insiders.
Great, you missed out on a crappy job as a blackjack dealer or waiter. 
Just drive another 20 minutes and go work at Foxwoods.
Or go get a job at Wal-mart as a greeter.
Seriously, who was going to stop in w. warwick over Foxwoods?
Come on now, do you really believe there is a limitless pool of gamblers to come down and spread their magic money allover every casino built?
[Edited on 11/9/2006 2:19 PM]
|
|
| |
|
| Nov 9, 2006 @ 11:31 PM |
Holy s***! No on 1 wins!!!! No casino in W. Warwick |
|
kelsmin
Posts: 4
|
agreed and disagreed.
the people who are going to get the jobs are going to be lower income people who will possibly try to cheat as well considering they'd make almost the same flippin burgers and like bitter said...greeting at wal-mart. there are positions everywhere...you aren't going to see people flocking to college to learn how to deal cards or clean up old people's drool all over the slot machines.
And seriously...where the f*** is west warwick? its like putting a casino in forestdale or glendale. people are NOT going to flock to a Harrahs casino.
lincoln park just spend a buttload on a new round-about outside its entrance which has caused an even bigger headache there, but people are not going to be leaving that place anytime soon.
I can understand the whole taxes thing because that would be lovely, but it was a very unrealistic idea which is why so many people rejected it. I mean, it wasn't even a close race. And if we look at the population of people who actually voted, you could further answer why it was rejected. Did more lower income people vote than higher income? did more people per capita per town vote a certain way ?
i voted yes personally knowing all the while it would be rejected, but I did vote, so im allowed to change my opinion.
|
| |
|
| Nov 12, 2006 @ 9:02 PM |
Holy s***! No on 1 wins!!!! No casino in W. Warwick
|
|
starting_again
Posts: 2
|
just to let you know i worked at fox woods.
never had to clean any drool.
just work for a bunch of a-- h---
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
page:
<<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>>
of 1 pages
|
< previous page | next page >
|