Fonzie Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I gotta try & do some homework on this one tomorrow, as it really interests me.......And this Berman guy strikes me as shady.Plus a majority of the big newspapers in state are against it, along with the FOP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 There's really not too much to research. No. 6 is written with some loopholes in the code.I'm all for putting a casino in Ohio, but I really don't like the way the verbiage is structured in No. 6 as it's written - mainly regarding the tax loophole. I think it'll be a "NO" vote for me this time around, and if they can fix the loopholes, I'll put it through on the second try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fonzie Posted November 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 There's really not too much to research. No. 6 is written with some loopholes in the code.I'm all for putting a casino in Ohio, but I really don't like the way the verbiage is structured in No. 6 as it's written - mainly regarding the tax loophole. I think it'll be a "NO" vote for me this time around, and if they can fix the loopholes, I'll put it through on the second try.Sounds like we're actually in agreement on this one Justin! I just wasn't sure if the tax loopholes were legit, or fodder for the commercials.I know I'd heard something about the indians getting first crack, and not having to pay taxes, and because of this, neither would Berman who gets 2nd crack. Then I heard he WOULD be paying taxes....but in Nevada, NOT Ohio.Then there's the whole slant about Argosi funding a bunch of those commercials to keep our business. With the whole skunk thing the last week, I keep forgettin' to look all this crap up, to see what's legit, and what's rhetoric/lies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magifesq Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I'm not in favor of gambling, however I'm tired of all the lies about it. IF it really helped education as they claim then it should be unnecessary - the lottery was supposed to be the answer to failing levies and my school almost lost all sports due to underfunding.If enough people want to hand over their money to casinos in person instead of online, put the facts out and let people vote democratically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/Casinoinitiative2007.pdfYeah I'm not convinced on the whole loophole bit. Also, people need to be weary of the fact the primary opponent (No on 6) to this is another gaming company, Penn National Gaming (owers of Argosy). Another group that opposes this is Vote no Casinos and is nothing more than an anti-gambling group. There is a third group called 'UNITE Here' opposing this ballot which is a union group that has it's own motivations. So All three of the opponents running ads against this all have personal motives: - No on 6 is a competitor. - Vote no Casinos is opposed to any gambling period. - UNITE Here has its union to grow.The lottery and things like this Casino have never been put out there as the end all, be all to school funding problems. While they do help some, people under estimate just how much money is required to run public schools.I'm voting yes on this one. I can think of more than a few people that this will help not only down in Wilmington, but also with other markets in the area. After talking to some investors and others like Real Estate brokers I can see more good done than harm just to the economy it's self in surrounding areas.Oh and I like to gamble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandova Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 There's really not too much to research. No. 6 is written with some loopholes in the code.I'm all for putting a casino in Ohio, but I really don't like the way the verbiage is structured in No. 6 as it's written - mainly regarding the tax loophole. I think it'll be a "NO" vote for me this time around, and if they can fix the loopholes, I'll put it through on the second try.That's the feedback I've gotten from many people I've spoke to about issue 6. It would be fine if they honestly take a look at fixing the cracks that will delapitate it's genuine purpose. (like it really has one) Anyways I am a NO vote this time, but not b/c I am against casinos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustinsn3485 Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 Darn it, I was planning to vote No as well...If JRMiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii is going to vote no then I can't vote no....crap...Ahh hell, I'm votin No, I guess we'll just have to agree on something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjachk08 Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 im voting no Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_SV650 Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/upload/ballotboard/Casinoinitiative2007.pdfYeah I'm not convinced on the whole loophole bit. Also, people need to be weary of the fact the primary opponent (No on 6) to this is another gaming company, Penn National Gaming (owers of Argosy). Another group that opposes this is Vote no Casinos and is nothing more than an anti-gambling group. There is a third group called 'UNITE Here' opposing this ballot which is a union group that has it's own motivations. So All three of the opponents running ads against this all have personal motives: - No on 6 is a competitor. - Vote no Casinos is opposed to any gambling period. - UNITE Here has its union to grow.The lottery and things like this Casino have never been put out there as the end all, be all to school funding problems. While they do help some, people under estimate just how much money is required to run public schools.I'm voting yes on this one. I can think of more than a few people that this will help not only down in Wilmington, but also with other markets in the area. After talking to some investors and others like Real Estate brokers I can see more good done than harm just to the economy it's self in surrounding areas.Oh and I like to gamble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I see no reason a casino needs to be a constitutional amendment of the state Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robhawk Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 Voting yes here, even without the tax's it will bring in revenue and jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I see no reason a casino needs to be a constitutional amendment of the stateI think it's only because Article XV Section 6 already speaks of the Lottery and Bingo; other forms of "gambling"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleCock Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I'll be voting yes because I'd rather drive to clinton county than drive to Indiana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yotaman88210 Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 Voting yes here, even without the tax's it will bring in revenue and jobs.and it will bring in people we really dont want... like sinners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 im voting yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 and it will bring in people we really dont want... like sinners. So are we planning an OR meet there when it opens? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f4isvt Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I am voting yes anything that creates 6000 jobs in todays economy all for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robhawk Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I sin and I like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f4isvt Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I am not voting for it or against on basis of using like alot of people are doing. I am looking at the jobs it will create. And I will probably go to it. Where is it supposed to be located? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fonzie Posted November 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 So are we planning an OR meet there when it opens? The innaugural O.R. "Pimps & Hoes Meat"!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 Darn it, I was planning to vote No as well...If JRMiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii is going to vote no then I can't vote no....crap...Ahh hell, I'm votin No, I guess we'll just have to agree on something.I hate it when that happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleCock Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 So are we planning an OR meet there when it opens? put my name on that list! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWing'R Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 im voting yes.We voted YES. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchmuckGirl Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I voted 'no' just because the tax loophole seems unfair.Once they fix up those problems I will vote 'yes' for it, for sure.And then count me in for the O.R. meet as well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 So what's the tax loophole? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.