Comments
littlehelppls t1_izc5ipe wrote
Tell em
[deleted] t1_izar1l7 wrote
[deleted]
Ditovontease t1_iza0th6 wrote
Who paid for this headline
freetimerva t1_izar2zw wrote
Richmond is spending all this time and effort for a casino...
and in the same breath...
>The city also wants, as its second highest priority, to prevent any state effort to accelerate the required completion of a $1.3 billion combined-sewer cleanup of the James River before 2035.
Levar, we got real problems in the city and a casino isnt one of them.
ExtremeHobo t1_izauy5n wrote
I know it seems too simple but couldn't we get our councilmen to pass something that says a new Casino has to pay for the combined-sewer cleanup?
freetimerva t1_izayl7b wrote
1.3 billion and the casino site is yours!
They'd probably agree. I could be convinced to vote yes for that one.
Djlewzer t1_izdqbhc wrote
Would love for development contracts to be tied to things like this. My guess that it’s effectiveness would be limited because not everyone would do it. Developers would just go elsewhere. I would love to be proven wrong though.
tornadogenesis t1_izauieq wrote
Richmond literally voted no on this. This brings it to the bottom of the "wish list"
How about enough ambulances to serve us? How about fair pay for emts? How about more money for teachers and schools?
All the casino will do is pad the pockets of the politicians and the rich. Disgusting.
RCBilldoz t1_izca3mt wrote
I mean, both parties pad the pockets of the rich, it’s how they get into office.
SwanOverSunshine t1_izag0p5 wrote
I wish we the actual people of Richmond could send a request for what we want to the General Assembly. Doubt the casino would be top of the list. Bet something related to more state funding for schools, teachers, and roads would be . . .
littlehelppls t1_izc5po0 wrote
Can we not petition them? We can create a forum by requesting a hearing
bozatwork t1_izb4o1m wrote
Wow, that headline is so inaccurate and annoying. I listen to City Council meetings, attend school board meetings, go to PTA meetings, attend my district's town halls, attend my civic association's meetings, subscribe to the newspaper (digital), follow the local broadcast news, talk to my neighbors and coworkers, and I can tell you that a casino has not been listed as a priority by anyone in the last year. We are asking the General Assembly for a lot but a casino isn't on the list.
whw53 t1_izcsp6m wrote
That's fine - this is referring to city government petitions. It's not misleading in that regard.
Alligetiserror37 t1_izb7zti wrote
Affordable housing, fixing the damn potholes, cleaning the James, so many things before a fucking casino
CrassostreaVirginica OP t1_iz9rijd wrote
For those paywalled, this article preview from VPAP:
>Richmond's first wish from the General Assembly is another opportunity for voters to approve a casino, even if the city has to share regional gaming revenues with a potential rival operation in Petersburg. Most of Richmond's legislative priorities for the coming assembly session center on promoting affordable housing and protecting existing homeowners from being taxed out of their homes by an overheated housing market. The city also wants, as its second highest priority, to prevent any state effort to accelerate the required completion of a $1.3 billion combined-sewer cleanup of the James River before 2035.
Asterion7 t1_iz9sio3 wrote
Jesus Christ why can the casino project not die already. How deep are these lobbyists pockets? The fact that they are ignoring the vote they already had makes me double down on opposing it.
ThatChildNextDoor t1_iz9unci wrote
It was only defeated by like 2400 votes, and people around me are very upset about it being defeated.
lunar_unit t1_iz9vj9r wrote
Trump was pretty sad about being defeated too. But that's how Democracy works. Not everyone is going to be happy, but if 51% of the neighbors vote a certain way, that's how it's gotta stay, unless we plan on fighting each and every election until we're happy with the results.
If enough people had wanted the casino, then enough people would have voted for the referendum, but we didn't, and we didn't. 🤷♂️
ThatChildNextDoor t1_iz9weic wrote
Also, happy cake day!
lunar_unit t1_iz9xf64 wrote
Whoa. Thanks! Eight years burned away arguing with you beautiful people! I've learned a lot from this subreddit.
ThatChildNextDoor t1_iz9wd0n wrote
Yeah, but you explain that to those people, while people across the river got plenty of entertainment venues and other investment properties.
Tylerjb4 t1_izdimdt wrote
Off topic but I would legitimately rather be ruled over by a monarchy that I disagreed with as opposed to being a political minority in a democracy. The only saving grace is the constitution with the bill of rights.
lunar_unit t1_izesk5e wrote
That's not a very well thought out statement.
You're a minority every time the other party that you don't support wins enough Congress seats and has a sitting president. That's how our system has worked for over 200 years, and while it's far from perfect, it's worked fairly well over time.
You having never lived under a true monarchy, means you can't actually compare what that means, but if you take a look at monarchies like Saudi Arabia or Brunei or historical European monarchies, if you disagree politically, they can disappear you or take all your assets without any lawful due process protections at all.
Tylerjb4 t1_izezftl wrote
So the US has never disappeared someone without due process?
lunar_unit t1_izf11tx wrote
Of course they have, but that doesn't mean a monarchy is better. Lol. Go read some history, then get back to me.
Tylerjb4 t1_izf5u3m wrote
Hitler rose to power democratically.
Pol pot was elected.
American democrats fought to keep black people enslaved, and then with as few rights as possible.
An elected American democrat president put Japanese in internment camps.
An elected American democrat president marched Indians from their lands to Oklahoma.
Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny.
lunar_unit t1_izf9ml7 wrote
Dude, what's your point? Humans fucking suck everywhere, in every time in history. And you still have more rights in an American democracy than in a monarchy. Go ask Jamal Kashoggi how he feels after Mohamed bin Salman, Crown Prince of Saudi ordered his killing and dismemberment (on foreign soil, no less) and got away with it even though everyone knows he did it.
If you're trying to suggest that life would be better if we had Trump as King, (I see you don't mention any Republican political shenanigans in your examples) then you drank too much Kool aid, because he doesn't give a shit about anybody but himself.
Back to your original statement, if you've lived your entire life in the US, you've lived under both Democrats and Republicans. Can you say your life is better under one, compared to the other? And being that you have lived under that kind of situation, what are you still doing here?
Tylerjb4 t1_izfedur wrote
You’re comparing possibly the best democracy against one of the worst monarchies. In a more comparable matchup, I would much rather live in modern Saudi Arabia than third reich Germany.
I would definitely take king trump because he can be held solely responsible. If he does something terrible, we yeet and replace him. At least a monarchy has long term generational investment in the success of their country. Our government is too busy trying to pass laws just to spite the other half.
Fuck the republicans, too. But the 3 biggest American fuck ups I could think of were Democrat orchestrated. You got anything the republicans did worse than those 3?
Personally, I’m more of a libertarian, minarchist, ancap. All governments suck ass. Their sole function should be common defense, enforcing contracts, and protecting natural rights.
lunar_unit t1_izfkz5j wrote
And royalty has been the force behind millennia of greed, corruption, colonialism, invasions, pogroms, ethnic cleansings, slavery, torture, land theft, unfair taxation, murderous crushers of dissent, etc etc, all over the globe.
>All governments suck ass. Their sole function should be common defense, enforcing contracts, and protecting natural rights.
Maybe we can agree there, but in a human world, there's always going to be corruption, and the most corruptible are most drawn to power, regardless of their political affiliation. We're fucked!
Anyway, have a good weekend.
Tylerjb4 t1_izflfmh wrote
U 2 bb
GrandmaPoses t1_iza3hbn wrote
It was what by 2400 votes? Defeated? Oh then I guess that's the decision. It's not a fucking jury trial.
PayneTrainSG t1_iz9uvsp wrote
Conversely, I didn't vote on it and was largely ambivalent, but this open repudiation of a public referendum is maddening.
systematical t1_izdbyp0 wrote
Likewise, but the fact they keep trying instead of taking no for an answer is pushing me to vote no this time.
bigdaddyman6969 t1_iza2hs8 wrote
So what ? If it only passed by 2400 votes do you think they would allow a revote? The people have spoken.
ThatSadOptimist t1_izcp2kl wrote
Also, it was out of 80,000ish votes. In the scheme of things, a couple thousand votes is not a questionable margin.
LostDefectivePearl t1_izb38km wrote
BINGO
plummbob t1_izbn2ro wrote
>The people have spoken.
​
​
They could of just not gone to the casino.
ThatChildNextDoor t1_izbrsq9 wrote
Exactly.
Asterion7 t1_iz9vp8x wrote
Elections have consequences....you can't just keep calling a vote until you get the results you want. Give it 5-10 years at least.
guiltyofnothing t1_izaceeo wrote
All it takes is 1 vote to win. The rest is for ego.
Fizzster t1_izbexip wrote
I voted yes initially, but now I’m going to vote no because they’re not respecting the will of the voters.
[deleted] t1_izagyh1 wrote
[deleted]
Asterion7 t1_izah3im wrote
Let Petersburg have it. Casinos are long term losers everywhere they go.
[deleted] t1_izawhr1 wrote
[deleted]
Asterion7 t1_izb0cov wrote
I don't think we need casinos in Virginia period. But I certainly don't want it in Richmond. Let the people in Petersburg decide what they want.
[deleted] t1_izb11z3 wrote
[deleted]
Asterion7 t1_izb442l wrote
Lol. How is it an argument that it will be bad in Petersburg so it might as well be bad here and opinion?
[deleted] t1_izb5yzk wrote
[deleted]
Asterion7 t1_izb970r wrote
Do your own research. All the studies were linked here the first time around. Casinos and sports stadiums are almost always long term net negatives for municipalities. I don't think it's changed in the last two years.
As for "political boundaries" last time I checked Petersburg was a decent drive down an interstate. I think we will be mostly insulated. Again I don't think Petersburg should go for it either. But I don't live there or vote there.
Gwala_BKK t1_izb2q1f wrote
Not true though is it? Casinos are a blatantly immoral and predatory business and accepting that into your culture has snowballing effects. Petersburg shouldn't have one either but I'd rather it be outside of the city than have it directly festering in the heart of what is currently a very positive movement
[deleted] t1_izb3jl3 wrote
[deleted]
Gwala_BKK t1_izbwy71 wrote
It most certainly hasn't been accepted into the culture of downtown Richmond. Sure low class people outside of the city like it but that's different.
littlehelppls t1_izc68p5 wrote
Let's not take it to class discrimination. But it is predatory on people of specific socioeconomic statuses.
littlehelppls t1_izc6cbm wrote
Let's not take it to class discrimination. But it is predatory on people of specific socioeconomic statuses.
Gwala_BKK t1_izcdzjk wrote
You're right, I shouldn't have said that.
Vapid_Ingenue t1_izce8eb wrote
Just for clarity, what exactly do you mean when you say "low class people?"
gravy_boot t1_izb52rt wrote
Oh so you’re saying the casino’s radius of negative effects would include the entire city if it was located in precinct 806.
[deleted] t1_izb6olo wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_izb89do wrote
[deleted]
gravy_boot t1_izb8yfs wrote
> But moving it a few minutes further down the road outside of an invisible border will prevent it from affecting the city at all.”
Literally no one here has said that- this is just you inventing something that doesn’t exist so you can wag your finger at it.
[deleted] t1_izbaeg0 wrote
[deleted]
gravy_boot t1_izbcsmr wrote
Ah ok, one comment which wasn’t referring to any part of Petersburg that’s “15 minutes” south of Richmond. But I guess you adeptly conclude that we all agree it’s fine.
[deleted] t1_izbdi1e wrote
[deleted]
gravy_boot t1_izbf2ra wrote
Petersburg the city, which is what that person was talking about, is a 30 min drive. Not 15, which is what you are imagining that we all believe is fine.
> any logical reading of the anti-casino folks’ arguments in context makes it clear the vast majority believe that.
This is instructive about how your broken logic works. Because you saw a handful of comments by noisy redditors you can somehow deduce what the “vast majority” believe.
I guess that’s similar to how you deduced what 85% of people want based on the votes of 15%.
littlehelppls t1_izc5z20 wrote
Casinos are garbage, keeping garbage out of our city is the only smart move here
tornadogenesis t1_izav6sg wrote
As someone who lives in Richmond i cannot vote for for people in Petersburg. If they want it they can vote yes. I can however vote and say, "No thank you, not in our city. Take your filthy money elsewhere."
That money up front sounds appealing but there is a much greater cost in the long run. The casino is not a boon, it is a money drain that funnels our cash into the pockets of the rich and the politicians.
gravy_boot t1_izanwwl wrote
> where people near it all want it.
This is wrong, like 1/10 adults in that area voted yes.
[deleted] t1_izapzxn wrote
[deleted]
gravy_boot t1_izaz8m6 wrote
You said everyone in the area wants it, which is the lie. What is the population of that precinct, and district? The turnout was like 13%.
[deleted] t1_izazmlc wrote
[deleted]
gravy_boot t1_izb02wu wrote
No I did the research and have the numbers, but you’re the one making bogus claims so you do the fucking work now.
Diet_Coke t1_iz9vob6 wrote
>promoting affordable housing and protecting existing homeowners from being taxed out of their homes by an overheated housing market
Oh, I've got the solution guys! Let's let homeowners and out of town investors buy homes and turn them into short term rentals. That will fix our housing market.
Vapid_Ingenue t1_iz9wu0b wrote
It should be illegal for corporations to own single family homes
Diet_Coke t1_iz9x9hb wrote
I agree, if I was king of Richmond for a day I'd change our zoning rules to make it against regulations for an LLC to own a 1 - 4 family dwelling. Homes should be for shelter, not investing.
Mr_Boneman t1_iza4le3 wrote
Councilman Mike Jones LLC owns the house he “lives in” in his district. Of course he owns multiple properties outside the city and his son was a star QB at Henrico HS while he was serving on city council. Managed to put a stop sign in front of the house on a commuter road as well that makes no sense being there other than to make his life more convenient. Really need someone to run against him in the new HOD district carved out for him as he preps to be our next mayor.
SwanOverSunshine t1_izafqcm wrote
Oh no, is he going to run for mayor? He’s so terrible, def not smart and ethical enough for that. He’s such a divider in the community, very us vs them. Was hoping he’d go into the general assembly where he would do less damage since he’d be one of many.
Mr_Boneman t1_izbd2bp wrote
I fear he’s setting up his HOD run to raise funds/gain attention for his mayoral run. Grade A affinity scammer, Dwight Jones with CTE and makes Stoney sound like a Rhodes scholar. He wouldn’t win if someone competent runs against him (Please John Balisles) but if it turns into a 3-5 person race that’s where I worry. Not enough people pay enough attention to him or know how shitty his record is, or that he couldn’t even properly file paperwork to run for office. Addison is too milquetoast to win against him and has other un redeeming qualities that would make it hard to beat him.
SwanOverSunshine t1_izbupvd wrote
I really hope Jon Baliles runs - he would be an amazing, unifying mayor. Really understands the city on a logistical level. Do you read his 5x5 newsletter?
Mr_Boneman t1_izby27x wrote
I’m not aware of it? My guess is when he left the Stoney Admin he knew what was coming with regards to their competence and agenda. I’m sure he’ll do something’s I won’t agree with, but him and Agelasto are sorely missed on CC.
SwanOverSunshine t1_izcjsmx wrote
He puts this out about once a week or so - great little local news analysis. Either can go to the site, or get it by email:
Charlesinrichmond t1_izciuys wrote
From what I know I'd be pretty happy to vote for John Baliles
DCFishingGuy t1_izai0vh wrote
>richmond.com/news/s...
So then all these go up for sale, the people living their get evicted, the same people don't have the money to buy them, the housing market crashes which affects the larger economy and the people who couldn't afford to live before are the most affected. Congrats you just destroyed our city.
Diet_Coke t1_izanhps wrote
No, they could still be owned by individual investors just without the protection of an LLC. One impact of that is that it makes slumlords personally liable for their properties, they can't play a shell game with LLCs and avoid liability for giving their tenants lead poisoning or failing to remediate black mold. From an insurance perspective, it would also limit one individual to owning ~4 - 5, maybe up to 15, 1 - 4 family dwellings because you can't get insurance for more than that as an individual.
I'm sure there would be some people who sold their properties. This change likely would put downward pressure on housing prices, which would be a good thing. It would not crash the market.
LostDefectivePearl t1_izb4fun wrote
I’m looking into an LLC for when I buy a house because I don’t want my name to be that easily searchable in public records. My partner has gotten death threats at work due to the nature of her job. It wouldn’t be hard to see who holds the LLC but just that small obstacle would probably stop some unhinged people from finding our address.
Charlesinrichmond t1_izciya6 wrote
Okay putting my lawyer hat on this makes so little sense I cannot even parse it
This would require the complete conversion of the US to a communist society to work I'm not actually kidding. You have to destroy most American laws it makes the Trump take on things look minor
You might not realize how trumpian this is
Diet_Coke t1_izcktqn wrote
That old Trump the communist
Charlesinrichmond t1_izfewfe wrote
nope. The Trump who wants to destroy the constitution and our democracy and rule of law.
He wants to destroy some aspects. You want to destroy other aspects. I actually give you the benefit of the doubt and I don't think you realize what you are proposing.
Corporations are just people. Groups of people. Your proposal boils down to overturning property rights, which is a big change in our society, and would quite literally require pitching a big chunk of the constitution
GMUcovidta t1_iza3yg4 wrote
There's times they have to- like if they're building a new development, warehouse etc. they may have to buy and demolish several single family homes. They may also buy a single family home and transition it into something else. You see this a lot with large older properties being converted into hotels, event venues etc.
It should definitely be regulated but a flat out ban doesn't make sense.
Vapid_Ingenue t1_iza4ylq wrote
Fair enough. I'll concede that. But corporations owning hundreds or thousands of single family homes all throughout a city... it just ain't right
GMUcovidta t1_iza5gz8 wrote
Totally agree with you.
[deleted] t1_izafwlq wrote
[deleted]
Charlesinrichmond t1_izcnz32 wrote
So what you are saying is renters should pay more? Because basically all tenants are in investment units and if investment units are charged more than tenants will have to pay more
[deleted] t1_ize16o0 wrote
[deleted]
Charlesinrichmond t1_izcikjp wrote
I think all of my law professors and half of my college professors would start crying if they read this point. It's really remarkably uneducated
Vapid_Ingenue t1_izer7fl wrote
Well let me help educate you: I don't give a fuck about you or any of your professors
Charlesinrichmond t1_izfe25v wrote
or education or not sounding like an idiot clearly
Please read a book
goodsam2 t1_iz9yxan wrote
It doesn't matter about short term rentals or not. I'm convinced a lot of that is a tax scheme to get around hotel taxes which are high because it's out of Towners.
The reason they buy it as investors is because the supply is not meeting demand so prices will rise. The big investors literally put in their sheets they love NIMBYs.
Add enough housing so that investors lose money. IMO the investor talk is because people don't like the idea that it's the people around them who are raising prices.
lunar_unit t1_iz9t522 wrote
>to prevent any state effort to accelerate the required completion of a $1.3 billion combined-sewer cleanup of the James River before 2035.
If the state and/or Fed chips in more dollars, then just get it done. If they don't, 2035 isn't realistic if it's solely funded by local dollars
goodsam2 t1_iz9xlxq wrote
Or we build the casino and use that money...
People keep forgetting which side of the ledger the casino is.
GrandmaPoses t1_iza3v55 wrote
You do realize the casino has its own ledger, yes?
goodsam2 t1_iza9ij0 wrote
The casino plan was for them to pay Richmond $20 million plus $1 million per year, along with donating some amount to charity and another music venue.
Since we can authorize them or not they had to pay Richmond an extra tax, on top of another business moving into an empty area.
Charlesinrichmond t1_iz9tf7x wrote
if the city doesn't want to tax people out of their homes they could maybe stop taxing people out of their homes? Given the city is doing it, not the state?
That's ridiculous
goodsam2 t1_iz9z6au wrote
It's all absurd we could be spurring all kinds of new developments adding millions to the budget adding thousands of homes and Richmond will say they can't do anything.
Ditovontease t1_iza10wu wrote
>to prevent any state effort to accelerate the required completion of a $1.3 billion combined-sewer cleanup of the James River before 2035.
lol
so basically "priority 1 is casino, priority 2 is keeping the james polluted for as long as possible"
cool. coolcoolcoolcool
nartarf t1_izazxm3 wrote
Why they tryna delay fixing our poop storm river fix?
fishmapper t1_izb3ezu wrote
Because that’s a cost of $5600 per resident of the city(1.3b/230k). A family of 4 cost would be over $20k for their share.
Really the state/fed funding is the only way to make this feasible. You have new residents to the city (new movers or new born for the last 50 years) who are on the hook for over 100 years worth of bad infrastructure.
fishmapper t1_izb3n41 wrote
Other newer cities and large urban areas have the luxury of not trying to shoehorn two sewage systems into space that’s been built up like Lynchburg Richmond and Alexandria (or was it Arlington?)
Charlesinrichmond t1_izco6da wrote
No it's Alexandria you're right
Professional_Book912 t1_izar8d3 wrote
It should read "Stoney" not "Richmond".
We are F'd until a new administration. This one does not care about the employee.
DeezSaggyNuts t1_izamh96 wrote
Let the casino die God damnit.
JosefDerArbeiter t1_iza0niu wrote
I'd love for the site of the casino to be a new manufacturer. I'm not sure what type of business that would be, but surely the city could court some global company to choose this lot as an investment location? The area is already built up for manufacturing and storage.
Instead Richmond is choosing to dig their heels in.
55V35lM t1_iza5e0g wrote
It’s what the city administration does - why come up with a new ideas when you can keep recycling the old
LostDefectivePearl t1_izb32ym wrote
Who the literal fuck wants this fucking casino? Never met a real person who does.
freetimerva t1_izdwjpe wrote
You obviously live on the north bank of the river west of downtown.
I live and work in southside where the vast majority voted YES. A lot of people here truly believed that a casino would help the community.
Urban One spent over a million dollars spreading lies to Richmonders about the benefits of their development. They probably spent a similar amount getting local officials on board.
LostDefectivePearl t1_ize3rgz wrote
Thank you for not outright saying short pump lol but no, I think it’s because I work in science/medicine so there’s apparently a significant bias in that group.
Personally I have always hated casinos, they weaponize one of the sweetest human emotions (hope) to efficiently extract money from people who are almost always not rich.
plummbob t1_izbnw2v wrote
>
>
>Richmond advocates a constitutional amendment to allow local governments the option of creating tax exemptions and other tools to protect homeowners from rising real estate taxes because of soaring home prices and assessments.
​
​
prop 13 to RVA? I heard its been a resounding success in california.
​
​
> Allowing local governments to develop and implement means-tested, long-term owner-occupied real state tax relief programs will help prevent the displacement of long-term owner occupants due to dramatically rising property tax assessments, thereby leading to neighborhood gentrification,” the city states as its third legislative priority.
​
​
we'll fucking do anything but legalize more housing. we'll even ensure people are stuck in pockets of multi-generational poverty before they legalize more housing.
debaterollie t1_izfpz0n wrote
Seems like we could just increase the homestead exemption. that way it helps people at risk of being gentrified, w/o helping corporate landlords.
plummbob t1_izfqdxh wrote
Depending on the extent, that could just geographically lock people in place because they would face a steep increase if they tried to move. It would also result in inderdevelopemnt, causing home prices to appreciate faster than otherwise.
debaterollie t1_izfqp3f wrote
no- a homestead exemption gives you a reduction in property tax on your primary residence so it would follow you to your new primary residence if you moved.
plummbob t1_izfryhz wrote
A homestead exemption in rva won't help if you try to move to nova. It would have to be statewide, but we can see in areas other areas like california and colorado, it doesn't help in any long term way in maintaining affordability. Nor does it help renters, who are often low income, and depending on the extent can cause budget issues from a decline in revenue.
A more economocally effective policy is a low income tax credit.... a "property tax break circuit breaker"
RCBilldoz t1_izcapqm wrote
This is Stoney’s last stand. What are there? 2 years left? No time for real change. He needs this casino to move to his next goal, whatever that is.
americanspirit64 t1_iza5tee wrote
This is the end result of unregulated Capitalism. Without regulation nothing will change. The prices of housing it going to continue to rise, which means wages will rise as well, in direct opposition the Federal Reserve Banks, desire to lower wages in the misguided believe that inflation is caused by a shortage of low paying workers. We are at the highest employment rate in decades 3.5%. First raise the minimum wage to fifteen an hour. Then regulate utilities. Biden should have made it clear it railroads can't fix the problems and give sick days. The government will nationalize the railroads companies... F*ck Casino's. That isn't a economic plan its a lobbying issue.
TNRAOIH t1_izbnvlc wrote
Our capitalism is regulated and it still sucks shit. Profit motive and hoarding of private property don’t go away with regulation
americanspirit64 t1_izg66wr wrote
It is not regulated anywhere near where it was before Nixon, Regan. and Bill Clinton. Especially tax regulations on the rich, corporations and especially the banks.
TNRAOIH t1_izgm7lc wrote
Agreed. And a system where the base is gluttonous exploitation that is marginally and temporarily tempered down based on how the leaders at the time feel isn’t a viable system anyways
Charlesinrichmond t1_izcociw wrote
Capitalism is just a fancy name for humans being humans. And humans always have a tendency to be humans
TNRAOIH t1_izd6iae wrote
You think all civilizations are naturally capitalistic due to human nature?
Charlesinrichmond t1_izfeivw wrote
yes. These are all just tags we hang on human behavior.
TNRAOIH t1_izfs9gt wrote
That’s interesting, I’ll have to read up on the capitalist economy of the Sioux prior to the expansion of colonial powers. Maybe there’s also some research on how the North Sentinel Islanders, currently untouched by modern global powers, independently developed their own capitalist economy.
SauseegeGravy t1_izaracl wrote
But if you hit it big you can continue to afford living in the city.
RCBilldoz t1_izcacic wrote
Please, someone, FOIA all the document used to determine the casino was a top priority.
City workers? Residents? Council? Le-Le?
orpheus456 t1_izdwl2q wrote
Scumbags
[deleted] t1_izaqzly wrote
[deleted]
I_AM_RVA t1_izatj94 wrote
The casino is going to be so fetch
ThatSadOptimist t1_izcoioj wrote
Funny, when I show up with a few hundred friends to talk about gun violence, he's not around. Maybe he's hanging out with other people in Richmond.
freetimerva t1_iz9w50p wrote
I can't wait to vote NO again.
Voting to allow some asshole from Atlanta to have a casino monopoly in Richmond is embarrassing.
Either just legalize gambling or dont.