Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Sink Riverboat Gambling in Virginia

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

There’s a movement afoot in the Old Dominion to bring in riverboat gambling to help rescue transportation finances.

Let’s hope it springs a leak.

Norfolk City Councilman Paul Riddick thinks that bringing in water-borne gambling palaces would be a great way to boost the state’s transportation budget, which is short upwards an estimated $100 billion to do all it needs to do over the next 15 years. He’s pushing to have the idea taken up by the General Assembly, which will meet in less than two months.

It’s the latest in a series of schemes to raise money without raising taxes. Gov. Robert F. McDonnell’s plan to generate revenue by privatizing ABC stores, however, has been on a bit of a bender and is seen as going nowhere.

Virginia can save itself a lot of grief if it avoids boosting gambling beyond the horse races. Look at Maryland, which held a constitutional referendum two years ago to allow slot machines.

Maryland’s plan, which was backed by Gov. Martin O’Malley, might bring in money but it has also brought a lot of baggage. To quote Citybizlist Baltimore, “no single issue in memory in Maryland has engendered more lobbying money, public rallies, legislative hearings, arm twisting, bill printing, press reporting and hot air than slots gambling.”

This is exactly what Virginia can expect if Riddick’s idea brings floating gambling hells to the industrial Elizabeth River or the Chesapeake Bay. After the run up (or run down) to privatizing ABC, it’s all Virginia needs.

My view is that people should do what they want with their money, but gambling is a sure-fire way to lose it. As The Virginian-Pilot notes, quoting finance magnate Warren Buffett, “gambling is a tax on ignorance.”

What’s more, one wonders where the market would be. West Virginia allows gambling and the once tony Greenbrier resort has recovered from sure demise by becoming a casino. Atlantic City isn’t that far away. Maybe new gamblers would come up to Norfolk from the tobacco fields and swamps of Eastern North Carolina. And there’s always a criminal element that pops up, like yard moles, when gambling is around.

In any event, riverboat gambling is a bad idea that comes with a lot of bad stuff. I hope it doesn’t float.

Peter Galuszka

(first posted and printed in The Washington Post)

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

40 responses to “Sink Riverboat Gambling in Virginia”

  1. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Peter:

    You've got to be kidding me. If people want to gamble, why shouldn't they? You'd rather have the government involuntarily take taxes from people than let adults gamble and then tax the profits of the casinos?

    Are you now the Nanny-In-Chief for the Nanny State?

    I've played cards in casinos all over the world. Like the vast majority of gamblers, I undeerstand that I will lose money if I play long enough. It's simply a cost of entertainment – like paying to see a professional sporting event or a play.

    Are there people who go too far? Of course. Like there are people who go too far with dieting (anorexics), booze (alcoholics), cigars, cigarettes, fatty foods, careless gun ownership, etc.

    Why do you and other "progressives" believe you are the protectors of my moral safety? You are not. Please refrain from protecting me from myself. While you and your "progressive elite" may find this hard to believe … I do not need nor do I want your protection.

    At times, you almost seem to "get it". For example, you write, "My view is that people should do what they want with their money, but gambling is a sure-fire way to lose it.". Right! So, why not let people who want to legally gamble do so? As for a sure fire way to lose money … buy a movie ticket, buy an expensive bottle of wine, legally play the Virginia lotto, etc. There are lots of very legal ways to waste your money. Do you propose to make them all illegal?

    You also write, "As The Virginian-Pilot notes, quoting finance magnate Warren Buffett, 'gambling is a tax on ignorance.'.

    Quoting Warren Buffoon? Spare me. What next? The wit and wisdom of George Soros?

    If you want to see a real example of Buffoon's logic watch the documentary, "The One Percent". It's a film about the wealth gap. The Buffoon disowned his grand-daughter for participating in the work. I guess his civic mindedness ends when someone questions whether people like him might have too much money. Nice.

    Care for a bit more buffoon logic? He was recently quoted as saying, "I think that people at the high end, people like myself, should be paying a lot more in taxes.". Here the sap tries to compare himself to doctors and small business owners supporting a spouse and four kids making $250,000 per year. People at the high end? People like himself? The jack wagon is worth $47B. A far cry from a doctor with four kids living in a high cost locale like Montgomery County, MD. I have a better idea. A wealth tax of 100% for all wealth over $500M. We can send the Nanny from Nebraska a bill for $46.5B. That would be sufficient to cover next year's tax bill for 400,000 Americans making $250,000.

    Peter, you like Buffet quotes? Here's one, "I’ll tell you why I like the cigarette business. It costs a penny to make. Sell it for a dollar. It’s addictive. And there’s fantastic brand loyalty.". Nice.

    That's the guy you use as a source of wisdom on what's best for his fellow citizen.

    They guy's a crock.

  2. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    wait. wait. What happened to the idea that we don't need to raise revenues – just spend what we have more prudently… cut waste… realign priorities, etc?

    That's the conservative ethic – correct?

    By opposing tax increases are they not saying that more revenue is not the solution but that cutting is the way to achieve a smaller, more accountable government?

    Notice how McDonnell – a self-avowed anti-tax conservative is looking for MORE money from ABC, offshore oil and stealth taxes, not paying for pension funds…

    he wiggles every which way from Sunday to "prove" that more money is not the solution…

    but then he bails out completely by saying that more money is needed – as long as we don't call them taxes.

    That's the HYPOCRISY of those who pretend they are fiscal Conservatives.

    These are the same fiscal conservatives who do not support a balanced budget at the Federal level.

    They talk-the-talk but when the time comes to actually cut – they run and hide.

    With respect to VDOT – isn't one of the most important questions before we talk about more money -is how much is needed and what is it needed for?

    If NoVa wants more money for transportation – why should they expect it NOT to come from the people of NoVa to start with?

    Do you REALLY think that the folks in HR/TW who approve gambling boats are going to be okay with those profits going to NoVa's road needs?

    ha ha ha ha ha…

    Groveton – get your own river boats….

    then we can talk…

    Let's see you and the NoVa reps advocate for Gambling boats on the Potomac to pay for NoVa roads…

    like that idea?

  3. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    I don't pretend to have any expertise in this subject, but it's my impression that between Nevada, Atlantic City, Indian reservations, horse racing, Mississippi riverboats, cruise lines and lotteries, anyone who wants to gamble legally in this country can already do so. Adding one more venue for gambling in Norfolk will not have a consequential impact on the number of people who ruin their lives through gambling addiction.

    As for myself, I pride myself on never gambling. I have yet to lose $1 dollar. I don't refuse to engage in gambling because of moral reasons but because I'm a tightwad. I hate parting with my money. And unlike Groveton, I don't derive any entertainment value from gambling. Regardless, I don't believe in imposing my values and preferences upon others. If Groveton and others like him want to gamble, let them do it.

  4. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    here's a real irony here. Conservatives claim that people are smarter than the government is deciding how to spend money.

    that they are much wiser than the govt and that one of the basic tenets is money spent by taxpayers goes to support a muc more legitimate purpose than the govt.

    so here are the same folks saying that the govt should get into the business of convincing people to spend money not only on irresponsible purposes but that the government benefit from it.

    I am always amazed at the convoluted logic that conservatives have these days.

    They talk about personal responsibility, hard work, and a govt that is small and accountable – and then they turn around and advocate riverboat gambling as a way for citizens to fund govt.

    ha ha ha ha ha ha….

    I'm loving it.

  5. RBV Avatar
    RBV

    I live very close to where the casino just opened up in Charles Town, WV.

    Have I been there?

    -Yes.

    Is it a dump?

    -Yes. For the most part.

    Why do people go to a dump and blow money?

    -It has no competition.

    Is it as bad as the anti-everything crowd makes it out to be?

    -No, it is not. It has brought jobs and much needed tax revenue to the county/state…..mostly from the pockets of out-of-state patrons.

    Limited in number and placed in the right locations, Casino's could provide a much needed revenue boost to the state.

    If you don't believe me, drive up to NOVA and count the cars heading to WV….along with their tax revenue.

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    For once I actually agree with Peter. However with a minor difference.

    I see no reason why the government should run the ABC stores. It makes no sense to me at all. It's a legal product and I don't see why the state should have a monopoly on selling it, regardless of whether or not it's a good revenue source for the state coffers.

    If the same logic were to be used for casinos, then if they were legalized they would only be owned by the state. Talk about a recipe for failure and corruption…

    For me, we don't need gambling. We don't even need a lottery. These have been shown to be taxes on the poor. What we need is common sense in Richmond to limit the growth of government and pay for what we do need (which btw is alot less than what they do today).

  7. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    I'm not opposed to the riverboat gambling nor the lottery – and just to point out that the lottery IS run by the state and has produced a fairly reliable revenue stream.

    I'd rather have the government doing this than the mafia.

    But what I point out is the sheer hypocrisy of the anti-tax politicians whose argument is that government spends too much and wastes money and that the answer is not increased taxes (which are revenues) but more efficient and more accountable government.

    but then folks like McDonnell turn right around – and advocate MORE taxes of offshore drilling (talk about a jobs killer!), hidden ABC Taxes, not paying for the pension fund – therefore disavowing responsibility to correct the problem.. just punt it.

    All I point out here is that this is not fiscal conservatism and these guys like McDonnell are not deficit hawks but chicken hawks.

    If you truly believe that government does not need more money – then Jesus H. Keeerist – be what you say you are and do what you say you will do.

    I don't hold the Dems to these standards because the Dems have never made no such claims.

    They say, for instance, that VDOT needs more money – and that taxes, tolls and user-fees are an honest, equitable and fair way to assign those costs.

    The fiscal-conservative wannabies instead claim that the the government already takes in too much money and the problem is to learn to live within it' means.

    then they turn right around and go looking for more revenues that they can then claim are not "taxes".

    It's totally hypocritical.

    Do we vote for HONEST tax & spenders or do we vote for dishonest hypocrites "fiscal Conservatives"?

  8. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    Considering that horses are a huge business in Virgina, it has always surprisd me that virginia has not taken a more proactive interest in, if not the sport, then at least the finances of it, which include racing and betting.

    I doubt if there are anywhere near as many slot machines manufactured in Virginia as there are race horses.

    Likwise I don't see any connection between waterborne gambling and transportation. If you want to put a salwes tax on gambling to provide revenue to transportation, why should other businesses get a free ride, so to speak.

    It is a mistake to take something, the value of which is as uniformly distributed as the roadways are, or the opportunity to use the roadways, and bill that to a handfull of the population, whether it be by toll schemes or sin tax schemes.

    For one thing, there is too much money involved, and point loading the system is bound to cause a failure.

    I think allowing gambling is a mistake, but I'm disinclined to tell someone else what they can and can't do with their money. Let them find out gambling is a mistake, or let them be casual gamblers for enjoyment. (I don't get it, but thats just me.)

    But, gambling has external costs, like any other business, and I'm not opposed to having as much of those internalized as possible, and I'm not opposed to enough government to monitor and regulate those costs. Allow the gambling and make sure it pays its full costs. And hold reckless gamblers equally responsible for their own actions.

    Sorry, but I agree with Buffoon that it is a tax on ignorance. But, as Groveton points out, it is not GAMBLING if you know you are going to lose: it is entertainment. For people too stupid to know the difference, it is a tax on ignorance.

    Took an informal poll on the parking lot bus at Charlestown one night: How much did you lose, you, you, you? Finally someon asked how much I lost, and I said I won $200, but it cost me $400 to do it. That got a good laugh on the bus, but it is easy to entertain a crowd full of losers.

  9. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    Care for a bit more buffoon logic? He was recently quoted as saying, "I think that people at the high end, people like myself, should be paying a lot more in taxes.". Here the sap tries to compare himself to doctors and small business owners supporting a spouse and four kids making $250,000 per year.

    ================================

    C'mon Groveton, you can do better than that.

    He says he should e paying more taxes, and you agree with him. Where is the argument?

    We now agree that rich people should pay more and we are only arguing over what the brackets should be.

    Your argument is that his tax will be equal to the tax paid by many many people earning $250k. And the is the point. higher taxes on the rich ae going to get a lot more meny from the very rich than the nominal rich. The vast majority of small businesses that will be hurt are a lot bigger that $250,000, what counts as a small business in the US can e really huge.

    The argument you make (about really small businesses) is a mythology, that you have accurately torpedoed: most of the money is going to come from big businesses.

    The argument you have made is actually for MORE progressivity, and I doubt Buffoon would argue with you.

  10. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    The Potomac River is actually in Maryland, so we can content ourselves with the idea that the sin isn't happening here.

    Maybe mMryland will send us a bill. States rights and all that.

  11. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    What happened to the idea that we don't need to raise revenues – just spend what we have more prudently?

    =================================

    Gambling itself is not a tax. According to the conservative ethic what is happening here is that government is de-regulating, and therefore expanding the business base.

    Ignores the problem of why this business should be taxed differently from others, or why this revenue stream should be dedicated to one purpose.

    The logic is still tortured even if you give them the starting line.

  12. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    hidden ABC Taxes,

    =============================

    You mean like the ones the FBI is investigating in PG County?

  13. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    They have a nice dock at Mt. Vernon. The ladies should be thrilled to have the boat dock there: just think of all the new vistors to Mt. Vernon, and all the liquor sales from George's restored still.

  14. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Some good entertainment here and some rock tossing but everyone has missed the big issue.

    More money is not needed for "transportation."

    Better land use patterns are needed so the existing money can be wisely spent.

    Not Ed Risse Either

  15. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    More money is not needed for "transportation."

    Better land use patterns are needed so the existing money can be wisely spent.

    ================================

    Better land use patterns cost money, too. They don't just happen.

    Meanwhile we are still stuck with the land use patterns we have, and they DO REQUIRE MORE MONEY for transportation.

    NO ONE, has done a valid trade study that shows how much we can afford to spend on altering land use over how many tens of decades in order to achieve an optimum mix of public and private transit, while not giving one party or another an undue cost burden.

    What we have instead is MORONS suggesting, no arguing polemically, that there is only one competent answer.

    It is utterly and completely stupid to suggest that something we might have someday eliminates our need for transportation monies today.

  16. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Groveton,
    If people want to gamble, they can always go to Vegas or Atlantic City or wherever.
    I remember when Russia went from Communism to Wild Capitalism and the first thing to spring up were "casinos" run by mobsters.
    Guess what? The rate of bombings and machine gunnings (bystanders be damned!) rose exponentially. Maybe that's your idea of libertarian heaven but I think you can stuff it.

    Peter Galuszka

  17. RBV Avatar
    RBV

    "If people want to gamble, they can always go to Vegas or Atlantic City or wherever."

    There is legalized gambling almost every night in Virginia. You wanna know where?

    Check out your local volunteer fire halls, fraternal organizations, rescue squads, etc.

    PG, go under cover, do some research….you will be SHOCKED at the amount of $$$$ these groups make off of bingo and other associated card games and tips.

    And you know what? The money raised at these places goes towards buying $500,000 fire trucks and ambulances…..that's money localities DO NOT have to spend on this equipment.

    Without the gambling this wouldn't be possible.

  18. RBV Avatar
    RBV

    And, I'll bet anybody here the odds of winning are better on the Pass/Don't Pass line on a craps table then they are on a bingo card or on the other games sold in bingo halls.

  19. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    "…that's money localities DO NOT have to spend on this equipment."

    ===============================

    Where do you think the money comes from? usually the local bingo game is patronized by locals, although I can remember when Wayson's Corner was a Bingo Mecca. Tour buses would arrive there on the days government checks arrived.

    Everyone who gets fire protection and does not play bingo, is a free rider.

    The goal ought to be equitable payment for services, not stick it to the suckers.

  20. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    SHOCKING. SHOCKING !!! RBV

    and RBV …NAILED IT…

    if you want to see the local squads and VFWs and other assorted local civic groups get up in arms and take your arm off at the shoulder socket – make one move towards taking away their local gambling franchise an see what happens.

    but once again I point out the fundamental flaw by those who says the govt wastes tax dollars and that taxpayers know best how to spend that money.

    Throwing one's money away on entertainment?

    Surely you JEST!

    how can that possibly be a better use of money that more and better roads?

    How about this.

    Instead of Riverboat Gambling – how about we put a gambling tax on all Bingo Games.

    Let's set it at 10% of your winnings…

    but you automatically get entered into the powerball lottery and a chance to win millions just for paying the gambling tax?

    or free HOT LANE use for a year?

    Sounds like something McDonnell would do, eh?

    I'd support it.

  21. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    "I remember when Russia went from Communism to Wild Capitalism and the first thing to spring up were "casinos" run by mobsters."

    Are we blaming machine guns on casinos?

    Are we blaming lack of crimminal control on casinos?

    Pretty soon we are going to have unobtrusive remote biometric scanning. If Peter is right,we ought to be able to scan everyone who comes to a casino and know exactly who the criminals are.

  22. RBV Avatar
    RBV

    "Where do you think the money comes from? usually the local bingo game is patronized by locals,…."

    True – And the craps tables at Charles Town are patronized by non-locals.

    In the context of who's paying for what and at who's expense, I'd say C-town has this thing won by a mile.

    The $200 you lost over there STAYED over there.

    It's revenue Virginia is simply not trying to capture….same w/ bingo…I've felt for years there ought to be a tax (by the state) on bingo players….either on the winnings or on admission.

    And to add insult to injury the poor, dumb bingo players are getting TERRIBLE odds when they part with their money.

  23. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    My point is that since the local ire department type games are patronized by locals the money still comes out of the local economy.

    The poor dumb bingo players are paying more than their share of fire protection and everyone else is a free rider.

    I don't think government should be encouraging that kind of cost sharing because it is inequitable.

    Oh, but it is voluntary, you say, so who cares? Well playing bingo is voluntary but having adequate fire protection, not so much.

    Virginia isn't trying to capture this revenue because it is considered sinful, dirty money. Except they are already on the slippery slope with the lottery.
    If West Virgina and Maryland are going to raid (hopefully) discretionary spending money from each other and Virgina, then Virginia has lost that battle and may as well fight back.

    It is too bad the states have resorted to raiding each others funds like Arabian tribes stealing goats and women from each other. "Buy American", "Hire American", "Buy Local", "Gamble Local"

    There is no good ending here. I think I'd rather see the state do a good job of protecting my property (keeping my taxes low by not letting a tax generating business be monoplized by the neighboring state), than have it protect my moral safety.

    But I don't think that business, or any business, should be targeted to support some particular government function more than other businesses that benefit proportionately from the same function. The fact it is a gamblng business makes no difference.

    It is a popular sell because "legitimate" businesses get off free. Which exposes immediately what is wrong with the idea.

    It would make more sense for riverboat funds to support clean water efforts than highway work, except that their customers will probblydrive large private vehicles to the waterfront.

    Even that will be a fraud if other waterfront venues are any example. River boat shped buildings sitting in the mud as if floating, and in a spot where no other building would be allowed. It is a charade.

    Why not dig a pond in the town square in Charlottesville and float one there? Why limit this to waterfronts? Is it waterfronts have a seedy history, and we don't want to offend the more Christian areas of the state?

    I don't care so much about the business, though I think it is a bad idea. But I dont think there is any reason to promote even more lumpy taxation, generating more angst about who pays for what.

  24. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Raise taxes to subsidize some developer. That's the Virginia way. It's time to stop.

    When Fairfax County started the Tysons Corner re-planning process, it was intended to have a financial plan to fund the necessary public facilities as part of the end product. As time passed and infrastructure costs rose, the BoS adopted the Comp Plan and Zoning Ordinance changes in June 2010, but told the public that the financing plan would be adopted in November 2010.

    Recently, supervisors have written that this date would slip some. The County Executive has informally stated that the slippage would likely last until FY 2013 — well after the November 2011 election.

    Without a billion four in road improvements, Tysons cannot grow even by one-third by 2030. The landowners cannot easily bear these costs. Taxpayers would revolt at shouldering the costs. Users of county and school services would join in quickly as well. Putting huge amounts of tax revenues and bond sale proceeds in Tysons would simply screw the rest of the county.

    So where are the supervisors? Hiding, of course. Let's toss in what happens in the other counties and cities. Top it all with the corrupt Commonwealth Transportation Board, and we have a strong argument for raising taxes for transportation — NOT. Bring on the riverboat gambling.

    TMT

  25. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    Raise taxes to subsidize some developer.

    Tax the developer as much as you can so that existing homes increase in value at no cost.

    ==================================

    Both statements are wrong.

  26. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    Bring on the riverboat gambling.

    ================================

    Fine, but treat it like any other business.

    Don't pretend it can solve your transportation problems alone, when all buisness together cannot.

    Why should a riverboat on a mudflat in the James subsidize transportation in Tysons when the residents won't do it for themselves.

    Why should the (new) riverboat be forced to pay taxes that others ahead of it won't pay?

    Tax the newcomer, it is the new Virginai Tax Ponzi Scheme. Keep paying dividends out of the membership fees of the new members.

  27. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    I think there needs to be a nexus between roads and users.

    When we essentially fund roads from a source that is divorced from the users – then the processes for determining where to build and what to build are based on available funds and not needs.

    The very BEST WAY to determine a need is to put a price on it to users.

    You don't have to make it a toll road but asking how much it would be worth in terms of a toll would give a pretty good idea of true need.

    Proposed roads that people are willing to pay a toll to use are obviously more of a need than proposed roads that no one would pay a toll to use.

    that's fits Ray's idea of a an auction – for new capacity.

  28. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    It's time to stop playing games about fees, proffers and development. If a landowner is proposing to build by right, he/she/it has no obligation to make any new proffers. There may be, however, an unsatisfied proffer from the last rezoning.

    However, we rarely see (at least in Fairfax County) any significant proposal to build by right. Landowners and developers want more density than they are permitted by law. It takes an extraordinary amount of additional infrastructure to support the requested density. In the case of Tysons Corner, that amount may well be more than the developers can afford and remain competitive.

    So, the landowners can elect to build by right and probably pay very little. They can ask for the moon, but should expect to pay the lion's share of the added public facility costs, which will be very high. Shouldn't they? They are the only true beneficiaries of the added density. Or, they could find some spot in the middle and pay the lion's share of the lower amount of facility costs.

    What is wrong with the cost-causer paying the costs? And this is not a matter of any down-planning or down-zoning. Fairfax County has said publicly that, if any landowner can show he's been down-zoned or down-planned, the County will immediately fix the error.

    Rights in dirt are not more important than other property rights.

    TMT

  29. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    Agree. The folks who advocate density act like no matter what level is density is involved that they have an inherent right to that density when, in fact, density means more use of existing infrastructure and facilities which, if not mitigated will result in not only degraded LOS but significant increases in taxes – as – the more density involved – the more expensive the infrastructure will be.

    When an area is water and sewered and transportation-sized for 4du – you can't wave a magic wand and make it sized for 8du.

    more parking, more water/sewer, more schools, libraries an roads…

    in fact the difference betwee 4du density an 8du density is almost twice as much infrastructure.

    For instance, people who live in 8du density don't poop any less than people who live in 4du density and all things being equal – twice as much water an twice as much sewer is needed.

    We have no problem charging the correct amount for new water/sewer hookups.

    We total up the cost of the additional infrastructure needed, divide it into the total number of residences and assign a cost.

    What the property rights folks want is "free" density – again..as if the infrastructure to serve 8du or higher just magically appears as soon as the guy applies for the higher density.

  30. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Not Ed Risse Either said:

    “Some good entertainment here and some rock tossing but everyone has missed the big issue.

    “More money is not needed for "transportation."

    “Better land use patterns are needed so the existing money can be wisely spent.

    Then ‘hydra’ said:

    “Better land use patterns cost money, too. They don't just happen.”

    ACTUALLY THAT IS NOT TRUE, THEY DO “JUST HAPPEN” in the normal course of enlightened human activity.

    As Professor Risse has made very clear to all who pay attention, the biggest change in the economic, social and physical activity that will create functional settlement patterns happens inside the heads of Urban citizens (95 percent of the existing population in ‘developed’ New Urban Regions.)

    As NERE said, money needs to be spent but that is NOT the first requirement and more money what ever the source will solve NOTHING.

    There is already a lot of money being spent on transportation, the problem is what the money is being spent on is just making matters worse because it generates ever more dysfunctional settlement patterns.

    Hydra went on to say:

    “Meanwhile we are still stuck with the land use patterns we have, and they DO REQUIRE MORE MONEY for transportation.”

    It is clear that what NERE intended to convey was that MORE money is not needed to further expand the failed transportation system.

    And then hydra, added:

    “NO ONE, has done a valid trade study that shows how much we can afford to spend on altering land use over how many tens of decades in order to achieve an optimum mix of public and private transit, while not giving one party or another an undue cost burden.”

    NO ONE knows what a “valid trade study” is.

    There have been many studies that document that the current attempts to build more of the same transportation infrastructure will continue to make Mobility and Access of Urban citizens worse and worse as measured by congestion, safety or general well-being.

    The blanket statement that is valid would be something like this:

    NO ONE has done a scientifically valid study that shows a large Urban agglomeration can be provided with Mobility and Access if the automobile is relied on for the majority of travel needs.

    In spite of this reality, hydra goes on to insult and demean those who he thinks do not agree with him by saying:

    “What we have instead is MORONS suggesting, no arguing polemically, that there is only one competent answer.”

    Anyone who says there could be only one competent answer to any complex question would be a “moron.” That was never the issue in this case.

    And then hydra added:

    “It is utterly and completely stupid to suggest that something we might have someday eliminates our need for transportation monies today.”

    It would be utterly and completely stupid but no one suggested that.

    The complex and troubled commentor who calls himself / herself ‘hydra’ has never examined the basis for his / her belief that any land is a good place for an Urban land use. That is just as foolish as suggesting any place is a good place to raise bananas, cranberries or hay.

    It is clear who the REAL utterly and completely stupid MORON is. It not the one who said:.

    “Some good entertainment here and some rock tossing but everyone has missed the big issue.

    “More money is not needed for "transportation."

    (OK, NERE might have said “more money should not be spent on the same failed transport system” but that was probably his / her intent.)

    “Better (aka functional and sustainable) land use patterns are needed so the existing money can be wisely spent.”

    AZA

  31. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    well .. no matter how you cut it..density – increased density – will cost money.

    Ask the folks at Tyson – both the developers and the residents.

    No one in the Tysons issue believes that the increased density can be built without causing more auto traffic in ADDITION to one heck of an expensive METRO expansion.

    I'm not doubting that places like Arlington do exist but I'm not sure we have a sure-fire recipe yet.

  32. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    It would be utterly and completely stupid but no one suggested that.

    ================================

    Actually, that is pretty much exactly what was suggested, and anyone can look above to see for themselves.

    Better land use patterns are needed so the existing money can be wisely spent.

    It is STILL utterly and completely stupid to suggest that something we might have someday eliminates our need for transportation monies today.

    Better land use patterns DON'T just happen, they cost money and lots of it. And they take time as Not EMR points out.

    They better land use patterns might happen someday, but in the meantime we ave other work to do.

    He claims no one knows what a valid trade study is, but he is suggesting that we take HIS WORD for it that we can slolve all our transprotation probleems only one way. It is his trade study or none.

    Actually, this is a fairly simple engineering problem. The costs of builiding maintaining, policing, and operating a city go up as the density goes up. And the cost of a far flung oversprawled suburbia goes up as density goes down. There are energy costs and capital costs and operating costs to consider and government costs and environmental costs to consider.

    But if you minimze Total Cost where Total cost = Production Cost (includes transportation) + External Costs (where all of EMRs collective errors go) + Government Cost, then you will pretty much have done all your trade studies.

    I'm sorry you feel insulted, but your hyperesthesia isn't my problem. Your ideas on land use and transprotation are STILL the dummest single, most unsupported argument I have ever heard.

    You haven't even the intellectual honesty to try to back up your (mostly false and twisted) misstatements, You just claim you never said what is right up there in print.

    It is pathetic that you have to be your own ghostwriter, cheerleader, audience, and commentator. I'd say it was a multiple personality disorder but you haven't enough creatively distinct personality to go around, so what you wind up with is a merely dissociative identity striving for megalomania.

    Now, if you believe people should pay their own full costs, you need to know what those costs are, and the way you do that is with trade, and failing that, you do it with trade studies.

    Mass transit does a job, but it doesn't do everything, and so there is a point at which it no longer makes sense to invest in it.
    Cars do some jobs very well and Airplanes do some jobs very well.

    But you are not doing anyone a favor, let alone promoting a better society by simply declaring the use of airplanes or cars as dead, or making claims about any transport mode that simply are not true and won't pass the most cursory inspection.

    Time after time you put things out there that as far as I can tell make you either an idiot or a liar. Then if I point out the simple fact that taxis in new york still carry 180,000 passengers a day, well, you are insulted, becsause you claim there is no urban area where cares provide mobility and access.

    Well, you are wrong about that, and if you want to be insulted as well, go right ahead.

    I'm looking for common ground here, for the little pieces of your ideas that might have some merit.

    I don't put words in your mouth, I try to be careful about quoting and paraphrasing accurately, but you, you will invent out of nowhere ideas that I have never promoted and claim them as mine.

    You go right ahead and do that, but in my book it makes you a liar, and therefore nothing else you say is credible, no matter which identical persona you are wearing today.

  33. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    well .. no matter how you cut it..density – increased density – will cost money.

    And there you have it, or one little piece of it. If we can agree on that much, then we can start to figure out how much more money, and what you get and don't get for it.

    I'll agree that excessive sprawl drives up cost, too, now all we have to do is decide what constitutes excessive and how much cost is involved in that.

    I'll agree that Arlington exits, too, but I wont agree that it is perfect or meets everyone's needs, for all time. nor will I make excuses for my lifestyle which is not possible in Arlington.

  34. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    “What we have instead is MORONS suggesting, no arguing polemically, that there is only one competent answer.”

    Anyone who says there could be only one competent answer to any complex question would be a “moron.” That was never the issue in this case.

    ==================================

    "There is no alternative but to make Fundamental Transformations of governance structure. "

    Sounds like only one answer to me.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    "In fact citizens cannot make well informed decisions on their own best interest on ANY topic until they have a reliable source of sound information."

    Here EMR and I agree, then he says something utterly untrue like:

    "Advertising driven Mass OverConsumption has led to debt, hardship and disintegration of a stable society."

    Obviously a reliable source of sound information is not going to be EMR and his various alter egos.

  35. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    Notice that traffic got so backed up on 95 that they threw open the toll gates in Newark so as not to impede traffic.

    They didn't just raise the price, which would be Larry's answer.

    The cost of holding up traffic wasn't worth the benefit from the tolls. Someone must have done a trade study.

  36. Larry G Avatar
    Larry G

    oh I think setting tolls according to what people are willing to pay is a good way to determine the acceptable level of congestion.

    You said yourself, thousands of hours of time are lost every year due to congestion.

    I'll bet some of those hours are more important to some people than to others and why not have an auction to see what they are worth.

  37. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    Because you cannot tell what they are worth if there is no option. No real option, anyway.

    Using tolls to set the congestion level is an ex post factor solution to having allowed a mismatch in density to transportation in the first place. It is sending the bill to the wrong people and awarding the government for malfeasance.

    We agree that at some level density increases cost. As enrolled points out, it also increases value. Somehow we need a way of balancing or trading those interests. TMT thinks Tyson's is too dense and my neighbors think one home per fifty acres is too dense.

    Tolls are government telling you to go someplace else and proffers and other restrictions are government telling you, "not here".

    This is basically auctioning off the costs and benefits of density vs sprawl. My idea is only to make it uniform, transparent, and fair.

  38. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    You guys are funny. No gambling in Virginia? LOL.

    Here is the URL for an internet horse racing site.

    http://www.xpressbet.com/Restrictions

    Note the "no restrictions" next to Virginia.

    Want to watch the races?

    Channel 602 on Cox cable in Fairfax County.

    East coast broadcasting starts at noon.

    Xpress bet is based in Pennsylvania. Th tracks are all over – except Virginia.

    My guess … Virginia sees no money from this.

    So, I can bet over the internet in Virginia, watch the races on Cox – Fairfax County and Richmond gets nothing.

    Sometimes reading the stuff people write on this blog is just too funny.

    Virginia is a heroic state. No gambling. Except horses and bingo and lotto and charity card games and football pools and office NCAA basketball pools and internet betting and fantasy football leagues.

    But no riverboat card games. Oh no!! That would be wrong. That would bring in the mafia. We need to keep Virginia a "no betting" paradise.

  39. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    TMT is concerned about taxes increasing on account of Tyson's development.

    Supposethe developers made him an offer. We will cover the cost of 80% of your property tax increases for the next ten years, but if you sell your property then we get 80% of the increase in value.

    What would be TMTs response?

    You see how different it is when you have skin in the game?

    Developers claim they are increasing value and residents claim they are increasing taxes. Fine, let them put their bets on the table, and let government set the rules and hold the stakes- without regulating the outcome. Let the market do that.

    So, if 65% of TMTs neighbors take the bait the the bet is on and the development is approved because most people think it will benefit them more than it hurts them. If the conditions aren't right now, they might be someday. There is no claim of permanent stasis such as zoning attempts to provide, but there is enough stability so that change is neither rampant nor forbidden.

    You may think my idea stupid, but it worked for Solomon.

  40. Hydra Avatar
    Hydra

    Groveton is right. Virginia is schizophrenic. They love to raise horses and hate to race them.

    Naturally, there is no betting at the gold cup.

Leave a Reply

Read More