- The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002   11,000+ members   72,000+ posts

Home | SE23 Topics | Businesses & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | About | Advertising | Contact | |
 Armstrong & Co Solicitors

Post Reply  Post Topic 
Author Message

Posts: 15
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #1
14-11-2007 06:27 PM

frosty wrote:
What do you need more bookies for? Why argue so vehemently for their expansion in FH? If you are so desperate to get rid of your cash, I can point you in the direction of a certain BI saleswoman with pimps to support!

Baboonery wrote:
Show me one word where I have 'argued vehemently for their expansion'. I disagree with your vehement and rather puritan dislike of them - that's one thing, arguing for their expansion is another.

Ok ok, you've argued vehemently against my dislike of them then. You've stated that you don't believe that they impinge on your life at all, and have found fault with every argument I have given regarding the negative impact they have and the negative impact new outlets would have. Even though you maintain that the number of bookies has halved, the number of people gambling and numbers of problem gamblers have remained around the same figures - which suggests that twice as much gambling is taking place in half as many establishments. Which by definition also suggests that an increase in the amount of gambling establishments has potential.
I am not arguing for the abolition of bookmakers either, I am arguing that an increase in their numbers and visibility on the local streets devalues the area and brings more potential problems leading to poverty and crime. If I could change the Blockbusters site into a coffee shop, deli, butchers or bakers I would be much happier.

Baboonery wrote:
I'm sure economists will be grateful to hear your idea of bottomless bookmaking demand, constrained only by the number of outlets. It's certainly a new theory.

Tell it to the residents of Hackney. Or are all those outlets magically staying afloat in your 'there must be demand before supply' mentality?! If that were the case, there'd be very little advance in the world wouldn't there?

You know, it doesn't take many criminal elements in an area to make a large impact. I'm sure you are well aware that the majority of crimes are committed by a minority of people. And I'm fairly sure low aspirations, poor education and poverty are all involved. There are links, if you are willing to acknowledge them.

Baboonery wrote:
I agree with you that FBOTs are awful, though. I'd happily see them banned.

We agree on something! YAY! Smile

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields

Messages In This Topic
x - Baboonery - 13-11-2007, 04:28 PM
RE: Gambling - thenutfield - 14-11-2007, 01:09 AM
RE: Gambling - nevermodern - 14-11-2007, 02:34 AM
RE: Gambling - PVP - 14-11-2007, 11:00 AM
RE: Gambling - shzl400 - 14-11-2007, 11:42 AM
RE: Gambling - shzl400 - 14-11-2007, 11:51 AM
RE: Gambling - Baboonery - 14-11-2007, 11:33 AM
RE: Gambling - frosty - 14-11-2007, 12:40 PM
RE: Gambling - Baboonery - 14-11-2007, 01:53 PM
RE: Gambling - frosty - 14-11-2007, 04:44 PM
RE: Gambling - Baboonery - 14-11-2007, 05:12 PM
RE: Gambling - Baboonery - 14-11-2007, 05:15 PM
RE: Gambling - frosty - 14-11-2007 06:27 PM
RE: Gambling - Ian - 14-11-2007, 02:20 PM
RE: Gambling - katie one - 15-11-2007, 01:40 PM
RE: Gambling - Ian - 15-11-2007, 02:12 PM
RE: Gambling - admin - 14-11-2007, 05:06 PM
RE: Gambling - frosty - 14-11-2007, 05:09 PM
RE: Gambling - RobChik - 14-11-2007, 09:47 PM
RE: Gambling - nevermodern - 15-11-2007, 02:00 PM
RE: Gambling - frosty - 15-11-2007, 02:12 PM
RE: Gambling - nevermodern - 15-11-2007, 02:18 PM
RE: Gambling - shzl400 - 15-11-2007, 02:28 PM
RE: Gambling - thenutfield - 16-11-2007, 12:19 AM
RE: Gambling - shzl400 - 16-11-2007, 01:19 PM
RE: Gambling - nevermodern - 16-11-2007, 11:58 AM