The basic problem today with any development is that most of them are just copy-cats which do not have any character.

Since Walt Disney created Disneyland and maybe even earlier everybody wants to follow that model. It works for a little while until the next Disneyland comes around. The same is true for any Convention Center, Stadium, Mall, etc.

Obviously it is impossible to change that pattern. So, we need to follow that path to be able to “compete”. However, specifically about the Bay Front Black Jack is correct rather than building an artificial place that will charge $100.00 we should use something already built and still charge the $100.00.

The secret is to build on top of what we already have. As he recommended reuse the old brick buildings and make the place attractive to the visitors for shopping, drinking and dinning. Once you have the place properly setup for traditional tourism then you could start building the place for all year use.

We have to assume that our newly created monster (the convention center) will be able to attract a couple of conventions in the middle of the winter and people attending those events will need food and drinks. We need to move people between that area and downtown. Now, that the monster is operational notice there is a corridor between the convention center and the hotel so use the same concept to move people all around that area in the winter (I always preferred tunnels better), have a nice free shuttle. Of course a train, monorail or a funicular will be much better, here of course for mass transportation I am just dreaming.

Now, to go year around, we need to slightly change the use and attractions with the seasons without having to change the whole place’s infrastructure.

For example right in the middle of the winter offer luxury ice fishing booths right on the lake and charge $100.00 a day. Have the local restaurants in that area gets a piece of the pie by cooking the fish according to the (tourist) fisherman specifications.

Africa is already using eco-tourism which really means you visit and stay with the locals eating local food and enjoying local things with some comfort. It will be really silly to build a football stadium in the Ngorongoro crater to attract tourists the same way that it will be really silly trying to change Presque Island or build anything like artificial beaches on the Lake. .

It is much easier and better to build supporting infrastructure around our assets rather than damaging them. Unless of course you are a big developer making you money building fake places with planned obsolescence.

I have no idea why are you talking about me citing Clinton’s approval rates unless of course you are using your talking points book like the telemarketers.

But just in the interest of fun I would say:

I guess you really do not believe me when I tell you that the system is truly broken. For all practical purposes there is only one political party in the US. The incumbents running for reelection. This is how the system works. The average person in the US does not count.

History will tell you that all Empires collapse from within. You can not live on a credit card for ever. Passing the bill to future generations.

You can not be spending fake money to eternity. Sooner or later all bills are due. Regardless of who is in charge and who makes the calls in a given point.

I am afraid that you not only do not know how to count or if you just use voodoo economic formulas. But you also do not know how to read. I have expressed many, many, many times that I do not belong to any political party and I do not Vote.

The system is not only broken but is also corrupt.

Obviously your use of talking points like drinking Kool-Aid clearly demonstrated how indoctrinated and brainwashed you are. This by the way is okay with me.

The basic problem about this fiasco is that it started at least 40 years ago with Nixon but people like you will never understand that.

My only point again is that in your original post as usual you math did not add up.

I did not make it up. Pure arithmetic nothing magic about it.

Also for your convenience, I am putting a link here where a “local” in Erie has asked very valid questions in his letter to the editor trying to make sense of all this.

http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081010/OPINION02/810100356/-1/ETN

• May 2002: The Office of Management and Budget wanted disclosure and governance principles in Bush’s 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie and Freddie.

• February 2003: A federal housing oversight report warned that unexpected problems at Fannie Mae could immediately spread into financial sectors.

• September 2003: Treasury Secretary John Snow, in testimony to the House Financial Services Committee, recommended that Congress enact legislation to create new agency to regulate and supervise financial activities of housing-related government entities to set prudent and appropriate minimum capital requirements.

Rep. Frank, the committee’s ranking member, strongly disagreed, saying: “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not facing any kind of financial crisis . . . . The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we’ll see in terms of affordable housing.”

• February 2004: The president’s new budget again highlighted risks of the explosive growth of these government enterprises and the then-low levels of required capital. It also called for the creation of a world class regulator. The administration determined that housing regulators of government agencies lacked the power and stature to meet their responsibilities and should be replaced with a strong new third regulator.

• February 2004: Greg Mankiw, chairman of Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers, cautioned Congress against taking the strength of financial markets for granted. He too called for reducing the risk by ensuring that housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.

• April 2004: Rep. Frank ignored warnings, accusing the administration of creating an “artificial issue.” “People pay their mortgages,” he told a group of mortgage bankers. “I don’t think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren’t there.”

From 2004 to 2008 the Bush administration made 12 more attempts to get Congress to pass legislation to have safer, sounder regulatory oversight of Fannie and Freddie and capital rules. You can see them for yourself on the White House Web site. But here are a couple of examples that show how Democrats resisted:

• July 2005: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid rejected legislation on reforming Fannie and Freddie. “While I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that would limit Americans from owning homes and harm our economy in the process,” he said.

• August 2007: Sen. Dodd, another Democrat, ignored President Bush’s emphatic calls for Congress to pass Fannie and Freddie reform legislation and called for him to immediately reconsider his ill-advised position.

Julio, name one democrat who called for reform of the GSEs. Your the guy who thinks congress can regulate our weather. Go home and drink your Koolaid, your personal insults are tiresome and your party is destroying our economy.
Many of us made two predictions when Clinton was elected. We said he would destroy our national security and our economy. But no one believed it would be as bad as 9/11 and 10/08.
Thanks Julio.

In season, crank it back and the peninsula would be open-air just like it is now.

The other 9 months of the year, close it up and you could still enjoy the beach etc.

When it is cloudy out, they could project holograms of the famous sunsets or borrow the IMAX projector from Tom Ridge center to show movies on the inside of the dome.