Paving over the Bellagio Fountains (long)

[Cosimo]

Yeah man, listen to Paver, if you don't use water sparingly then it will be all gone and your children won't have any water ever.

Water conservation isn't about saving water For The Children™, it's a distribution scheme. Only those uses approved by a government bureaucrat can use water. In a free market, the only way someone's lawn would dry out would be if they didn't want to pay for the water. The water lost from the fountains due to evaporation is not comparable with the amount consumed by a local neighborhood.

Precious Natural Resource? Please. It's a commodity good, limited in supply over time, but unlimited in the long run.

One average home consumes half an acre-foot (AF) per year. Near as I can get from scanty reading, the Bellagio fountain loses about 2-5AF per month. Not sure on this. More numbers would help. Anyway, a hotel that houses 3000 people and a casino that packs a similar number in, in addition to their kitchen, showers, baths, sinks, and toilets, is consuming maybe 60 households' worth of water a year from a fountain.

[Justin A]

Doesn't the Bellagio use recycled water for those fountains?

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't the Bellagio use recycled water for those fountains?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's not Fiji water we're talking about here.

More likely filtered toilet water from the casino's bathrooms.

[RunDownHouse]

I hardly think you can draw an analogy between the fountains and the entire atmosphere shift that occured with "theme" hotels, especially since the fountains' status as a part of that shift is very debatable.

I don't think anyone is planning their vacation around the fountains; people aren't saying, "Gee, I love Reno, but those fountains!" I don't think they said that even in the past, but I don't know of any way to prove/research that. And to get even deeper, are people choosing to stay specifically at the Bellagio doing so because of the fountains? Out of all the people that derive value from the fountains over any given length of time, how many are actually Bellagio guests?

On the other hand, I can't imagine the fountains are any kind of a significant cost. If he's hinging his argument on the fact that Bellagio would not be "much" worse off without the fountains, you should ask him to put some numbers behind his assertion that its really a large expense.

[RustedCorpse]

[ QUOTE ]


Why bother? Because I think he is wrong and out of principle---principle being: one should never concede an argument to a jerk.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously do you think ANY argument you could make is going to make him suddenly go "ZOMG ZOIKS!!!11!!!!! U'RE RIGHT!"

The fact of the matter is you are probably right, but nothing is going to convince him of this. As far as conceding an argument to a jerk, it's not an argument, it's a switching monolgoue.

[jaydub]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't the Bellagio use recycled water for those fountains?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's not Fiji water we're talking about here.

More likely filtered toilet water from the casino's bathrooms.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, sinks and such, not "black water"

[jrobb83]

[ QUOTE ]
Paver Man: "The 'before and after' method of measuring value should apply here....
They could pave over the Bellagio fountains and the economics of the greater Vegas tourism market would demonstrate no measureable impact.
The value difference "before" (with fountains) and "after" (without fountains) is nominal...ergo, the fountains are of no real value to the whole. Even Bellagio would probably have a tough time showing a real, major loss of income.
But still they waste a precious resource."


[/ QUOTE ]

This argument is highly silly. I have received a good amount of economics and business education and the "'before and after' method of measuring value" is something he made up on the spot to try and sound intelligent. And even then he gives zero evidence why his "before and after method" shows the fountains to be a waste of resources.

You shouldn't spend time and energy to refute an argument that makes no sense and is grounded in absolutely nothing.

[Macedon]

[ QUOTE ]
I hardly think you can draw an analogy between the fountains and the entire atmosphere shift that occured with "theme" hotels, especially since the fountains' status as a part of that shift is very debatable.

I don't think anyone is planning their vacation around the fountains; people aren't saying, "Gee, I love Reno, but those fountains!"

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a good point. But what if the Bellagio paved over their fountain and The Aladdin down the block built the same water show in front of their casino, wouldn't the Aladdin see an economic benefit (foot-traffic leading to greater visits inside the casino) whereas the Bellagio would lose customers?

And taken further, what if all of the casinos in Vegas sold of their "free" theme-inspired entertainments to Reno casinos, wouldn't Reno see a rise in visits and Vegas, conversely, see a drop?

[RunDownHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
And taken further

[/ QUOTE ]
But that was my point. You can't take it further. The question is, "How much are the Bellagio fountains worth?" not, "How much is the 'theme' atmosphere of Las Vegas worth?"

You can argue that the fountains are part of that atmosphere, but the next question is then how much a part are they, which just comes back down to their individual worth. And that's the problem with the argument. Who knows? I have no idea how much traffic would increase at Aladdin and how much it would decrease at Bellagio. And neither does the clown you're arguing with. The best argument for their worth is simply that Bellagio still has them around, and Bellagio's management has exhibited some level of competence.

[astroglide]