Referendum for Casino

goh meng seng

20 Nov 04, 00:46

One of my helpers have suggested for us to press for a referendum for the issue of Casino.

No matter how we look at it, this is about trading social well being for economic gains. Whether this is acceptable to us will affect us in the years to come.

The impact on the society would vary but it is important for Singaporeans at large to decide whether they would agree to have casino or not, with the potential threats on social order and well being.

Thus, it is time for us, the citizens to reclaim our power and right to decide on issues that might have wide impact on us as a Nation and a people.

I suggest we hold the referendum on the casino issue in the coming general elections, to save cost. This is also good in the sense that at least for those constituencies that do not have the chance to vote, they could still exercise their rights of ownership of this place we call Singapore.

Goh Meng Seng

Disclaimer: This is not Workers' Party's Official stand yet, I am just opening up this issue for everybody to discuss.

yeebas

20 Nov 04, 11:07

I am against of having a casino in singapore because the economical benefits do not overcome the future social problems brought about it.

iveco

20 Nov 04, 11:33

Might as well call for referendum on various other issues like capital punishment and gay marriage as well.

idwar

20 Nov 04, 11:58

Islamic authority will issue a fatwa, Church will condemn from the Pulpit...

..........and Religious Bodies will be in open opposition to any Govt policy that support Gambling.

Govt vs God : Who will the people listen to ?

idwar

20 Nov 04, 12:12

Even if 75% agree, so what? Will the referendum reveal the ethnic/religious divide? If 99 % of Muslims say NO, will the majority population ignore the views of the minority?

So what you want to do? Ban Muslims from Casino?

sarek_home

20 Nov 04, 14:47

If such ethnic/religious divide exist, it exists regardless of whether a referendum is held. By having a referendum to reveal it would allow the society to address the issue. Otherwise it will be a hidden time bomb waiting to expose one day when some other issues force us to reveal our core values.

If 99% of Muslims say NO, the government will need to have more communication with the Muslim community to address their view and concern as any inclusive gov't should do. The gov't can't just force the decision to the society based on a subjective view that the society is mature enough.

Originally posted by idwar:
Even if 75% agree, so what? Will the referendum reveal the ethnic/religious divide? If 99 % of Muslims say NO, will the majority population ignore the views of the minority?

So what you want to do? Ban Muslims from Casino?

sbst275

20 Nov 04, 14:48

Casino is bad

iveco

20 Nov 04, 14:57

Originally posted by sbst275:
Casino is bad

It has never been good, anyway.

laurence82

20 Nov 04, 15:03

Overheard some people talking about it, they said having a casino in Singapore makes no difference. Without it, people still travel to Genting. I beg to differ.

Genting is really a good place for habitual, addicted gamblers. Most of the occasional gamblers, and even tourists, just travel there once in while to have fun. Now, you bring the casino closer to home, and even if u put restrictions, those who do not fall within these restrictions, and are occasional gamblers, may be addicted soon. It does pose some societal problems, and I certainly hope the gahmen wouldnt simply said "Oh, if the people becomes addicted, its their fault"..then we certainly do not need a gahmen in the first place, if it couldnt arrest the problems early.

Besides, even if its to attract foreign investments as well tourist monies, will the monies taxed from them be used to improve Singaporeans well being, like reducing GSTs, transport costs, income taxes and CPF rates? Lets really hope so..

yeebas

20 Nov 04, 16:51

Originally posted by laurence82:
Overheard some people talking about it, they said having a casino in Singapore makes no difference. Without it, people still travel to Genting. I beg to differ.

Genting is really a good place for habitual, addicted gamblers. Most of the occasional gamblers, and even tourists, just travel there once in while to have fun. Now, you bring the casino closer to home, and even if u put restrictions, those who do not fall within these restrictions, and are occasional gamblers, may be addicted soon. It does pose some societal problems, and I certainly hope the gahmen wouldnt simply said "Oh, if the people becomes addicted, its their fault"..then we certainly do not need a gahmen in the first place, if it couldnt arrest the problems early.

Besides, even if its to attract foreign investments as well tourist monies, will the monies taxed from them be used to improve Singaporeans well being, like reducing GSTs, transport costs, income taxes and CPF rates? Lets really hope so..

Yes Yes..But wait.Areyou very sure that the economic benefits will overcome the social problems? What about the cost incurred when treating these problems? So lets say indeed that there are economic benefits. will it go into other places used to solve the social problems? If it is so, must well we don't have a casino and maintain the standard of our living. Have casino or no casino also no difference. -.-

yeebas

20 Nov 04, 16:56

Oh yah. And by the way. What makes you think that our GST will decrease, taxes fall, transport costs fall and bla bla bla. There are no written promises by the government. It is no fool proof plan. What happens if the idea fail? Will it affect us? By then Singaporeans don't sulk that the government did not reach their targets because it is you all yourself who bit onto the sweet words of the government on the benefits.
Oh please, when have the government been so generous to singaporeans.If indeed we have increased revenue, i believe that the government will just say. Oh. We will be safe keeping the money for rainy days. In other words, the money will be hidden in the reserves. hahahaha..singaporeans..wake up your idea.

deli_1971

20 Nov 04, 17:19

i will prefer the government making the decision by their own without consulting the people

RaTtY81

20 Nov 04, 17:23

Originally posted by deli_1971:
i will prefer the government making the decision by their own without consulting the people

tat is bad man...

goh meng seng

20 Nov 04, 18:22

The following is an example of referendum being done in US:

Proposition 71 will guarantee biologists' right to do
embryonic
stem-cell research.
?SPL
George W. Bush has won the presidential election. But
Republicans are
not the only ones celebrating the poll results:
biologists who wish to
pursue human embryonic stem-cell research have also
had good news. All
they have to do is move to California, if they aren't
already there,
and apply for a share of the $3 billion that voters
have just approved
for their field.

By 59% to 41% of votes, Californians said "yes" to
Proposition 71, the
California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative,
which will raise
around $300 million a year for a decade through bond sales.

This referendum is done basically because it involves a potential trade off of morality against scientific /economic gains.

Basically, I think if the issue is controversial in nature and there is a possibility of National divide, we should go for a referendum.

Goh Meng Seng

iveco

20 Nov 04, 19:00

Might as well hold a referendum for every unpopular legislation that could be implemented.

yeebas

21 Nov 04, 07:34

Will the referendum be held? I think we are too slow. The government have already requested the proposal from companies. We are way too slow. One way is to sit out on the Sentosa island and prevent machinery for getting onto Sentosa. If the building drags on too long, the builder will run into high costs and might as well abandon the project. (joking)
I am rather upset that despite the many objections by the all the religious groups in singapore, the government still went ahead with the plan. Their consulation carried out on 7 dialogue session did not specify what is the result of it. The amount of people considered in the consultations are not specified, how do we know the results? Is the government thinking that since the population have so much trust in us, we should just go ahead because we are always right! We willwanta referendum that will involve the whole nation because this issue is dividing the nation! How will Singapore stand together in the future when national unity and seeds of discord have already been sown by the government itself?

pikamaster

21 Nov 04, 09:44

Originally posted by yeebas:
Will the referendum be held? I think we are too slow. The government have already requested the proposal from companies. We are way too slow. One way is to sit out on the Sentosa island and prevent machinery for getting onto Sentosa. If the building drags on too long, the builder will run into high costs and might as well abandon the project. (joking)
I am rather upset that despite the many objections by the all the religious groups in singapore, the government still went ahead with the plan. Their consulation carried out on 7 dialogue session did not specify what is the result of it. The amount of people considered in the consultations are not specified, how do we know the results? Is the government thinking that since the population have so much trust in us, we should just go ahead because we are always right! We willwanta referendum that will involve the whole nation because this issue is dividing the nation! How will Singapore stand together in the future when national unity and seeds of discord have already been sown by the government itself?

Standard practice, isn't it? Don't you remember the Iraq War?

the amused pikamaster

pikamaster

21 Nov 04, 09:45

Originally posted by deli_1971:
i will prefer the government making the decision by their own without consulting the people

and why is that so? Do you favour efficiency over democracy?

the puzzled pikamaster