You want Casino?
-
Gambling is not good by nature.
Why intensify more.??? If there are 10-20% ppl whom have gone bankrupt in Singapore buying 4d, toto, soccer, shares.. then opening a casino will increase it to 40-50%.
There is always degree of differences and variations in everything. A light cut, a deep cut, and amputation..etc. Even we have 4d, toto...etc.. opening a casino will definetly create more social and family problems. The process of "decomposition" will be even faster then what you can imagine.
One day, we might find our love ones keep frequenting the casino since it is so near. What would you think then if you are presently supportin the idea?
Good luck -
Gambling addicts will not be able to hurt their own finances if they cannot afford to gamble, given the proposal by the govenment to ban people who are unable to afford to pay $100 per day to enter the casino, effectively limiting gambling there to people who simply can afford it. That does not cause more people to lose their shirts off their backs.Originally posted by niceguy_123:Gambling is not good by nature.
Why intensify more.??? If there are 10-20% ppl whom have gone bankrupt in Singapore buying 4d, toto, soccer, shares.. then opening a casino will increase it to 40-50%.
There is always degree of differences and variations in everything. A light cut, a deep cut, and amputation..etc. Even we have 4d, toto...etc.. opening a casino will definetly create more social and family problems. The process of "decomposition" will be even faster then what you can imagine.
One day, we might find our love ones keep frequenting the casino since it is so near. What would you think then if you are presently supportin the idea?
Good luck
Are we going to deprive the rich from helping our economy because of dead set principles that gambling (even for the rich) is not good? The choice to gamble is an exercise in freedom, something that is indicative on how far we have progressed as a society. If we can't even trust ourselves on this, how do we trust ourselves to go into the elections every few years and elect a government? -
Dr. Tony Tan is right. Until Dr. Balakrishnan is able to put forward a comprehensive economic plan to show how Singapore will benefit from having a casino in terms of how many jobs created and which industries will be correlated or integrated to draw on casino factor to stimulate growth, we really should not proceed with the decision of having a casino yet.
To find out how much benefit singapore could get from casino depends on the proposal submitted by the companies interested in participating in bidding for it. It is like knowing how much people can reside in a plot of land only after the bidders submit their proposal( building a high rise condo or semi detached housing can differ the number of people living in it). However according to initial estimate, it could bring in 1.5 billion in profit anually, increase tourist number by 15%, increase their time in singapore as well as increasing the number of job employment by the thousands
I also want to put down the statistic on how gambling had already been part of singapore life
$20 million spend on online gaming
$2 billion spent on places like batam, genting etc anually
$3.5 billion on 4D anually
$2 billion horse betting
$0.5 billion toto
$0.18 billion soccer
$0.6 billion slot machines
$0.06 billion singapore sweep
and all these does not include the gambling amount on the 200 estimated underground gambling den here. If just 1/2 of the amount spent on overseas gambling just by singaporean is spend here, the revenue will be tremendousThere is a need to approach the decision from an overall new economic plan, incorporating factors other countries or casinos have not considered as otherwise our future generations may blame on all of us if things go terribly wrong.
our future generation may also blame us for our hesistation when we should build our casino when the times r goodGambling is not good by nature.
Casino could bring in the much needed revenue for our country which can help people like the needy or poor. Casinoes could offer a lifeline to the people who cannot find a job and also maker the gov richer so they can help out the general population by cutting on taxes. If u say it can increase the gambling addict problem in singapore, it can also help more people who r facing hardship and difficulty. U r not being merciful towards them by stopping a casino being built. I say go for it
Why intensify more.??? If there are 10-20% ppl whom have gone bankrupt in Singapore buying 4d, toto, soccer, shares.. then opening a casino will increase it to 40-50%. -
haha, ur so funny, u know that?Originally posted by stupidissmart:Casino could bring in the much needed revenue for our country which can help people like the needy or poor. Casinoes could offer a lifeline to the people who cannot find a job and also maker the gov richer so they can help out the general population by cutting on taxes. If u say it can increase the gambling addict problem in singapore, it can also help more people who r facing hardship and difficulty. U r not being merciful towards them by stopping a casino being built. I say go for it
oh ya, the revenue argument is so great. oh well, of course it's great in such a money-minded country in Singapore. As the saying goes, our minsiters will go for anything that brings in the dollars. Social concerns are merely rhetorical disguises- C"mon, how many students and parents and teachers have been petitioning for the reduction of stress in oure ducation system for the last 40 years! But no, the govt has a twisted concept that stress makes us (economically) competitive and enjoys pulling the mask of "it helps prepare kids for the future". But that detracts from the point.
the word "lifeline" seems to conjure a very philanthropic image, but according to what i read in NYT sometime last year, jobs in the casino sector are hardly waht you could consider a lifeline. Ya, I know SIngapore now allows bar-top dancing, but is that sufficient incentive to make every lady want to work as a bargirl? And how about the guys? Casino operators do not usually pay workers much or care much for their welfare. in Las Vegas, the casino workers complain of ianbility to pay house loans and mortgages. What makes you think teh similar thing will not apply here?
Haha, it would make the government richer, but would the icnrease in wealth immediately translate to benefits for the public? Special education is still under-funded, AFA is not getting proper support for its anti-AIDS campaign, and the list goes on. And the hypocrisy of all this is that we have a gigantic amount in national reserves. WHy is this amount not being used, when it is in the billions (USD).
Merciful? Think again.
the (enraged) pikamaster -
haha.. if everyone here say "its ok to hv a casino, as long as i dun gamble in there" then no need for casino cuz no one goes there. haha
-
oh ya, the revenue argument is so great. oh well, of course it's great in such a money-minded country in Singapore. As the saying goes, our minsiters will go for anything that brings in the dollars. Social concerns are merely rhetorical disguises- C"mon, how many students and parents and teachers have been petitioning for the reduction of stress in oure ducation system for the last 40 years! But no, the govt has a twisted concept that stress makes us (economically) competitive and enjoys pulling the mask of "it helps prepare kids for the future". But that detracts from the point.
U don't care for money ? I thought tis is the number one complaint singaporean have on their government. U like to be tax more heavily ? U like to pay higher for HDB ? U like Public transport to increase ? U like Road tax to increase ? U like education fee to increase ? U like health care to increase ? If u don't then u should encourage policies where there is a real increase in the revenue of the people and the country. One of them is the casino. The money not only rolls in for the increase in employment of the people, increase the amount of tourist and amount thgey spend and increase other related business such as restaurant, hotel and airline, but it also increases the coffers of the government through tax. And tat is where the government can take in more revenue and hopefully reduce the tax on the citizen. -
It's a false hope to believe that the government WILL reduce tax for the citizen with more revenue from the casino.
Whether the casino goes ahead or not, collective tax revenues, hdb flat prices, public transport, road taxes, education fees, health care costs, etc will still increase.
A casino does not transform a government to be santa claus to the people.
stupidissmart wrote:
U don't care for money ? I thought tis is the number one complaint singaporean have on their government. U like to be tax more heavily ? U like to pay higher for HDB ? U like Public transport to increase ? U like Road tax to increase ? U like education fee to increase ? U like health care to increase ? If u don't then u should encourage policies where there is a real increase in the revenue of the people and the country. One of them is the casino. The money not only rolls in for the increase in employment of the people, increase the amount of tourist and amount thgey spend and increase other related business such as restaurant, hotel and airline, but it also increases the coffers of the government through tax. And tat is where the government can take in more revenue and hopefully reduce the tax on the citizen. -
I believe a government with more money will either reduce tax or stop any increase to tax for the people. Do u think it is good for government to have more money or less money ?
-
Money will never be enough for our government. Don't you know that?Originally posted by stupidissmart:I believe a government with more money will either reduce tax or stop any increase to tax for the people. Do u think it is good for government to have more money or less money ?
Or otherwise, why the rental concession for HDB shops are withdrawn immediately after the recovery of the economy? Why the rental so expensive that the shop owners have to pay with larger part of their profits or even digging into their pockets. Why can't the gov let people make more pocket money to spend and have some or a little bit of prosperous among the middle to lower income earner.
Instead of just caring for their own pocket money in which they make things beneficiary to their executives and the higher profile people whom they are living like royal families?
Why the ministers' salary have to be more than a million dollars per annual?
Why Mps' salary have to be a few tens of thousands per month?
Why the president's salary have to be two more million dollars per annaul?
Why are the gov's executives are also drawing so......high salaries?
Now, PAP is recruiting more and more people. So....who pay these people?
In my opinion, a minister's pay should be between S$500k to S$700k per annual and he will still very highest paid minister in the world. I don't understand why they need so much money or salary; are the ministers going bring their money together with them to another world? -
Why the ministers' salary have to be more than a million dollars per annual?
Do u really think tat singapore will be so much poorer when we pay the minister the pay they getting ? Since my opinion of u is a gov hater, I will phrase the statement on government having money in a different way. If the gov find themselves with little money, they will start to increase tax from somewhere. So it is better for them to be richer than poorer and it will benefit everyone. Agree with the above statement ?
Why Mps' salary have to be a few tens of thousands per month?
Why the president's salary have to be two more million dollars per annaul?
Why are the gov's executives are also drawing so......high salaries? -
So....you are telling me that these are the greedy government with no mercy.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Do u really think tat singapore will be so much poorer when we pay the minister the pay they getting ? Since my opinion of u is a gov hater, I will phrase the statement on government having money in a different way. If the gov find themselves with little money, they will start to increase tax from somewhere. So it is better for them to be richer than poorer and it will benefit everyone. Agree with the above statement ?
Worst than Ancient Chinese Tyrant Chin Emperor!!!!!
-
In theory, I agree with you. However, in Singapore, the practice says otherwise.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I believe a government with more money will either reduce tax or stop any increase to tax for the people.
Well, imo, the Singapore government thinks more money for THEMSELVES is good. Imo, that is bad. Look at how they pay themselves and how much cash is needed to run their administration, investments and businesses.Do u think it is good for government to have more money or less money ? -
You know why so many people protested against casino. Simply, when the casino make tonnes of money; we don't get a share. The casino is just enriching the governrment pockets or into their own pocket.Originally posted by macjoe:Well, imo, the Singapore government thinks more money for THEMSELVES is good. Imo, that is bad. Look at how they pay themselves and how much cash is needed to run their administration, investments and businesses.
Many years ago, I have always been very supportive of having casino in singapore. But now, I 'm strongly against it. The government is just doing it in favour for themselves.
By then, Tomasak will own the biggest part of casino and todate, so much profits or loss incurred had never been clearly reported. Worst, the government party in which every individual of them own loads of shares in profitable corp for themselves. greedy bunch of skunks
I'm confused, I don't know our government are businessmen or politicians. How can a businessman doing better in government? Very disgusting!!! -
You know why so many people protested against casino. Simply, when the casino make tonnes of money; we don't get a share. The casino is just enriching the governrment pockets or into their own pocket.Originally posted by macjoe:Well, imo, the Singapore government thinks more money for THEMSELVES is good. Imo, that is bad. Look at how they pay themselves and how much cash is needed to run their administration, investments and businesses.
Many years ago, I have always been very supportive of having casino in singapore. But now, I 'm strongly against it. The government is just doing it in favour for themselves.
By then, Tomasak will own the biggest part of casino and todate, so much profits or loss incurred had never been clearly reported. Worst, the government party in which every individual of them own loads of shares in profitable corp for themselves. bunch of greedy skunks
Through numbers of years of observation, the gov's performances and tonnes of money that they rewarding to themselves.....are outrages, incredible, disgusting, tyrant, selfishness and fuccckkkkiing
I'm confused, I don't know our government are businessmen or politicians. How can a businessman doing better in governor? Very disgusting!!! -
pap dun care if i want or not, opposition opposed for the sake of opposed. it ordei decided, casino is a go. what feeback, poll or show are really just for show on how "democracy" we are.
me as singaporean just shut up and pray i can see through the day and hope one day can get out of here. -
Actually, have any of you been to casinos abroad????
Or have any of you stayed abroad long enough to know what's life with a casino in the country??
The truth is, it's really nothing!!! Just another entertainment complex!!! Gambling addicts will still be gambling addicts, non gamblers will still be non gamblers....
Gambling addicts are risk takers, and if you talk to them long enough, you will probably find out they are very business minded, and like to take risk!!!
Non-gamblers are not risk takers, they are too afraid to let go, that makes their nature unsuitable. Some would calculate too much the probability, and some feel so burnt after losing $20, they dare not try again..
But there are many people who gamble just for small trills, they would spare probably $10 or $20 just hoping they get a little lucky. And when they start to lose more than $50, they start to feel heart burned.
For those non risk takers who lose more than $100, they get so heart broken, they start to swear they never gamble again.
Then after sometime, the gambling trill start to subside, becos the casino is just another landmark.
For foreigners who have lived long enough in countries with casinos, they don't really think about it that much. There ain't too much trill in what they see as normality. Those who gamble are just that type, and those who don't are just not that type.
If you ask me, in 10 yrs down the road after (let's say!) the casino is built, we would treat it with nothing much more than a social complex, where we can watch movie, eat in restaurants and chit chat with friends. -
if you've actually been to casinos and talked to some of the people there, the most fervent of gamblers isnt your average stupid guy who empties his pockets into the jackpot machine..they're actually very very brilliant mathematicians, who plan every move very carefully, observing patterns, results, calculating this and that, plotting their own graphs possibility tables...they don't just throw coins in and spin, they actually will wait months before finding the precise calculated "strike period" the go all out to win, so obviously some people who claim to know this and that about gambling and how it ruins lives, attracts people to this and that don't know ther facts.
-
Dear Vito Corleon,
You may be right, there are such people around which we term them as professional gamblers.
However, if everybody is like them, then most casinos will close shop isn't it? Casino is a zero sum game; i.e. if the casino makes money, it means many people will have to lose money. If you make money, it got to come from the casino losing it to you.
It would be totally naive to base analysis on such narrowly defined terms. From US govt commissioned study of gambling impact, it is found that those with lower education level are more bound to become problem or pathological gamblers. There are three or four categories of gamblers defined. Problem and pathological gamblers are of social concerns. These two part add together will form about 7% to 9% of total adult population. Do you understand what that means? We will have to look at the larger picture.
The study also shows that the incidence of problem and pathological gamblers increase significantly when there is a casino introduced nearby.
Now, this study is done by reputable agencies commissioned by the US govt. This is not some ill funded studies done by some ulu universities. The implications are wide ranging and worrying.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by vito_corleone:if you've actually been to casinos and talked to some of the people there, the most fervent of gamblers isnt your average stupid guy who empties his pockets into the jackpot machine..they're actually very very brilliant mathematicians, who plan every move very carefully, observing patterns, results, calculating this and that, plotting their own graphs possibility tables...they don't just throw coins in and spin, they actually will wait months before finding the precise calculated "strike period" the go all out to win, so obviously some people who claim to know this and that about gambling and how it ruins lives, attracts people to this and that don't know ther facts. -
I really hope that if the casino makes money for the country, they would lower the taxes down. I'm not earning more but the taxes seems to be going up every year.....
-
You may be right, there are such people around which we term them as professional gamblers.
Tat is true. But however the benefit of it is real too. It can create much jobs, pull in more tourists and revitalise many other industries related to it such as hotels and restaurants. For the other types of gamblers, it become a more convenient venue for them to gamble as well as prevent tis cash flow into other countries such as genting
However, if everybody is like them, then most casinos will close shop isn't it? Casino is a zero sum game; i.e. if the casino makes money, it means many people will have to lose money. If you make money, it got to come from the casino losing it to you.
It would be totally naive to base analysis on such narrowly defined terms. From US govt commissioned study of gambling impact, it is found that those with lower education level are more bound to become problem or pathological gamblers. There are three or four categories of gamblers defined. Problem and pathological gamblers are of social concerns. These two part add together will form about 7% to 9% of total adult population. Do you understand what that means? We will have to look at the larger picture.
The study also shows that the incidence of problem and pathological gamblers increase significantly when there is a casino introduced nearby.
Now, this study is done by reputable agencies commissioned by the US govt. This is not some ill funded studies done by some ulu universities. The implications are wide ranging and worrying. -
IMO, proponents in this casino debate are like insurance agents
selling only the benefits of an investment-linked product without fully and clearly explaining the hidden conditions of hefty charges and risks to the consumer.
Look how wealthy the insurance agents and companies have become!
Why do the authorities in the first place allow such risky products marketed and sold to the public by half-truth "professionals"? Doesn't it make it easy for "professionals" to hoodwink the consumer? Isn't consumer protection inadequate or it's not the responsibility of the authorities to protect the consumer who are deemed to be mature enough to make decisions for themselves? Then, what are the authorities for? -
Hi Smart,
Is gahment running out of ideas...r tey paid 2 think n deliver the "goods''. A private business has to make profit...so if S'pore Inc..wants a casino...say it loud n clear tat it is 4 pure economic reasons.
Look, go 2 Sdyney, Macau, Sri Lanka, these casinos are flooded with mainland Chinese who go there to gamble....so Spore wants a piece of the action..but the Casino committee pple, who r they, r they foreigners deciding 4 3.5 million Singaporeans to hve the casino. So gahment has to come clean....we need casino because ....123..
4 years, we have "obscene surpluses", n now, mfg is hollowing out, retail alos die, lifescience is work-in-progress..wat do we hve, our best scholars r co-opt into gahment...tey r in a box...better to toe the line, than to sacrifice their S$20k - S$30k job...why risk it...be kaisei, kaisu...steady...casino wil come n tey will continue to hve their bonuses..
Yes, jobs r created...r these 4 Singaporeans..or FTs...tey can role dice better...we already feel tat we r second-class citizens in Spore...alienated...
China n India will be the next economic superpower, whether u like it or not...tey have the mass, the talents....China have 200,000 scientists graduating every year..almost 365 companies of Fortune 500 r in China already..
So 4 pure economic reasons, yes, by all means go 4 the casino, but it shld have nothing to do with Singaporeans maturity to hve casino or not.
Will the truth come out, wanna bet. -
A couple of months ago, I have advocated Referendum for Casino but some forumites say not possible. Now there are some PAP members who mention this in parliament, where are the critics?
Anyway, here's our press release:
WorkersÂ’ Party to seek public feedback before announcing its position on the Casino issue in April
The WorkersÂ’ Party will make public the partyÂ’s policy position on the Integrated Resort that will feature a Casino in April, closer to the PAP governmentÂ’s announced date of making its decision public in mid April.
To increase greater public participation in the policy process, the Workers' Party will be holding a Public Consultation Exercise on the proposal for a casino in Singapore. It will be held on Saturday, 5th March 2005 from 2 pm - 5pm at the WorkersÂ’ Party Headquarters, 216-G Syed Alwi Road, #02-03, Singapore 207799.
Following the Consultation Exercise the WorkersÂ’ Party will collate the views from the meeting and deliberate the issue at the party level.
There will be two speakers who are party members. Goh Meng Seng, aged 34 is a Singaporean graduate operating a company based in Hong Kong. He comes back regularly for WPÂ’s grassroots activity and writes for the Hammer.
Chia Ti Lik, aged 30 is a litigation lawyer and partner in the firm where he practices in Singapore. He is also assistant to Mr. Low Thia Khiang, MP for Hougang and a WP Youth Action Committee member.
Since the announcement of the Public Consultation Exercise in early February, the WorkersÂ’ Party has received a steady stream of email opinions on the casino issue. The views in these emails include those for and against the Casino proposal. These emails are from Singaporeans both residing in Singapore and abroad.
Given the number of views The Workers' Party has received via emails, the party will continue to solicit views on the Casino Proposal even after the Public Consultation Exercise.
Members of the public are invited to send their views to the Party via e-mail at [email protected] or by regular mail to: PO Box 15, Toa Payoh Central Post Office, Singapore 913101.
The Consultation Exercise will be moderated by James Gomez, Assistant Secretary-General (2nd). For more information, please call 6298-4765 or contact the undersigned at 8115-9667. -
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/135230/1/.html
it not you want or not? it been decided. -
IMO, proponents in this casino debate are like insurance agents
U have a problem with insurance ? The proponents of the casino debate do bring out the pro and con on the argument. If u say the proponents of the casino debate r like insurance agents, then people who r against the casino r liek father in a church. They resist certain policies such as abortion, contraceptives, masturbation, wearing too sexily etc which in fact, is not very relevant nor make them competitive in today's society. There is a reason why the church and the state r seperated.
selling only the benefits of an investment-linked product without fully and clearly explaining the hidden conditions of hefty charges and risks to the consumer.
Look how wealthy the insurance agents and companies have become!
Why do the authorities in the first place allow such risky products marketed and sold to the public by half-truth "professionals"? Doesn't it make it easy for "professionals" to hoodwink the consumer? Isn't consumer protection inadequate or it's not the responsibility of the authorities to protect the consumer who are deemed to be mature enough to make decisions for themselves? Then, what are the authorities for?Hi Smart,
U r not happy with the gov ? Fine. U r not happy with their salary ? Fine. U r not happy about their pro-foreigner policies ? Fine. But casino r not these issues and we shouldn't lump them together.
Is gahment running out of ideas...r tey paid 2 think n deliver the "goods''. A private business has to make profit...so if S'pore Inc..wants a casino...say it loud n clear tat it is 4 pure economic reasons.
Look, go 2 Sdyney, Macau, Sri Lanka, these casinos are flooded with mainland Chinese who go there to gamble....so Spore wants a piece of the action..but the Casino committee pple, who r they, r they foreigners deciding 4 3.5 million Singaporeans to hve the casino. So gahment has to come clean....we need casino because ....123..
4 years, we have "obscene surpluses", n now, mfg is hollowing out, retail alos die, lifescience is work-in-progress..wat do we hve, our best scholars r co-opt into gahment...tey r in a box...better to toe the line, than to sacrifice their S$20k - S$30k job...why risk it...be kaisei, kaisu...steady...casino wil come n tey will continue to hve their bonuses..
Yes, jobs r created...r these 4 Singaporeans..or FTs...tey can role dice better...we already feel tat we r second-class citizens in Spore...alienated...
China n India will be the next economic superpower, whether u like it or not...tey have the mass, the talents....China have 200,000 scientists graduating every year..almost 365 companies of Fortune 500 r in China already..
So 4 pure economic reasons, yes, by all means go 4 the casino, but it shld have nothing to do with Singaporeans maturity to hve casino or not.
Will the truth come out, wanna bet.