You want Casino?
-
OK. Then don't control drugs in Singapore then. People should know what's good for them, and what's bad for them. So no need to control drugs.
why link it with drugs ? We already haver many gambling venue such as 4d toto etc, do we have many drug venue ? there r many different vices and there is a level for each of them. Not all of them r the sameQuestion: is gambling a vice, or not a vice? Is there such a thing as Legal Vice?
is smoking a vice ? Is drinking a vice ? So we should ban all vices ?I know gambling itself isn't dangerous, but is dangerous to those who knows no limit. But why put temptation at their fingertips?
I know drinking itself isn't dangerous, but is dangerous to those who knows no limit. But why put temptation at their fingertips? So all alcohol should be banned ?Likewise for cigarettes; I'm a smoker myself, and I'm all for the move to ban smoking in public places. In fact, instead of increasing cigarette prices like crazy, and making exorbitant revenues, why don't just ban it in one fell swoop? I will welcome it, because I know that's the only way I can quit, and live a little longer in this sorry world.
Tat is for u. There r many people who do not want and can not stop smoking. -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
u mean u r going to critically examine the issues by basing gov in a casino topic ?
[b]
[quote]yes, we r discussing the pros and cons but u need to critically analysis the issues at hand...why do we hve the casino...4 u...casino 4 casino sake...blah..blah...blah...clearly then yr view is myopic..a simpleton tat nvr seen the world...
so u think the gov is lousy, and so ? Had anyone deny tat casino will bring in money from tourism ?
Do we then agree tat gahment wants the casino because of economy...just say it...n not "pushed" it as if it is up to Singaporean maturity. Casino is a "pien man" in chinese..irregardless of wat u called it, an integrated resort. I already give u the disneyland example, why we lose out to HK n Shanghai..is disneyland a casino, hve u seen any casino in Disneyland..if we hve won Disneyland...do we still need casino...remember there r 200 million pple in Indonesia...big enough market rit..so we lose it, n then now casino. Why, if gahment acknowledge it, it means tat they hve run out of ideas n need the easy money....Hve the casino rit, but speak the truth..how many times must i getr thr yr thick skull.
There are good pple in gahment n i do not bash them unneccesary but if they r like u...singapore is dead...cause we need to fit into the world..not the world around Singapore...wat Singaporeans maturity to hve or not to hve the casino..we need casino because of the economy..
And ruined our hard-earned reputation of Singapore....wat audacity....Those experience i listed down r true...in fact...just having dinner with a mainland chinese boss, who just came back from holidaying in Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand, he told me tat windows in Genting Hotel are completely sealed, even the hanging fans are removed as many pple hang themselves aft losing money.....mainland women selling their bodies as they piled up debts....
did he tell also u tat genting used to be a village and the people there were poor. Now they were beter off with employment and malaysia manage to bring in much money from tourism ?
Yes, money..money...money....is tat all to itI am not a moralist...but speak the truth 4 goodness sake, hve the casino, tell the pple the truth, tell them how gambling tax money is going to be used in health, infrastruture etc...softsell...not like those #&!& tat comes frm u.
they will tell u in every year's budget. If there is no casino, then the budget we get from every year will be lesser.
Ya, blah.blah..blah..wat do u expect frm these bright-eye scholars..enough of yr stupidity...really...i cannot believe tat we hve such "bumpkin'' in Singapore...
I guess being rude is a way u like to communicate huh ?
How else, stupid..where i cannot c the tree frm the forest...That is a big IF and which marketing report leads you to be sure it will pull in more. Gamblers want gambling and good pay-off and easy credit, why would like care about the theme park. They are gamblers, they are taling the risk going to all these places now. If they worry they wouldn't have gone there.
they like to care about the theme park as wel. There r many people going to genting and these people do visit the theme parks as well. Gamblers r not crazy fanatic tat only want to gamble and not do other things such as playing in a theme park or eating. I tell u gamblers r like people around u. They do not go there becauise they r addicted but they go there for som fun or escape from a stressful life.I hope you realize, gambling, drugs and sex are alway good companions.
No, I don't realise why does gambling be associated with drugs and sex. U think gamblers r bad hats with tattoos and gangs tat go around having sex and taking drugs ?How do they blacklist Batam and local illegal gambling dens. Why gov is not blacklisting casino operating cruise. Sex alone will be enough to ruin families. Drugs and sex are not profitable? Strange? Is gambling legal on cruise? If they can offer gambling what stop them from offering others.
i am saying banning the cruise ships if they provide drugs to the people there. If they just provide proper gambling, then why ban them ? Gambling is legal on cruise. The authority can stop them from operating in singapore if they r offering other dubious services such as providing drugs.Because there is no gambling profit cap in other countries. Where did I say "gambling tax in sigapore is higher elsewhere". I already answered: "Other gambling operators (cruise, Batam, illegal operators) have few rules to observe and do not pay gambling tax. They can use these savings to provide better services including but not limited to illegal drugs and sexual services to attract and retain gamblers." It cost more gambling and social problems. That is the big cost we have to pay with the casino. If it fails, does the gov has the gut to admit failure or it will pump in money and remove all safeguards to keep it afloat to save face. How much money we are pumping in to keep the Durian afloat.
u think batam do not pay any tax to anyone ? Why do u think sex and drugs will be better service, if they get to offer it at all ? And did u answer why does a bigger and more posh casino fails to attract gamblers but a lousy small old one can ? Why do u think these the casino here will not attract people when experienced casino operators bvelieved it do ? Why do u extrapolate so far as saying singapore has to pay to keep a foreign casino from operating ? Why do u think the durian is a failure ? There r people going there occasionally to go for the performance and play etc. Why do u compare the casino to the durian ?Ok, so having a Casino in Singapore can be good in terms of Tourism Dollars.
Before the casino is here there r already people jumping off floors and killing themselves. U think by not building one singaporean will not gamble ? They still go to genting as well isn't it ?
But what about the man who murdered his entire family, and jumped to his death because of gambling??? -
Catholic Archbishop Chia says casino not best strategy for development
By Asha Popatlal, Channel NewsAsia
Singapore's head of the Roman Catholic Church, Archbishop Nicholas Chia, says having a casino is not the best long-term strategy for sound economic development.
In a statement read out at all Catholic churches this weekend, he questioned whether promoting gambling is a legitimate role for the government, especially since a casino did not provide citizens with essential products, such as water and electricity.
He said gambling is known to cause considerable social and financial hardship.
There is the danger of exploitation of the consumer and his weakness.
And would undermine the work ethic and values of hard work.
He expressed concern that poor people would spend a disproportionate amount in hopes of striking gold.
Archbishop Chia also questioned how much greed was the motive for the casino.
He felt gambling was not reflective of a gracious society and that casino gambling should not be legalised. - CNA -
The government is more corncern over their own pockets than its people that why they are going ahead with the casinos. they don't care we die!!!Originally posted by ShutterBug:Catholic Archbishop Chia says casino not best strategy for development
By Asha Popatlal, Channel NewsAsia
Singapore's head of the Roman Catholic Church, Archbishop Nicholas Chia, says having a casino is not the best long-term strategy for sound economic development.
In a statement read out at all Catholic churches this weekend, he questioned whether promoting gambling is a legitimate role for the government, especially since a casino did not provide citizens with essential products, such as water and electricity.
He said gambling is known to cause considerable social and financial hardship.
There is the danger of exploitation of the consumer and his weakness.
And would undermine the work ethic and values of hard work.
He expressed concern that poor people would spend a disproportionate amount in hopes of striking gold.
Archbishop Chia also questioned how much greed was the motive for the casino.
He felt gambling was not reflective of a gracious society and that casino gambling should not be legalised. - CNA
tyrant government!!! Where on earth the cabinet ministers getting millions of dollars salaries except singapore!!! -
Casino is very different from other form of gambling like 4D and Toto. The gov, by introducing casino, is moving up to a much higher level of the gambling addition ladder.Originally posted by stupidissmart:why link it with drugs ? We already haver many gambling venue such as 4d toto etc, do we have many drug venue ? there r many different vices and there is a level for each of them. Not all of them r the same .
==========
Dec 15, 2004
THE CASINO DEBATE
Can S'pore tackle massive addiction?
A MAJOR argument for the establishment of a casino in Singapore is
that we already have several forms of gambling, so a casino will not
change anything.
However, legalised gambling in a casino cannot be compared to current
forms of legalised gambling due to the difference in the time-frame of
gratification, from the placing of a bet to the settling of the bet.
In the case of a Singapore Sweep lottery ticket, it takes from a few
days to a few weeks from the buying of the ticket to the release of
the results - and gratification of the gambling. Buying 4-D or Toto
takes from a few hours to a few days to achieve gratification.
Would it be a surprise if I tell you that research shows that the
shorter the time to gratification, the higher the chance of addiction?
Hence, there are more people addicted to 4-D and Toto than there are
those addicted to Singapore Sweep.
Now imagine the time-frame shortened by an order of magnitude in a
casino. From the time a gambler places a bet to the time the bet is
settled, gratification occurs in mere seconds. Indeed, for jackpot
machines, the timeframe may even be in milliseconds.
You can place more than one million bets in a casino in the time taken
to settle one Singapore Sweep lottery-ticket bet.
With that short a time-frame to gratification, a casino will cause a
massive increase in gambling addiction.
Thus, gambling in a casino is significantly different from current
legalised gambling in Singapore.
If we ignore the moral and economic aspects of the casino issue, it
boils down to this: 'Is Singapore prepared for the massive increase in
gambling addiction that will come with the setting up of a casino?'
Thomas Sim Wai Tat (Dr)
Copyright © 2004 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved.
Privacy Statement & Condition of Access. -
Catholic Archbishop Chia says casino not best strategy for development
casino provide cash, which is an essential product
By Asha Popatlal, Channel NewsAsia
Singapore's head of the Roman Catholic Church, Archbishop Nicholas Chia, says having a casino is not the best long-term strategy for sound economic development.
In a statement read out at all Catholic churches this weekend, he questioned whether promoting gambling is a legitimate role for the government, especially since a casino did not provide citizens with essential products, such as water and electricity.He said gambling is known to cause considerable social and financial hardship.
casino causes hardship yet on the other hand removes hardship for the peopel employed or depending on the casinoThere is the danger of exploitation of the consumer and his weakness
.
so does drinking and smokingAnd would undermine the work ethic and values of hard work.
Working smart is better than working hardHe expressed concern that poor people would spend a disproportionate amount in hopes of striking gold.
They r still going to do tat by going to cruises or genting anywayArchbishop Chia also questioned how much greed was the motive for the casino.
it was also greed tat made singapore progress till nowHe felt gambling was not reflective of a gracious society and that casino gambling should not be legalised. - CNA
considering the fact tat most developed countries have casinos, it may not be true
I believe religion and states have to be seperated. This archbishop probably want the gov to stop abortion and contraceptives as well which is not for the best interest for the people. Is it fair for businessmen or people from other religion ?Casino is very different from other form of gambling like 4D and Toto. The gov, by introducing casino, is moving up to a much higher level of the gambling addition ladder.
how different is it to casinoes on cruise ships ? There r cruises everyday to nowhere, it is dirt cheap and the boarding point is even nearer than sentosa -
Hey you smart a-r-s-e should give your arrogant opinions directly to the Bishop, why don't you?
What's with your tit-for-tat replies?
You think you're so God Damned smart is it?
You'd probably shrink in person, I bet. -
"dirt cheap" is why people will still go to cruise instead of the gov casino.
Is this gov going to turn S'pore into a "cruise to nowhere".
That will stop part of the problem. You have no safeguards if others start serving drugs and sex and introduce more and more social ills.Originally posted by stupidissmart:how different is it to casinoes on cruise ships ? There r cruises everyday to nowhere, it is dirt cheap and the boarding point is even nearer than sentosa
Tell us what batam is taxing. You forget about cruises and illegal dens, do they pay tax? Pay to who?Originally posted by mannovo:i am saying banning the cruise ships if they provide drugs to the people there. If they just provide proper gambling, then why ban them ? Gambling is legal on cruise. The authority can stop them from operating in singapore if they r offering other dubious services such as providing drugs.
Do you have any survey to say that the gamblers prefer bigger and more posh casino over one that give them easy credits and better pay-off? Where did I say "casino here will not attract people"? The question is how big an attraction it will be. If the attraction is small. It fails to keep the local gambling money from flowing to cruise, Batam etc. If the attraction is big, the cruise and Batam etc will try to attract new gamblers from S'pore or lure old customers back with better "services". Don't you have to think in advance what will happen if the casino is not economically viable? Can S'pore afford to have an ICONIC MUST SEE turning into an ICONIC MUST SEE failure? Is Durian econically self-sustaining? Let's be pragmatic.
So it doesn't matter if the gov casino cause more to jump?Originally posted by mannovo:u think batam do not pay any tax to anyone ? Why do u think sex and drugs will be better service, if they get to offer it at all ? And did u answer why does a bigger and more posh casino fails to attract gamblers but a lousy small old one can ? Why do u think these the casino here will not attract people when experienced casino operators bvelieved it do ? Why do u extrapolate so far as saying singapore has to pay to keep a foreign casino from operating ? Why do u think the durian is a failure ? There r people going there occasionally to go for the performance and play etc. Why do u compare the casino to the durian ?
What is the total sum then? Is the hardship caused balance the relief?Originally posted by mannovo:Before the casino is here there r already people jumping off floors and killing themselves. U think by not building one singaporean will not gamble ? They still go to genting as well isn't it ?
Is casino means "working smart"?Originally posted by mannovo:casino causes hardship yet on the other hand removes hardship for the peopel employed or depending on the casino
That is why you think so lightly about the social ills casino will cause.Originally posted by mannovo:Working smart is better than working hardOriginally posted by mannovo:No, I don't realise why does gambling be associated with drugs and sex. U think gamblers r bad hats with tattoos and gangs tat go around having sex and taking drugs ? -
Do you have any survey to say that the gamblers prefer bigger and more posh casino over one that give them easy credits and better pay-off? Where did I say "casino here will not attract people"? The question is how big an attraction it will be. If the attraction is small. It fails to keep the local gambling money from flowing to cruise, Batam etc. If the attraction is big, the cruise and Batam etc will try to attract new gamblers from S'pore or lure old customers back with better "services". Don't you have to think in advance what will happen if the casino is not economically viable? Can S'pore afford to have an ICONIC MUST SEE turning into an ICONIC MUST SEE failure? Is Durian econically self-sustaining? Let's be pragmatic.
_______________________________________________________________________
sarek_home, you obviously have not been to Las Vegas to experience the out-of-this-world opulence.
With most international airlines flying into S'pore, it's timely to develope one or more world-class integrated resorts with casinos.
Such intergrated resorts can then stage world championship events such as boxing which would be viewed by billions of viewers.
It'll be a great and effective way to promote and sell S'pore.
Please don't compare an integrated resort with a casino with "The Durian", which is altogether a different animal.
And also please stop joking about Batam illegal casinos and cruise ships competing against these mega corporations bidding to invest in the region of 2 billions US Dollars for each development.
Incidentally one of the bidders in JV with Capitaland, Kerzner who developed The Atlantis Resort/Casino in the Caribbean which is now dubbed as the 8th wonder of the world. -
Hey you smart a-r-s-e should give your arrogant opinions directly to the Bishop, why don't you?
What's with your tit-for-tat replies?
You think you're so God Damned smart is it?
You'd probably shrink in person, I bet.
why don't u write your own opinion instead fo cutting and pasting from someone else like the archbishop."dirt cheap" is why people will still go to cruise instead of the gov casino.
now it is already dirt cheap. With singapore casino, it will be free for the tourists to go. How cheaper can 'free' get ?
Is this gov going to turn S'pore into a "cruise to nowhere".That will stop part of the problem. You have no safeguards if others start serving drugs and sex and introduce more and more social ills.
I already told u the safeguard for your drug issue but u just fail to read or mention about it.Tell us what batam is taxing. You forget about cruises and illegal dens, do they pay tax? Pay to who?
given a legitimate casino operatioal, few willeb going for small or illeal dens. Why go to an ilegal den which will liable u to be caught and fine than going for a posh and beautiful casino ?Do you have any survey to say that the gamblers prefer bigger and more posh casino over one that give them easy credits and better pay-off? Where did I say "casino here will not attract people"? The question is how big an attraction it will be. If the attraction is small. It fails to keep the local gambling money from flowing to cruise, Batam etc. If the attraction is big, the cruise and Batam etc will try to attract new gamblers from S'pore or lure old customers back with better "services". Don't you have to think in advance what will happen if the casino is not economically viable? Can S'pore afford to have an ICONIC MUST SEE turning into an ICONIC MUST SEE failure? Is Durian econically self-sustaining? Let's be pragmatic.
2 billion is a lot of money for building a casino resort. It is going to be a big attraction, certainly bigger than batam etc. U want a survey on whether does bigger and more posh casino will woo over people ? I thought tis is common sense ? Even if it fails, wat have it got to do with u ? U should be glad someone spend over 2 billion to help revive the construction business in here a bit.So it doesn't matter if the gov casino cause more to jump?
so it doesn't matter the lack of casino thus resulting in poorer people and more people jumping off better ?What is the total sum then? Is the hardship caused balance the relief?
wat r u trying to say here ?Is casino means "working smart"?
building a casino to earn money from tourism is smart.That is why you think so lightly about the social ills casino will cause
why don't u elaborate ? U think gamblers r people with tattoos, join a gang, involve in drinking and beating wives or wat ? -
Catholic Archbishop Chia says casino not best strategy for development
By Asha Popatlal, Channel NewsAsia
Singapore's head of the Roman Catholic Church, Archbishop Nicholas Chia, says having a casino is not the best long-term strategy for sound economic development.
In a statement read out at all Catholic churches this weekend, he questioned whether promoting gambling is a legitimate role for the government, especially since a casino did not provide citizens with essential products, such as water and electricity.Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Disneyland, n selling yr ass also provides cash, which is essential product also wat.
casino provide cash, which is an essential productHe said gambling is known to cause considerable social and financial hardship.
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Ya, if no casino, u mean pple cannot find another job…wats with “our world-class” education, to be a grouper, u must be kidding..If there r no casino, pple will just hve to find another job..if they like casino so much, tey cld apply to Genting wat…toking thr yr ass again
casino causes hardship yet on the other hand removes hardship for the peopel employed or depending on the casinoThere is the danger of exploitation of the consumer and his weakness
.Originally posted by stupidissmart:so does drinking and smoking
.
hve u heard of drinking n smoking causes bankcruptyÂ…far n few in betweenÂ….but gamblingÂ…is addictiveÂ…on the highÂ…especially in the casino..instant gratificationsÂ…I know..cause I know the mainland ChineseÂ…tey r the biggest fish tat macau, Australia, NZ, Las vegas roll out the red carpet to tem..the whites gambles for funÂ…but the Chinese gambles like their life on itÂ…n tey come in massesÂ…And would undermine the work ethic and values of hard work.
Originally posted by stupidissmart:Working smart is better than working hard
.
Prostitutes r working smart tooÂ…so why did u not do itHe expressed concern that poor people would spend a disproportionate amount in hopes of striking gold.
Originally posted by stupidissmart:They r still going to do tat by going to cruises or genting anyway
Going there n being at yr own backyard is 2 different situation..stupidÂ…u must be a fucking civil servant tat nvr seen the worldÂ…Look..i understand why gahment must hve casino...just dot give the crabs tat its helps employment, singaporeans need to be matured..Just hve the casino..okArchbishop Chia also questioned how much greed was the motive for the casino.
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
4 greed, u sell y soul to the devilÂ…u must as well go n dieÂ…Spore is it wat it is today because we strive for independence..4 a place we can call homeÂ…4 a life worth livingÂ…to make a decent livingÂ….what kind of values can u teach yr kidsÂ…honesty, pride, respect..wat bullshitÂ….4 casino..it comes with the territory..vice, money launderingÂ…etcÂ…Yr ancestors whoever ty r, will turn their grave...n strangle u...
it was also greed tat made singapore progress till nowHe felt gambling was not reflective of a gracious society and that casino gambling should not be legalised. - CNA
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Ya, Holland also legalise drugs, a developed country, when do we do it too. Draw a line in the sandÂ…wat our ancestors have worked for, strive for..could vanished in a flashÂ…wats plan B if casino failsÂ….n after casinoÂ…wats nextÂ…the same shit argument will come frm u, stupid tat world is changingÂ….unemployment..etcÂ…
considering the fact tat most developed countries have casinos, it may not be true
We will also hve the “poor”amongst us, even the best of political party would not be able to eradicate poverty…but Spore have stand 4…a good country to bring up kids…so wats give…to hve casino 4 casino sake…Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Why do u puts words in the archbishop mouth….did he say tat..religion n state is already separate in Spore..we all know 4 a fact…but in a real democracy…pple hve choice….do we…or the “porridge is already cooked”, then why do a political “wayang”..just hve the casino cause of the economy cannot be substained…lets those we want to migrate…migrate…those who wants to work in other countries…go…fuck the winners and quitters argument…
I believe religion and states have to be seperated. This archbishop probably want the gov to stop abortion and contraceptives as well which is not for the best interest for the people. Is it fair for businessmen or people from other religion ?Casino is very different from other form of gambling like 4D and Toto. The gov, by introducing casino, is moving up to a much higher level of the gambling addition ladder.
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
So why do we hve the cemetery in yr backyardÂ…its convenientÂ…when u dieÂ…u bury u lohÂ…no different wat...hve it in krangi or yr backyard, stupid
how different is it to casinoes on cruise ships ? There r cruises everyday to nowhere, it is dirt cheap and the boarding point is even nearer than sentosa -
Las Vegas is big, you walk out from one out-of-this-world place will only find yourself with another out-of-this-world place. In S'pore, you walk out of this resort, you find reality of a busy city. It is unrealistic to think the resort will have such dramatic effect as Las Vegas.
The talk about Batam illegal casinos and cruise ships is in the context of whether gov casino will draw the local gambling money from them. It is a key issue that need to be explored and I was not joking.
Please show us a reference of this "8th wonder of the world" comment so we can put it in proper context. I am all for a 9th wonder of the world in S'pore if it bans locals like the "8th wonder". Think about it, the "8th wonder" bans the locals from the casino. How wonderful. I am all for a "intergrated resorts can then stage world championship events" but we don't need a casino that will breed more social ills for this society.Originally posted by poon pee pee:_______________________________________________________________________
sarek_home, you obviously have not been to Las Vegas to experience the out-of-this-world opulence.
With most international airlines flying into S'pore, it's timely to develope one or more world-class integrated resorts with casinos.
Such intergrated resorts can then stage world championship events such as boxing which would be viewed by billions of viewers.
It'll be a great and effective way to promote and sell S'pore.
Please don't compare an integrated resort with a casino with "The Durian", which is altogether a different animal.
And also please stop joking about Batam illegal casinos and cruise ships competing against these mega corporations bidding to invest in the region of 2 billions US Dollars for each development.
Incidentally one of the bidders in JV with Capitaland, Kerzner who developed The Atlantis Resort/Casino in the Caribbean which is now dubbed as the 8th wonder of the world. -
Disneyland, n selling yr ass also provides cash, which is essential product also wat.
finding an oilfield in singapore also give us cash, but it is never found. It is the same as disneyland. Since u can't make them come here why talk about it ?Ya, if no casino, u mean pple cannot find another job…wats with “our world-class” education, to be a grouper, u must be kidding..If there r no casino, pple will just hve to find another job..if they like casino so much, tey cld apply to Genting wat…toking thr yr ass again
if there is 100 jobs in a town with 200 people finding jobs, no matter how u displace there will aways be 100 out of job. The best way to solve tis problem is to develop more jobs to raise 100 jobs to 150 or 200hve u heard of drinking n smoking causes bankcruptyÂ…far n few in betweenÂ….but gamblingÂ…is addictiveÂ…on the highÂ…especially in the casino..instant gratificationsÂ…I know..cause I know the mainland ChineseÂ…tey r the biggest fish tat macau, Australia, NZ, Las vegas roll out the red carpet to tem..the whites gambles for funÂ…but the Chinese gambles like their life on itÂ…n tey come in massesÂ…
have u heard of gambling giving u cancer ? Have u heard of gambling poisoning other people with your "aura" (meant for smoking) ? Have u heard of people gambling and then drive, causing accidents ? Com'on, the different vices gives very different problems. Since u know tat chiense like to gamble, then why not make use of tis opportunity to improve our economy ?Prostitutes r working smart tooÂ…so why did u not do it
so u prefer to employ coolies to carry sacks of rice or simply buy a machine to do it ?Going there n being at yr own backyard is 2 different situation..stupidÂ…u must be a &^!#ing civil servant tat nvr seen the worldÂ…Look..i understand why gahment must hve casino...just dot give the crabs tat its helps employment, singaporeans need to be matured..Just hve the casino..ok
the port where u go for the cruise casinoes is already at your backyard. Is harbourfront further than sentosa ? BTW I am not a civil servant4 greed, u sell y soul to the devilÂ…u must as well go n dieÂ…Spore is it wat it is today because we strive for independence..4 a place we can call homeÂ…4 a life worth livingÂ…to make a decent livingÂ….what kind of values can u teach yr kidsÂ…honesty, pride, respect..wat bull%!$%Â….4 casino..it comes with the territory..vice, money launderingÂ…etcÂ…Yr ancestors whoever ty r, will turn their grave...n strangle u...
singapore is here today because we promote meritocracy and with greed as a motlivation, pushes the people to work harder. U want a home, a life worth living etc is also greed in another sense. If there is no greed element in, u probably just live in a 1 room HDB from the gov and working a relax but poorly paid job. Toobad most people want to have a condo to live, travel every year or want a big posh car tat drives them to work.Ya, Holland also legalise drugs, a developed country, when do we do it too. Draw a line in the sandÂ…wat our ancestors have worked for, strive for..could vanished in a flashÂ…wats plan B if casino failsÂ….n after casinoÂ…wats nextÂ…the same %!$% argument will come frm u, stupid tat world is changingÂ….unemployment..etcÂ…
holland is just one contry. I am saying most developed countries have casinoes. US have it, england have it, australia have it, korea have it, japan have it and even malaysia have it. Why talk about a single country ?We will also hve the “poor”amongst us, even the best of political party would not be able to eradicate poverty…but Spore have stand 4…a good country to bring up kids…so wats give…to hve casino 4 casino sake…
Having a turf club and floating casinoes still make here a good place to live in and raise kids, why wil adding in a casino worsen the situation ?Why do u puts words in the archbishop mouth….did he say tat..religion n state is already separate in Spore..we all know 4 a fact…but in a real democracy…pple hve choice….do we…or the “porridge is already cooked”, then why do a political “wayang”..just hve the casino cause of the economy cannot be substained…lets those we want to migrate…migrate…those who wants to work in other countries…go…&^!# the winners and quitters argument…
I never say he said tat religion and state should be seperated. I am telling u tat it is and should be seperated. If u felt tat singapore is not democractic enough, then please feel free to participate in the long thread of democracy here.So why do we hve the cemetery in yr backyardÂ…its convenientÂ…when u dieÂ…u bury u lohÂ…no different wat...hve it in krangi or yr backyard, stupid
singapore have only very few crematorium which is very far from the central area yet it is good enough to burn out all the dead here.Las Vegas is big, you walk out from one out-of-this-world place will only find yourself with another out-of-this-world place. In S'pore, you walk out of this resort, you find reality of a busy city. It is unrealistic to think the resort will have such dramatic effect as Las Vegas.
there r many casinoes which r located in residential areas. I believe the las vegas thingy is to tell u tat big and posh casinoes brign in peopleThink about it, the "8th wonder" bans the locals from the casino. How wonderful.
wat do it help if the other 8th wonder of the world like genting and cruise ships admit in the locals here ? -
The tourists will have to pay for air-fare, airport tax, hotel room etc to come to enjoy this "free" entry. Quite expensive indeed. Cruise can certainly afford to give out "dirt cheap" tickets free if they want to.
I already reminded you blacklisting cruise only solve a small part of the problems.Originally posted by stupidissmart:now it is already dirt cheap. With singapore casino, it will be free for the tourists to go. How cheaper can 'free' get ?
Better pay-off and easy credit attract. The risk of being caught is just part of the gamble. They are gamblers.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I already told u the safeguard for your drug issue but u just fail to read or mention about it.
You think all gamblers are the same? While posh casino will appeal to some, better pay-off and easy credit attract others. That is common sense. You think there is no consequence to S'pore if a 2 Billion dollar investment fails? Can we afford to have a 2 billion ICONIC MUST SEE failure in one of S'pore prime area?Originally posted by stupidissmart:given a legitimate casino operatioal, few willeb going for small or illeal dens. Why go to an ilegal den which will liable u to be caught and fine than going for a posh and beautiful casino ?
Why are you extrapolating "the lack of casino thus resulting in poorer people and more people jumping off"? Provide some reports to support your extraplotion.Originally posted by stupidissmart:2 billion is a lot of money for building a casino resort. It is going to be a big attraction, certainly bigger than batam etc. U want a survey on whether does bigger and more posh casino will woo over people ? I thought tis is common sense ? Even if it fails, wat have it got to do with u ? U should be glad someone spend over 2 billion to help revive the construction business in here a bit.
Building a casino to breed social ills bad idea.Originally posted by stupidissmart:
so it doesn't matter the lack of casino thus resulting in poorer people and more people jumping off better ?
Building a resort to earn money from tourism is smart.
If you haven't understand, it will not help if I elaborate. There are many types of drugs from designer drugs to heroin. There are many types of sex workers from high class escorts to street hookers. There are also many types of gamblers from posh casino visitors to gambling dens regulars.Originally posted by stupidissmart:building a casino to earn money from tourism is smart.Originally posted by stupidissmart:why don't u elaborate ? U think gamblers r people with tattoos, join a gang, involve in drinking and beating wives or wat ? -
The tourists will have to pay for air-fare, airport tax, hotel room etc to come to enjoy this "free" entry. Quite expensive indeed. Cruise can certainly afford to give out "dirt cheap" tickets free if they want to.
if it is about tourists then u will have little against them coming here for gambling. I am talking about the localsI already reminded you blacklisting cruise only solve a small part of the problems.
why won't it solves all the problem since no cruise ships will be serving drugs around ?Better pay-off and easy credit attract. The risk of being caught is just part of the gamble. They are gamblers.
gamblers don't find it fun to be caught. They only find interest in winning money. On your better pay off, they can't make it much better beyond 100:98. U think the odds of winning in a posh casino is very different compared with the illegal ones ? Isn't gamblng in a safer place where u can keep your earning without fear of being caught or beaten, making it having a higher payoff than illegal dens ?You think all gamblers are the same? While posh casino will appeal to some, better pay-off and easy credit attract others. That is common sense. You think there is no consequence to S'pore if a 2 Billion dollar investment fails? Can we afford to have a 2 billion ICONIC MUST SEE failure in one of S'pore prime area?
most gamblers r pretty much human and r the same. do u think the people who send in the 19 proposals r blockheads and invest in 2 billions to see it fail ? they see a potential profit here ! wat is the consequences for a 2 billion investment from overseas tat fail ? Wat is the consequences for singapore if it succeeds ? I guess singaporean really need to be trained to handle risks.Why are you extrapolating "the lack of casino thus resulting in poorer people and more people jumping off"? Provide some reports to support your extraplotion.
the point is will a lack of casino make singapore generally poorer.Building a casino to breed social ills bad idea.
building an oilfield is even smarter. Too bad NO ONE want to build an oilfield nor a RESORT in singapore. COm'on they have been asking people to build one for 10 over years. NO ONE came. NO ONE.
Building a resort to earn money from tourism is smart.If you haven't understand, it will not help if I elaborate. There are many types of drugs from designer drugs to heroin. There are many types of sex workers from high class escorts to street hookers. There are also many types of gamblers from posh casino visitors to gambling dens regulars.
the question is on why u put drugs and prostitution together with gambling ? u seems to answer ina different manner here. -
Dec 17, 2004
Casinos: Economic costs as big as any benefits
By Yeoh Lam Keong
For The Straits Times
THE integrated casino resort project (ICR) has been proposed
principally to re-energise Singapore's flagging tourism industry.
On its surface, the model looks seductive. Only 30 to 50 per cent of
the project is supposed to be centred on gaming. The bulk of the
revenues from the $2 billion investment, we are told, should, as in
Atlantis or Las Vegas, come from an alluring infrastructure of
high-end hotels, world-class entertainment, restaurants and convention
facilities that would also synergistically benefit tourism as a whole.
.......................
Tempting
LIKE its high rolling namesake, the ICR project looks tempting. A much
darker picture, however, emerges if one looks at its economic costs.
First, while the benefits are potentially large (Prof Koh estimates
the ICR can add 0.3 to 1 per cent of GDP), the costs are equally big.
Cost benefit studies of Australia's experience in gaming estimate a
sum of between A$1.8 billion (S$2.3 billion) and A$5.6 billion on both
the benefits and costs sides of the ledger.
Australian Productivity Commission (APC) listed the following among
the main costs: Bankruptcy, loss of work productivity, job losses,
police incidents, court cases, divorce and violence. The impact on
family dysfunction and breakdown is obvious.
The APC found that 96 per cent of problem gamblers suffered from
depression, 58 per cent have considered suicide and 14 per cent had
attempted it. Half spent over 50 per cent of their income on their vice.
.......................
Can regulation reduce these costs? Can limiting access to casinos to
high-rolling tourists or to rich citizens, for example, reduce the
number of problem gamblers? Can't Singapore have its cake and eat it too?
Unfortunately, the economics of the gaming industry work against this.
To begin with, the bulk of most casinos' clientele tend to be local
residents - usually 70 per cent to 80 per cent even in
tourist-intensive locations like Australia or Genting, in Malaysia.
Atlantis and Las Vegas, which rely principally on non-residents or
foreign tourists, are not at all typical examples.
In Singapore's case, the greater the regulation of locals, the greater
will be the implicit 'tax' on its ICR as compared to less regulated
regional gaming establishments. Over time, the more intense the
regional competition gets, the more financially unviable will local
regulation become. After sinking more than $2 billion into such a
project, there is likely to be increasing pressure to relax or dilute
restrictions on local clientele so the ICR can be competitive with
other casinos in the region, subject to fewer restrictions. The
financial viability of the local casino may require the acceptance of
high levels of local misery.
Unseen threat
IN ADDITION, the ICR, by its very nature, will pose an unseen threat
to the very tourism infrastructure it is designed to energise. This is
because ICR-type operations typically subsidise the hotel,
entertainment and other facilities attached to the casino. Often, such
facilities barely break even or may even lose money, but the project
as a whole is supported by the gaming profits from the clientele that
such facilities draw.
.......................
It is in these more common cases that the ICR could become a Trojan
horse, with a potentially destructive impact on the local hospitality
industry because of its massive non-gaming infrastructure. Being
heavily subsidised, these facilities could damage surrounding hotels,
entertainment venues or convention places. Around Sky City, Auckland,
for example, hotel rates have fallen around 10 per cent due to
competition from the casino's cheap subsidised hotels.
.......................
Given these risks, to describe the ICR as an 'option' that Singapore
might like to buy, as some of its defenders have described it, may be
misleading. Instead, the project is perhaps more accurately
characterised, in financial market parlance, as the selling of an
'uncovered option'. Besides the certain social costs and the big
initial investment involved in purchasing this 'option', the total
losses to the economy as a whole could be unexpectedly large,
open-ended and extend over an indefinite time horizon, as in the case
of the sale of an 'uncovered option' gone wrong.
.......................
Would we not be diluting our tourism branding by moving closer to the
niches occupied by gaming cities like Las Vegas and Macau? Is this
what we want as a key part of our tourism strategy, let alone in
setting the tone for Singapore's social policy?
ICR proponents argue that gambling of all sorts is already rampant in
Singapore. Professor Peter Collins, Director of the Centre for the
Study of Commercial Gaming in Britain, estimates that gambling per
capita in Singapore is already among the highest in the world.
Establishing an ICR, its proponents argue, could capture some of the
business now lost to cruises and foreign casinos, and raise tax
revenues that can be used for social good as well as to rehabilitate
the worst effects of problem gambling.
Regulation
FRANKLY, I find this argument rather weak. The existing scale of
gambling is primarily determined by social policy and regulation
rather than dictated by local consumer taste.
In regulated France, for example, spending on gaming forms only 1.3
per cent of GDP. Compare this to a similarly rich, but less regulated
country like Japan, where 'pachinko' gaming turnover alone forms a
whopping 6.7 per cent of GDP.
Unlike Japan, Singapore is not desperate for alternative fiscal revenues.
To my mind, the admittedly high existing per capita spending on
gambling in Singapore is not an argument for establishing yet another
gaming venue in the form of a legal high-end casino.
Rather, it is a much stronger argument for a careful review of
regulation of existing gaming facilities - including legal 4D,
'football clubs' with their gaming machines and illegal gambling - as
well as of the adequacy of counselling, education and community
support for existing problem gamblers.
Although superficially compelling, the ICR project, with its dark and
hidden costs, is a Faustian bargain. And as with most such bargains,
the devil lurks in the details.
The writer is Director of Economics and Strategy at the Government of
Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) and Vice-President of the
Economic Society of Singapore (ESS). The views expressed here are his
own and do not represent those of either the GIC or the ESS.
.......................
Copyright © 2004 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved.
Privacy Statement & Condition of Access. -
I'm talking about the Las Vegas opulence which the 19 contenders are trying to convince our government that they will develope.Originally posted by sarek_home:Las Vegas is big, you walk out from one out-of-this-world place will only find yourself with another out-of-this-world place. In S'pore, you walk out of this resort, you find reality of a busy city. It is unrealistic to think the resort will have such dramatic effect as Las Vegas.
The talk about Batam illegal casinos and cruise ships is in the context of whether gov casino will draw the local gambling money from them. It is a key issue that need to be explored and I was not joking.
Please show us a reference of this "8th wonder of the world" comment so we can put it in proper context. I am all for a 9th wonder of the world in S'pore if it bans locals like the "8th wonder". Think about it, the "8th wonder" bans the locals from the casino. How wonderful. I am all for a "intergrated resorts can then stage world championship events" but we don't need a casino that will breed more social ills for this society.
How can S'pore compare with Vegas, a city that never sleeps....not from the local population of 2.5 millions, but contributed by the 38 - 40 millions tourists who visit annually.
Cheating to beat the punters by illegal casinos in Batam is quite rampant....and it can also happen in cruise ships because they are not regulated.
Please try to comprehend the word "dubbed" when I used it to describe The Alantis Casino/Resort as the 8th wonder of the world.
No mega corporation in their frame of mind would come to develope a two billion US Dollars world-class integrated resort without a casino in S'pore.
You talk about possible failure.....why don't you engage your brain ask yourself why there 19 international mega corporations bidding to develope the integrated resort/casino in S'pore? -
"On Monday, the Government announced a 10-year target to double tourism
arrivals from 8.3 million to 17 million, and triple tourism spending
from $9.6 billion to $30 billion."
Where do your "38 - 40 millions tourists" come from when gov only target 17 mill in 10 yrs?
Why don't you spell out why they would not "develope a two billion US Dollars world-class integrated resort without a casino in S'pore".
The "international mega corporations bidding to develope the integrated resort/casino in S'pore" because they want to use S'pore as the thin edge of the wedge to open up the region so they can build more casinos in the region where the real big money come.Originally posted by poon pee pee:..............
How can S'pore compare with Vegas, a city that never sleeps....not from the local population of 2.5 millions, but contributed by the 38 - 40 millions tourists who visit annually.
..............
No mega corporation in their frame of mind would come to develope a two billion US Dollars world-class integrated resort without a casino in S'pore.
You talk about possible failure.....why don't you engage your brain ask yourself why there 19 international mega corporations bidding to develope the integrated resort/casino in S'pore? -
"On Monday, the Government announced a 10-year target to double tourism
he is probably talking about las vegas where its population is about 1.7 million and tourists is 35.8 million in 2000. Given the projected growth in tourism, it is not surprising for it to be 38-40 million
arrivals from 8.3 million to 17 million, and triple tourism spending
from $9.6 billion to $30 billion."
Where do your "38 - 40 millions tourists" come from when gov only target 17 mill in 10 yrs?
http://www.aiaconvention.com/live/61/events/61LAS05A/SN887863/CC714166Why don't you spell out why they would not "develope a two billion US Dollars world-class integrated resort without a casino in S'pore".
because they have many better places to build a 2 billion dollars resort. Every coutries in the world r begging investors to build such a resort in their countries.The "international mega corporations bidding to develope the integrated resort/casino in S'pore" because they want to use S'pore as the thin edge of the wedge to open up the region so they can build more casinos in the region where the real big money come.
tis is your own assumption. they probably want to earn the money directly in singapore and not waiting for others to open up. why wait ? If waiting is wat they want then they shouldn't bid, let the other companies bid for them and wait till the cows come home
anyway about yoru article... much of it was already been mentioned here and there. -
Casino is illegal in S'pore
Under the existing law,casino is illegal in S'pore.But the govt can 'break' the law if it wants to approve one
-
Under the existing law,casino is illegal in S'pore.But the govt can 'break' the law if it wants to approve one
policies change with time. In the past women r not allowed to vote. So should we blamed their gov for breaking the law when women start to vote ? -
Originally posted by PRP:
there is something call legislation
Casino is illegal in S'pore
[b]Under the existing law,casino is illegal in S'pore.But the govt can 'break' the law if it wants to approve one [/b]
-
Sorry to say that you don't and you can't understand what I'm trying to relate in plain simple English.Originally posted by sarek_home:"On Monday, the Government announced a 10-year target to double tourism
arrivals from 8.3 million to 17 million, and triple tourism spending
from $9.6 billion to $30 billion."
Where do your "38 - 40 millions tourists" come from when gov only target 17 mill in 10 yrs?
Why don't you spell out why they would not "develope a two billion US Dollars world-class integrated resort without a casino in S'pore".
The "international mega corporations bidding to develope the integrated resort/casino in S'pore" because they want to use S'pore as the thin edge of the wedge to open up the region so they can build more casinos in the region where the real big money come.
You are arguing out of context and worse still, you make all kinds of silly assumptions.
I've wasted enough time with you and I am not going to waste another minute of my time. -
Note that the writer of this letter has failed to adderss the illegal gambling establishment, which is rife and very much alive here: people are losing their shirts over these establishments, and they also borrow heavily to spend on their addiction. Going by your arguments, these should also contribute to the high suicide rates.Originally posted by sarek_home:Casino is very different from other form of gambling like 4D and Toto. The gov, by introducing casino, is moving up to a much higher level of the gambling addition ladder.
==========
Dec 15, 2004
THE CASINO DEBATE
Can S'pore tackle massive addiction?
A MAJOR argument for the establishment of a casino in Singapore is
that we already have several forms of gambling, so a casino will not
change anything.
However, legalised gambling in a casino cannot be compared to current
forms of legalised gambling due to the difference in the time-frame of
gratification, from the placing of a bet to the settling of the bet.
In the case of a Singapore Sweep lottery ticket, it takes from a few
days to a few weeks from the buying of the ticket to the release of
the results - and gratification of the gambling. Buying 4-D or Toto
takes from a few hours to a few days to achieve gratification.
Would it be a surprise if I tell you that research shows that the
shorter the time to gratification, the higher the chance of addiction?
Hence, there are more people addicted to 4-D and Toto than there are
those addicted to Singapore Sweep.
Now imagine the time-frame shortened by an order of magnitude in a
casino. From the time a gambler places a bet to the time the bet is
settled, gratification occurs in mere seconds. Indeed, for jackpot
machines, the timeframe may even be in milliseconds.
You can place more than one million bets in a casino in the time taken
to settle one Singapore Sweep lottery-ticket bet.
With that short a time-frame to gratification, a casino will cause a
massive increase in gambling addiction.
Thus, gambling in a casino is significantly different from current
legalised gambling in Singapore.
If we ignore the moral and economic aspects of the casino issue, it
boils down to this: 'Is Singapore prepared for the massive increase in
gambling addiction that will come with the setting up of a casino?'
Thomas Sim Wai Tat (Dr)
Copyright © 2004 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved.
Privacy Statement & Condition of Access.
A legal casino would bring the entire industry into the lime-light, and allow it to be regulated, just like smoking is controlled by heavy taxes. Even without a legal casino, people would still continue to bet in illegal casinos and rack up the same social problems. We shouldn't wait for the press to highlight these cases before we are aware of them. -
It is definitely encouraging that people are taking an active interest in the casino issue.
However, there is a disturbing trend that is both uncourteous and also bad for the welfare of this thread.
Please do not engage in personal flamming and attacks on others' character. Not only is it childish behaviour, it also degrades the level of debate on this thread.
Let's keep the arguments to the main topic.