View Poll Results: Casino or not?

Voters
91. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    33 36.26%
  • No

    54 59.34%
  • Dunno

    4 4.40%
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 101

Thread: Casino or not?

  1. #1

    Default Casino or not?

    want to see the views of singaporeans

  2. #2

    Default

    no matter how many polls held anywhere and with the media wanting to get singaporeans to debate and talk abt it, its not like as if any of these views are gonna inspire the local government here to make a decision based on those suggestions... i think we should get the decision in less than a week from now according to the news...

  3. #3

  4. #4
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Planet Nikon
    Posts
    21,905

    Default

    It's so obvious it will be done regardless of what SGeans think... it's extra income for ... *ahem* get it?

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by espn
    It's so obvious it will be done regardless of what SGeans think... it's extra income for ... *ahem* get it?
    well said espn. i dunnoe abt the extra income part lar, i also dun wan to make any assumptions with baseless ground, but coming back, since when did they did anything with regards to the thoughts and views that is being churned out by the many brain cells of singaporeans...

  6. #6

    Default

    I think that the govt. has no more ideas to regenerate interest in Singapore, so they have to resort to building a "mega-resort" featuring a casino.

    So far, the only other "creative" employment they have is "restructured" cleaning jobs.

  7. #7
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Planet Nikon
    Posts
    21,905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jonlou
    well said espn. i dunnoe abt the extra income part lar, i also dun wan to make any assumptions with baseless ground, but coming back, since when did they did anything with regards to the thoughts and views that is being churned out by the many brain cells of singaporeans...
    They only have to do it once to say they do listen, remember Chek Jawa? After that, they've been quoting it as example they do listen, but it's just once... and they use it forever.

    Just wait and see, it will be gone ahead...

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by espn
    They only have to do it once to say they do listen, remember Chek Jawa? After that, they've been quoting it as example they do listen, but it's just once... and they use it forever.

    Just wait and see, it will be gone ahead...
    aiyah.... one side in, one side out lar... only chek jawa in already dunnoe why stuck inside lor... dun really wan to drag the politics in at the end of the day... if not the thread is gonna be even longer than the sentosa one, in fact, longer than the actual sentosa island lar i tell u...

  9. #9
    Senior Member glennyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,587

    Default

    i juz dun like the idea one single bit. Casino is a big nono for singapore. and i for one will stand to my ground till i am dead.

    NO.

  10. #10
    Senior Member denniskee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    bukit batok
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    I voted yes for reasons below :

    1) Our citizens are frequently going to the cruse & genting to gamble anyway, & how much do they spend per trip?

    2) In a week, how many times & how much they spend on 4D, TOTO, Scratch, Horse Racing, Soccer betting?

    3) Look @ the situation here, manufacturing are moving out, ie less jobs, worse have to compete with foriegn talents for the jobs, so Casino island can create alot more jobs, together with the hotels and amusement park.

    4) Singapore is so small, most of our tourist attraction are more of a 1 time visit is enough. Having Casino helps.

    5) If one can control how frequent & how much to spend on gabling as of now (1) & (2), they should be able to control their spending when visiting the Casino.
    photography makes one sees things from all angles.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    upper thomson
    Posts
    183

    Default

    if the casino can decrease GST, income tax, this tax that tax, wadever taxes. then yes...

  12. #12

    Lightbulb

    firstly, i want the monies paid by the developers to the govt to go towards the people of singapore, eg. funding an unemployment benefits scheme, fund an elderly health insurance scheme, among others.

    it should not go towards boosting the govt's reserves, again.
    Last edited by reachme2003; 11th April 2005 at 08:36 AM.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    In this small world
    Posts
    3,142

    Default

    Are you guys afraid? What you guys are afraid of? A casino? I am not afraid of moving to analog MF cameras instead of following the trend like many who wanna go digital.


    Same thing here. If gambling is the trend, are you a follower or you go your own way? If you are not a gambler why bother whether it is built or not? If you are a gambler what difference does it make to build it? You will not gamble if you are not a gambler and you will still gamble if you are one even if it is built.


    When I see the interview on this guy who collected 29K signatures online, I find that it is a BIG joke. How many of those 29K are really sincere in opposing the move to build one? 29K out of 3 million++ (1%?) is a BIG joke when you consider the 500K out of 6 millions++ (12%?) you see in HongKong physically in 2004.


    End of the day, it will still be built as those who oppose gambling (the religious group mainly) will not gamble and we will get REAL attractions for inflow of money from our dear foreigners when HK have Disney, Japan have Disney and Universal Studio, Thailand have their history and culture, likewise for Laos, Burma, Cambodia and in particular China. Even Philippines has something else more than Singapore.


    "Singapore, is it a part of China?" is the biggest joke I have heard for Singapore, an insult to my heart.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    In this small world
    Posts
    3,142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fuzzy
    if the casino can decrease GST, income tax, this tax that tax, wadever taxes. then yes...
    That is impossible. If you run the country like George Bush (yeah Booshi.t) or some Capitalism way, you can get ready to move to another country very soon.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    In this small world
    Posts
    3,142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reachme2003
    firstly, i want the monies paid by the developers to the govt to go towards the people of singapore, eg. funding an unemployment benefits scheme, fund an elderly health insurance scheme, among others.

    That will be scary, VERY scary.

    1. Unemployment Benefits
    People will have no motivation to work. There will be more and more people who are unemployed will be less motivated to work. How many people are unemployed now? 60K for a start? Each person give $500 per month, one year you will need $360 million to support. I rather spend these $360 million to train people so they can get back into the workforce.

    2. Elderly Health Insurance Scheme
    They have their own CPF and Insurance scheme. Those that cannot are now being funded by charity. If you start this thing, people will be relying on the government more and more. Do not forget the population is getting older and with this system the tax will be more and more. Instead of relying on this we should plan early.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theITguy
    Are you guys afraid? What you guys are afraid of? A casino? I am not afraid of moving to analog MF cameras instead of following the trend like many who wanna go digital.
    your example would actually support NOT having a casino. since having a casino is the trend, singapore should be brave enough to buck the trend.

    Same thing here. If gambling is the trend, are you a follower or you go your own way? If you are not a gambler why bother whether it is built or not? If you are a gambler what difference does it make to build it? You will not gamble if you are not a gambler and you will still gamble if you are one even if it is built.
    gamblers are made, not born. give people the opportunity or temptation and they may get addicted. true, we have 4D, TOTO, horse racing etc, but no one can gamble 24/7 in these forms of gambling unlike the casinos with their super-addictive jackpot machines for example. i won't be surprised if some people actually camp inside the casino playing jackpot machines for days on end.

    When I see the interview on this guy who collected 29K signatures online, I find that it is a BIG joke. How many of those 29K are really sincere in opposing the move to build one? 29K out of 3 million++ (1%?) is a BIG joke when you consider the 500K out of 6 millions++ (12%?) you see in HongKong physically in 2004.
    ask yourself, why wasn't a national referendum called so that all singaporeans can vote on the issue? where is the sincerity of the powers that be? in the absence of any referendum, and with the widespread belief that the casino is already a done deal, the fact that someone actually bothered to gather signatures for a petition is an encouraging sign that some singaporeans are prepared to stand up publicly for their views.

    End of the day, it will still be built as those who oppose gambling (the religious group mainly) will not gamble and we will get REAL attractions for inflow of money from our dear foreigners when HK have Disney, Japan have Disney and Universal Studio, Thailand have their history and culture, likewise for Laos, Burma, Cambodia and in particular China. Even Philippines has something else more than Singapore.
    singapore can do much more in improving its attractiveness to tourists. for example, singapore can be the food and shopping capital of south east asia. improve our service standards and courtesy, from taxi drivers all the way to sales staff at SLS, and tourists will come back for more. i know many people who travel to hong kong regularly to shop and eat, not to visit ocean park or gamble.

    "Singapore, is it a part of China?" is the biggest joke I have heard for Singapore, an insult to my heart.
    "singapore needs a casino badly" is a bigger joke that i have heard, and insults my heart and my reason.
    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by denniskee
    I voted yes for reasons below :

    1) Our citizens are frequently going to the cruse & genting to gamble anyway, & how much do they spend per trip?

    2) In a week, how many times & how much they spend on 4D, TOTO, Scratch, Horse Racing, Soccer betting?

    3) Look @ the situation here, manufacturing are moving out, ie less jobs, worse have to compete with foriegn talents for the jobs, so Casino island can create alot more jobs, together with the hotels and amusement park.

    4) Singapore is so small, most of our tourist attraction are more of a 1 time visit is enough. Having Casino helps.

    5) If one can control how frequent & how much to spend on gabling as of now (1) & (2), they should be able to control their spending when visiting the Casino.
    I think this is a rather flimsy logic though use in many cases to justify the building of the casino. The fact is that gambling can be a form of addicition and the ill effects are something that can be quite intangible and hard to manage once it goes out of hand. If the above reason are how we justify the building of casino, i think we can use the same reason to justify having a bigger red light district, or how about legalise designer drugs? Ultimately i think the reason they will go ahead with the casino is all about $$$, if they are more capable with other means of making $$$, casion won't be considered at all. Just my thoughts.

  18. #18
    Senior Member Big Kahuna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    I will say "Yes" for economy reason

    How I wish I got money to buy a few bangalow near Sentosa coves Rich will get richer

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wiki
    I think this is a rather flimsy logic though use in many cases to justify the building of the casino. The fact is that gambling can be a form of addicition and the ill effects are something that can be quite intangible and hard to manage once it goes out of hand. If the above reason are how we justify the building of casino, i think we can use the same reason to justify having a bigger red light district, or how about legalise designer drugs? Ultimately i think the reason they will go ahead with the casino is all about $$$, if they are more capable with other means of making $$$, casion won't be considered at all. Just my thoughts.
    Why not, if the business is lucrative enough, events like orchard sex parade is possible. Well, Singaporeans are very forgetful people, after sometime they will forget about it and start voting for the government again.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ahbeng
    Why not, if the business is lucrative enough, events like orchard sex parade is possible. Well, Singaporeans are very forgetful people, after sometime they will forget about it and start voting for the government again.
    Precisely! This is the problem that i find disturbing. They tends to look only at the money factor rather than the social ills. Those who agree to it in this forum also just look at it from the economy gains. If that is the case, i think we might as well become a sex city and a major exporter in drugs. maybe we can even get a home license to grow poppy flowers??

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •