share the country pride by paying $100 ???
- Thread starter ggodetucsamoht
- Start date
It is not a lousy system, it is an Unfair system that discriminates Citizens and PRs against FW and students.
Considering that it is for a good cause, A blanket levy for all "residents" would have been more appealing.
Considering that it is for a good cause, A blanket levy for all "residents" would have been more appealing.
Last edited:
why dont YOU tell us your positive views?
more jobs, more income, more vibrancy, more benefits? ... :think:
my view is always that Casino Gambling on a national scale is good only during bad times to bring in benefits from foreigners, but one day when the economy is good, and when citizens are having good income, then you will see what will happen to many of us. If only you have seen hardcore gamblers, and how they destroy their lives and those around them, then you'll understand, my friend.
Of course it doesn't matter to me because we dont gamble but in the long term, it will affect lots of young people growing old .... see the effect in a generation or two. :dunno:
... is gambling the only thing you can think of? the $100 levy is to protect singaporeans to deter them from going.
go head and continue grumbling. It's our national fav past time after 4-D and TOTO to complain after all. dude you are in the wrong forum. post it on stomp please!!
btw as for your thought on jobs etc. Everyone will hire the guy who accepts the job for the least pay. It's all about Singaporeans willing or NOT to step out of their comfort zone.
Anyway, to start with, we all all born into this world unfair so QUIT bitching
Last edited:
is this the only shortcut you can understand about the whole issue? I asked for your positive views and you said I am bitching?:dunno:
Just think (if you are able to) for a moment: why is there a need for this $100 levy if entering a Casino does not bring harm?
Now, think again: where is your cheese? :think:
now if the money from the $100 levy goes to a social security fund that is collected and then used to take care of old folks who have no next of kin to take care of them then why not? it will reduce social burdens and what's more better to give to the needy than to lose them in some overseas investment. At least the money stays in the country and is spent in the country which in turn will improve our local economy.
simple simple, veeeeery simple.....do like what malaysia did with genting...ban totally people from playing. if malaysia can ban muslims from entering, singapore can also ban singaporeans from entering....problem solved. no singaporean go in, no harm done. no harm done, no increase in crime rate. hahhaaah!!!!!!!!!
but but....every person do know rite that the crime rate in singapore is directly attributed to FTs rite (okay okay....a certain percentages oni...but hey, with the big hullabaloo in the papers, people would get the perception that all crimes insingapore were commited by foreigners.)? so...if FT can blow their money at the casinos....hmmm....and singaporeans has to bail them out with public funds....hmmmmm...... i don get this point...shouldn't it be the other way round? FT pay 100 to enter?
OH WAIT! I forgot! if FT has to pay to enter, there wont be an increase in tourist arrivals coz they have to pay to enter a place where they will spend millions each year!!! what for? paying people to give them money? if anything, they should be paid to give out so much money! i see i see....hmmmm.....profit...profit......i understand liou......
but but....every person do know rite that the crime rate in singapore is directly attributed to FTs rite (okay okay....a certain percentages oni...but hey, with the big hullabaloo in the papers, people would get the perception that all crimes insingapore were commited by foreigners.)? so...if FT can blow their money at the casinos....hmmm....and singaporeans has to bail them out with public funds....hmmmmm...... i don get this point...shouldn't it be the other way round? FT pay 100 to enter?
OH WAIT! I forgot! if FT has to pay to enter, there wont be an increase in tourist arrivals coz they have to pay to enter a place where they will spend millions each year!!! what for? paying people to give them money? if anything, they should be paid to give out so much money! i see i see....hmmmm.....profit...profit......i understand liou......
Last edited:
Yap you're right not all foreigners gamble.. and it's no need.. Sing gov is not stupid, they already think about it..
IMO this casino is not meant for gamblers but more for money laundry from other neighbor countries.. those corrupt people from neighbor countries can come as tourist and change their "dirty money" into coin and it's not traceable.
you think Singapore can become like this (read: "rich") with no natural resources is because of what? *i bet you know the answer*
another sweeping statement that is made without thinking.
one more thing... please define what FT means; Foreign Talent? Foreign Tourist? what?
My Maid recently went missing for 12 hours after collecting her hong bao. Turned out she went to Casino to play.
i guess places like Lucky Plaza will be deserted soon :bsmilie:
and not forgetting Golden Mile, Peninsula Plaza and Mustafa too... :bsmilie:
Last edited:
Sometimes I hoped that the 100 bucks would be increased to cost an arm or leg for the locals and residents that they stay far away from it.
The levy on entering the casino as well as self and family barring system is a post-mortem device as it addresses only known gambling addicts and problems. It does not help in addressing the problems arising from the formation of new generation of gambling addicts or its formation. So why do we place a post mortem device on a vice when we could have avoided the vice altogether?
On the point that the revenue being channelled towards helping the society, unless we know exactly where and how the revenue is being distributed for our societal development, there is no way to believe that the society actually gained from it- at least from the revenue generated. Has anyone seen the any public financial report on spendings from the Tote board, Singapore Pools and Turf Club?
On creating indirect and direct jobs, is there any data on newly created employment? What is the ratio between Singaporeans and FTs being hired in lieu of this pool of employment? What is the median wage of these professionals compared to our nation average as well as to their home operations?
Someone had his letter to the ST forum published yesterday and I found him explaining very well in simple terms how Casinos are more dangerous than pools and turf club:
"You can have 60 games in 1 minute in a casino, but not pools and turf club. Mathematical odds dictate that the longer you play, the higher and more you will lose." - paraphased.
The casino in my opinion is an attempt to market Singapore, generate more revenue for the top while losing focus on the strategic knowledge based economy development and creating higher societal and protection costs in real dollars and intangible costs as well as contravening the very values and beliefs systems that has seen us this far.
The levy on entering the casino as well as self and family barring system is a post-mortem device as it addresses only known gambling addicts and problems. It does not help in addressing the problems arising from the formation of new generation of gambling addicts or its formation. So why do we place a post mortem device on a vice when we could have avoided the vice altogether?
On the point that the revenue being channelled towards helping the society, unless we know exactly where and how the revenue is being distributed for our societal development, there is no way to believe that the society actually gained from it- at least from the revenue generated. Has anyone seen the any public financial report on spendings from the Tote board, Singapore Pools and Turf Club?
On creating indirect and direct jobs, is there any data on newly created employment? What is the ratio between Singaporeans and FTs being hired in lieu of this pool of employment? What is the median wage of these professionals compared to our nation average as well as to their home operations?
Someone had his letter to the ST forum published yesterday and I found him explaining very well in simple terms how Casinos are more dangerous than pools and turf club:
"You can have 60 games in 1 minute in a casino, but not pools and turf club. Mathematical odds dictate that the longer you play, the higher and more you will lose." - paraphased.
The casino in my opinion is an attempt to market Singapore, generate more revenue for the top while losing focus on the strategic knowledge based economy development and creating higher societal and protection costs in real dollars and intangible costs as well as contravening the very values and beliefs systems that has seen us this far.
Employers should be more alert to their belongings. not to suggest anything about FW, but when desperate (e.g. 1 year income "flew away" when they're about to go home), pple may do things that they normally don't'....
And casinos usually operate on 1 principle, let patrons win a few rounds and they're hooked.
And casinos usually operate on 1 principle, let patrons win a few rounds and they're hooked.
ah...sorry....i take FT to mean foreigners...not foreign talents or foreign tourist or anything. meaning, non singaporean or singaporean PRs. u know, those who do not need to pay the levy.
Similar threads
