1,000,000 X $100 = $10,000,000 already sio sio in their pockets.
Still not enough to keep their f**king mouth shut.
What more they want ?
Still not enough to keep their f**king mouth shut.
What more they want ?
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Casino Levy to be raised after Elections?
- Thread starter Goh Meng Seng
- Start date
Not good with numbers?
many didn't know that we can use our credit cards to gamble in genting. they charged u M$30 for any amount u wanna withdraw. no question ask. just flash your card and state how much u need.
i m now saddled with credit cards loans debts. but i very clever. i use one visa card to pay for another card's debt. so whenever there is a new credit card promo, u bet i would apply for one. got free gifts some more. i need it badly to pay for the other credit card which is used to pay for the lst one loan which i lost in genting.
You are "clever"??? I hope you are being sacarstic here.
That's not a clever thing to do. If you can get credit cards, I'm sure you can also get overdraft credit lines. Use your ATM card to withdraw from credit line at an ATM machine, charge is RM 5 to RM 10 only. Furthermore, overdrafts charge interests about half of credit cards if you rollover.
If you've followed the casino debates before the IRs were built, you might recall Vivi Bala, when presenting the casino levy scheme, unequivocally promised that the levy shall not be removed under any circusmstance. Therefore, political, in order for the levy to be removed, it has to be either Vivi Bala is also removed from MCYS or he cooks up some silly excuses like underestimation and LHL covers his back again.
Sometime you really have to wonder about VV...
First the YOG and now this ....
When Minister Balakrishnan was formulating the policy to deter problem gambling, he had a whole team of scholars, consultants, experts etc.
Somehow he came up with a policy which has clearly failed to deter Singaporeans but ended up generating a huge amount of $$$ for the PAP government.
Where got so many local visitors?
Everyday I am seeing more foreigners than locals when I am on duty there.
Unless they are also including the PRs and work permit holders too.
The ah tiongs are oredi outnumbering the other visitors 2 to 1.
1. Got levy already people complain too little, no levy how to shut these people's mouth?
2. Ban singaporeans, this one will not go down happy with investors neither those who go casinos.
Actually the problem lies in impulse n irresponsible gambling. NCPG already have hotline for people to nominate their family members if they deem them as those with problem gambling? Still not enough? Like that means either the family members don't care for this family member or they cannot be bothered.
What are we targeting actually? Until now I don't understand is the report says having 1 million visits from Singaporeans is making who unhappy? The government is unhappy, people who are unhappy with having a casino in Singapore or people who don't like Singaporeans from entering casino?
Actually for us who have been paying levy, with or without levy doesn't make a difference, we also do not mind the levy goes to government coffers. In fact with a levy, we don't get to see people going into casino for fun just to crowd around play $5-$10.
How do we want the levy to really work to its effect? Only 100 singaporeans able to go to casino daily? $5000 daily levy?
I am hearing from my bosses the government is not happy our casino is drawing gamblers money away from singapore pools.
Their takings have going down very much oredi after the IRs opened.
Last time many people were against having two casinos in Singapore but PAP never listened. Now they started to panick when everything is showing sign of side effect. Just like LKY admitted PAP do make wrong policies in the past but he never specifically state which one he made mistake.
paiseh, I meant the turf club booths in public where we buy horse bets. but have to agree with you that turf club got entrance and also the clubs got membership fees.
The last part on collecting extra revenue, I agree with you that govt wants extra revenue. $2000 yearly levy will not deter serious punters. But the question here is not serious punters, but those impulsive and irresponsible punters.
Smoking causes death, cancer, increase cigarette tax and levy, people still smoke. Why no one suggest banning cigarettes altogether?
Come to think of it, by looking at the statement above shows that having such a decision will make any politician look stupid if they make such a decision. :p
GMS unhappy loh, when Sinkies happy he not happy, when sinkies unhappy he happy cos can gain some votes
The other day 2nd Chance Mohammad Salleh said he banned his top management and executives from going casino.
I read this I want to laugh. Why? What is the ethnic group for most of their management and executives. In the 1st place, their religion do not allow gambling. Ban or no ban also same:o
I read this I want to laugh. Why? What is the ethnic group for most of their management and executives. In the 1st place, their religion do not allow gambling. Ban or no ban also same:o
Many of the people who are concerned about the social problems of the casinos want effective policies which can deter problem gambling.
THe current levy system is FAILING to deter problem gambling. The only thing which it is good for is collecting lots of $$$.
The example I have quoted where you use the casino card to limit how much Singaporeans can gamble is a possible policy alternative.
If we can have a policy where we control problem gambling while at the same time allow all Singareans to enjoy the casinos in moderation, then we should scrap the levy system and implement this policy.
As an Econs. Hons. Cpt. Goh should understand that the economic consideration of taxation is price elasticity. Can the government afford to tax the goods or services out of a certain level of demand affordability? The political consideration is social consequence and control of supply to keep it at an administratively manageable level and socially tolerance level. Otherwise, if something is deemed so undesirable and intolerable, just outlaw it, e.g. narcotics.
It's alright, economically, socially and morally logical to tax rich people more in order to help poor people. However, is it alright to make smart and responsible pay more to deter silly and irresponsible people?
silverfox@ said:
Deterring impulse gambling doesn't mean >1 million visits by Singaporeans are not deterring impulse gamblers.
I hope that everyone do not associate impulsive gamblers with normal gamblers.
If this figure is low, a lot of people will say "You see, have levy is so stupid, no one wants to go 2 IRs."
If this figure is 1 million, people start to say "the levy does not have desired deterrence effect."
So let me ask what is the desired deterrence effect everyone is looking at?
I get what you mean, but I do not agree that the govt should control us that much like kids, as to how we want to spend our money. Unless we are living in a communist country. If My money is the govt's money, that I got nothing to say.
Levy goes to help the country's coffers. If the levy I paid goes to charities or old aged home, seriously I don't mind, at least I did my part to help the country. :p
Similar threads
