Casino: Yes or No

haha james.

anyway i think we had enough of watching others judge a post in shallow and meaningless manners, so i myself will stop right here. Viva la Casinos! :twisted:
 
The FACTS petition is about to be sent to president Nathan, and then we shall see if anything democratic will be taken.

Sound like you are insider to FACTS! Little wonder of the insistence. I'm not sure why the petition to the President. This is a all loss alternative, whatever the outcome of the petition or the outcome of the casino debate. People in FACTS should know very well.

Like 3Notes, I'll end here for good.
 
haha... i'm not a FACTS insider. i'm a sammyboy forum lurker, so i'm like more politically aware (in that very limited sense). i'm against casino, but not for the sake of families and children... more for economic viability and stuff.

i'm just glad singaporeans are not so apathetic as some would describe. it's just a sad fact when people complain without seeing the things going around them.
 
To all proponants of legalised casino, good news to you people, as was expected.

(Taken off report from Yahoo Singapore, CNA)
As of Monday April 18, 4:17 PM

"Singapore says 'yes' to two integrated resorts with casinos"

SINGAPORE : Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has said Singapore will go ahead with plans for two integrated resorts with casinos.
One will be built at Marina Bayfront, and the other at Sentosa.

Speaking in Parliament, Mr Lee said that when the idea was first mooted, he was personally against one.

But the environment has changed, particularly in the tourism industry.

While Singapore's tourism numbers have been increasing, market share has been falling.

He said realising the ideas to make Singapore a place that has 'buzz' is not so easy and that Singapore cannot stand still.

Singapore cannot afford to lose out in the tourism game as many jobs are at stake, even Singapore's position as an airhub.

Many cities around the world are reinventing themselves, including New York, London and Paris and Singapore cannot to stay still, he said.

The third point he wanted to make was that the casinos will be in integrated resorts, and a small but essential part of the project which makes it feasible.

And because of this, there is no need to have government grants for the resorts, he said. - CNA /ct
 
As expected it gets the go ahead...

Now left to see whether the Poker Bunnies will be as gd as the one in Vegas... :smt009
 
mikemann said:
Speaking in Parliament, Mr Lee said that when the idea was first mooted, he was personally against one.

How come all the MPs also say that they are against the casino idea? :wink:
 
Timex, please dont quote a whole para like this. quote only the point you wish to comment on. thanks.
 
imo the worst part is that people believe their opinions are not taken seriously.

while the government has been quick to address issues of potential problems, i think it has been viewed by many as a foregone conclusion given the pragmatic-economic nature of the ruling government. coupled with the alot of the intensive pro-casino propaganda by the media, which some would feel is the government's alternative voice, people are increasingly alienated by the actions and the proceedings in the year or so with the casino debate.

with all honestly, although it might seem even worse... perhaps a decision making process without the consultation of the people would have given less resentment. singaporeans are so akin to the idea that major decisions are never made by them but the government, and this, as with the remaking singapore, only serves to give people that impression that their opinions are ultimately unwarranted.
 
thor666 said:
imo the worst part is that people believe their opinions are not taken seriously.

I'm don't.
I'm pro-casino even though I don't gamble.
But my feeling is this: why stop at 2? If you want to undertake the project, make a good one. Have a few high end world class casion (as opposed to low end casinos for the aunties in Gentings and on cruise ships).

This proposal is more attractive to big time gamblers.

After all, would Orchard Road be so attractive to shoppers if there were only 1 mall there. I think not.
 
I never doubted the outcome of the talks. Could the media have handled it better? Maybe. The amount of scrutiny placed on the casinos, just serves to prove one thing, no matter the outcome of polls or public outcry, the government will just go ahead with it. But, to view this in context, at least a step has been taken to maintain a form of transparency. That in itself is progress.
 
lowjk said:
But my feeling is this: why stop at 2?

I think they're going for 2 highend casinos. so stop at 2. the other thing to note is that the supply may far outstrip the demand, especially when the singapore currency is quite significantly large in the asian regions. genting alone is going to expand its casino, and by far and large the most famous casinos in the region are in macau.

more casinos? perhaps not for now. more for the future. we can't really tell the effects and outcomes of a single casino now.. so imo it's best to stick with just a limited market for now.
 
i have deleted some post that were a bit too political for SOFT. please keep to Music in Singapore. thanks.
 
soft said:
i have deleted some post that were a bit too political for SOFT. please keep to Music in Singapore. thanks.

Then you probably should remove Kopi-tiam, "say everything under the sun" too.
 
Argh. The casino is in. So much for pretending to listen.
Who didn't see that happening...

Maybe they could have a band playing background music in the casino?
 
soft said:
i have deleted some post that were a bit too political for SOFT. please keep to Music in Singapore. thanks.

hmm.. right. i shall try to keep my comments as neutral as possible as well. :)
 
Back
Top