Casino Levy to be raised after Elections?

[aurvandil]

Another policy option being seriously considered is to discontinue the annual levy scheme completely. This is because the people likely to have problem gambling issues are using this to visit the casinos repeatedly.

As mentioned before, an alarmingly large number had paid the $2k levy. There is therefore a need for retroactive action to prevent the incidence of problem gambling from exploding. Hence if the decision is to discontinue the annual levy, those who had bought the $2k levy will have their 1 year entry cancelled and be given a refund based on the number of times they have visited the casino.

No details on how the proposed refund will work. It however 100% will NOT be $2000/365 = $5.47 per visit.

 

[Ramseth]

Another policy option being seriously considered is to discontinue the annual levy scheme completely. This is because the people likely to have problem gambling issues are using this to the casinos repeatedly.

As mentioned before, an alarmingly large number had paid the $2k levy. There is therefore a need for retroactive action to prevent the incidence of problem gambling from exploding. Hence if the decision is to discontinue the annual levy, those who had bought the $2k levy will have their 1 year entry cancelled and be given a refund based on the number of times they have visited the casino.

I just came back from breakfast at downstairs hawker centre. Two hawker aunties chatting that they've bought the S$2,000 annual pass. One said she's lost more than S$20,000 so far and the other one said she's lost a few thousands "only." Both agreed that since paid for the pass already, after lunchtime, close stalls and go gamble again, try to win back.

 

[aurvandil]

I just came back from breakfast at downstairs hawker centre. Two hawker aunties chatting that they've bought the S$2,000 annual pass. One said she's lost more than S$20,000 so far and the other one said she's lost a few thousands "only." Both agreed that since paid for the pass already, after lunchtime, close stalls and go gamble again, try to win back.

It is this group they are really worried about. When they formulated the policy, the expectation was that only "a few thousand" will buy the annual $2k pass.

When RWS first opened, I remember reading how an amazing 20,000 to 30,000 bought the annual $2k levy. The Minister has not released any updated numbers and the people I have been gossiping with have been quite shy to give me any firm numbers. With the opening of MBS, my guess-estimate of the number of current $2k pass holders would be 50,000 to 80,000. That would explain why the casino car parks are always full during the weekends and why we can have more than 1 million Singaporean visits in 7 months.

 

[myo539]

1 million visits or 1 million unique visits?

You go toilet 5 times a day is 5 of you go toilet or you go 5 times?

Make some deduction or triangulation to get a clear picture.

If one million unique visits, then 1,000,000 x $100 = $100 million. Did the gahment collect $100 m?

The word is "visits" - then it is based on entrance. The moment you step into the casino, the entrance machine make a click and counts as one. So if you go out of casino to smoke or to get fresh air or to pee 5 times, then it is counted as 5. This is more the case, I think. Remember, you use statistics to suit your purpose.

All these are my hypothetical or arm-chair thinking because as a citizen I have never visited the IRs nor the casinos. IRs and casino are not meant for citizens.

Genting Highlands Resort in Malaysia is for foreigners. So I go there with family and friends to spend my money - on hotel, food and entertainment and make some donations. I am doing my small part to "prosper thy neighbour".

 

[Glaringly]

There're two types of gambling. Time is of the essence to distinguish between them.

Besides time, odds plays a big part in people's mind. Most People who buy lottery will say, if I am lucky I could "win". However in casino gambling, since the odds of winning are very much more, these people who goes to casino do believe they can win, many even think they know the trick to win! Totally different psychology in the state of mind that we are talking. That's why casino gambling is very dangerous. It trick people into thinking they can recover their money back and therefore have no problem selling whatever they have to go for another round.

If I may compare, addition to casino gambling is like addition to drugs. If the state is going all out in combating drugs and having the death sentence melted out even to the small time drug traffickers!

So, why are we promoting the former and trumpeting it like nobody business while condemning the later?

Isn't both are evil as it destroy lives and causes broken families. It's sad and I believe we are beginning to see the damages and harm, it could be a little too late now.

 

[aurvandil]

The following is another common "logic" I have heard about why the $2k annual levy is "cheap".

If you check with the travel agencies, the cost for a weekend trip to Genting is about $300 (bus ticket + room). Add in $100 for makan, you will therefore spend about $400 per trip.

According to my gambling kakis, this means that if you go to the casino more than 5 times in 1 year, you will "earn back" the $2,000 !

Bonus is that you can even "save time" since you don't have to take the 6 hour bus ride up and down Genting.

If you ask around your gambling kakis, you will hear all sort of rationalisations like this to justify buying the 1 year $2k pass.

The really silly part about it is that with the huge amount of Genting Points they have amassed, they don't actually have to pay anything if they want to go Genting.

 

[silverfox@]

Another policy option being seriously considered is to discontinue the annual levy scheme completely. This is because the people likely to have problem gambling issues are using this to visit the casinos repeatedly.

As mentioned before, an alarmingly large number had paid the $2k levy. There is therefore a need for retroactive action to prevent the incidence of problem gambling from exploding. Hence if the decision is to discontinue the annual levy, those who had bought the $2k levy will have their 1 year entry cancelled and be given a refund based on the number of times they have visited the casino.

No details on how the proposed refund will work. It however 100% will NOT be $2000/365 = $5.47 per visit.

Early sunday I read this I almost fell off my chair.
Considered by who? You? You MP ah or from PAP?

The way you said is like you are the ones putting all the plans in place.

 

[CCBcsj]

Early sunday I read this I almost fell off my chair.
Considered by who? You? You MP ah or from PAP?

The way you said is like you are the ones putting all the plans in place.

Haha, my sentiments exactly. I was almost wondering if he was VB in disguise!

 

[silverfox@]

I just came back from breakfast at downstairs hawker centre. Two hawker aunties chatting that they've bought the S$2,000 annual pass. One said she's lost more than S$20,000 so far and the other one said she's lost a few thousands "only." Both agreed that since paid for the pass already, after lunchtime, close stalls and go gamble again, try to win back.

Last time when the IRs are not opened, many singaporean aunties are at cruise ships, genting highlands. Ever since the opening of IRs, tour bus agencies to Genting highlands has taken a hit. Because all those who have been going to the casino in Genting has shifted to playing in Singapore. This is a fact, anyone can go to those bus tour agencies and ask whether business was better for them before IR open or after IR open.

Lose, people will go, win, people will still go.
At least these 2 aunties will say after lunchtime close stall and go gamble and not say today don't open stall but go gamble. Or will the story evolve into actually they open till night, but because want go gamble so they close at lunchtime.:o

 

[CCBcsj]

Last time when the IRs are not opened, many singaporean aunties are at cruise ships, genting highlands. Ever since the opening of IRs, tour bus agencies to Genting highlands has taken a hit. Because all those who have been going to the casino in Genting has shifted to playing in Singapore. This is a fact, anyone can go to those bus tour agencies and ask whether business was better for them before IR open or after IR open.

Cruise ships also give free ferry tickets when you change enough money. Don't need to take half a day off, only slightly longer than going to RWS.

 

[aurvandil]

The way you said is like you are the ones putting all the plans in place.

If I were the one putting the plans in place, I would have scrapped the levy and introduced the casino card system to limit the amount Singaporeans can gamble based on their decalred income.

 

[silverfox@]

If I were the one putting the plans in place, I would have scrapped the levy and introduced the casino card system to limit the amount Singaporeans can gamble based on their decalred income.

That's why you said policy being seriously considered is by who?

This kind of behavior in chinese we say

自己讲，自己爽

 

[aurvandil]

That's why you said policy being seriously considered is by who?

The same group of people who terminated the free shuttle service to the casinos. Their KPI is to control problem gambling in Singapore. If you don't beleive me, you can always write in to MCYS and check.Remember to cc Minister Balakrnishnan in your email.

IF YOU CAN GET MINISTER BALAKRISHNAN TO DECLARE THE LEVY WILL NOT BE CHANGED BEFORE/AFTER THE ELECTIONS, I WILL ADMIT I AM WRONG.

 

[scroobal]

You are right. Its the same fear.

The issue is the number of Singaporeans visiting that has gone beyond the projected numbers. There has been some sort of disquiet about the Seafood chaps debts that have gained currency and questions being asked.

The Government unfortunately have their hands tied behind their back after asking sizeable investment from Sands and Gentings.

Another problem that did not expect is that number of criminals cases - cheating and theft that has been reported in both casinos.

Unfortunately these concerns and half measures are affecting gamblers who have the means and discipline to handle this well. Some are just happy playing giving away $500 to $1K a month and they can afford. However the $100/200 levy is lost money for them but deterrent for others.

Alternatively, they will do what they do best - ask the prostitutes at Toa Payoh Brothel not to report adverse stories about the casinos.

The same group of people who terminated the free shuttle service to the casinos. Their KPI is to control problem gambling in Singapore. If you don't beleive me, you can always write in to MCYS and check.Remember to cc Minister Balakrnishnan in your email.

IF YOU CAN GET MINISTER BALAKRISHNAN TO DECLARE THE LEVY WILL NOT BE CHANGED BEFORE/AFTER THE ELECTIONS, I WILL ADMIT I AM WRONG.

 

[aurvandil]

Alternatively, they will do what they do best - ask the prostitutes at Toa Payoh Brothel not to report adverse stories about the casinos.

Until the Minister made his announcement, the size and extent of the problem was largely unknown beyond a small circle that tracks this issue very closely.

As an election issue, I was initially of the opinion that it would not be ripe for this election. I was thinking that it would only ripen for the 2017 elections when the body count would be too large for the msm to hide. This body count would be in the form of reports of suicide and an explosion of the current homeless population from hundreds to thousands.

I am was therefore quite surprise to see the issue being raised by the PAP now. I was expecting Minsiter Balakrishnan to lie low and quickly run road to another Ministry after the elections. Then problem then goes to the sucker who is the new Minister for MCYS.

If you look at the chronology of events, the issue was actually not surfaced by Minister Balakrishnan. Instead the issue was first surfaced about 2 weeks prior by PM Lee at a community event. At that event, he cryptically advised his constituents not to gamble at the casinos.

Then came the big bang cancelling of the shuttles and the Minister’s remarks in Parliament. The Hansard report of that sitting is still not out. When it is, I will post it up so that we can see what the msm chose to censor.

On the shuttle service, the move makes more sense if you take into account the large population of $2k pass holders. Having successfully got them to pay the $2k levy, the casinos were trying to make it as convenient as possible for this group to go and gamble. As many have pointed out, it is silly to think that people who were unwilling to pay the $100 levy would somehow be enticed to go and gamble because there is a free shuttle bus ride.

On the losses, it is quite obvious you do not gamble often. The estimate of $500 to $1k per month is way too modest. This is more typical of how much a gambler would lose per session. As was observed, the casinos tend to be crowded during the weekends. It would therefore be reasonable to expect these gamblers to visit once every week and lose between $2k to $4k every month. This number is quite close to the median income of Singapore.

Right now, the problem has not fully manifested itself. This is because problem gamblers still have savings to fall back on. They have friends they can turn to for loans and things they can sell at the pawn shop. If you give it another year or so, these sources of finance will run dry and the problem will become so obvious that the msm cannot hide it.

 

[Ramseth]

At least these 2 aunties will say after lunchtime close stall and go gamble and not say today don't open stall but go gamble. Or will the story evolve into actually they open till night, but because want go gamble so they close at lunchtime.:o

These two stalls usually do breakfast and lunch business anyway. Without the breakfast and lunch takings, how to have big capital to gamble?

 

[silverfox@]

The same group of people who terminated the free shuttle service to the casinos. Their KPI is to control problem gambling in Singapore. If you don't beleive me, you can always write in to MCYS and check.Remember to cc Minister Balakrnishnan in your email.

IF YOU CAN GET MINISTER BALAKRISHNAN TO DECLARE THE LEVY WILL NOT BE CHANGED BEFORE/AFTER THE ELECTIONS, I WILL ADMIT I AM WRONG.

Of course I don't believe you.
You don't ask me to get Balakrishnan to declare the levy will be changed. You are the one who quoted that they are the ones considering removing the levies, you have to tell us how credible your source is.

If you are not from PAP, or Balakrishnan is not your brother, or neighbour, I seriously wonder how to believe a word you said. Or is it a figment of your imagination/assumption again this time round?

 

[silverfox@]

You are right. Its the same fear.

The issue is the number of Singaporeans visiting that has gone beyond the projected numbers. There has been some sort of disquiet about the Seafood chaps debts that have gained currency and questions being asked.

The Government unfortunately have their hands tied behind their back after asking sizeable investment from Sands and Gentings.

Another problem that did not expect is that number of criminals cases - cheating and theft that has been reported in both casinos.

Unfortunately these concerns and half measures are affecting gamblers who have the means and discipline to handle this well. Some are just happy playing giving away $500 to $1K a month and they can afford. However the $100/200 levy is lost money for them but deterrent for others.

Alternatively, they will do what they do best - ask the prostitutes at Toa Payoh Brothel not to report adverse stories about the casinos.

Scroobal, don't be naive. You seriously think Sands and Genting will want to invest in building a casino in Singapore if Singaporeans are banned from going into the casinos?

Let's say there is no IRs in Singapore, what is Singapore going to compete with other countries? How are jobs going to be created? Govt can bar Singaporeans from entering casinos, casinos in turn will retrench as they do not need so much employees, how is that going to affect the country?

I hope you realise that from this forum alone you get the same person saying 2 kinds of tone.

Months ago, "the levy will be removed when they realise no locals want to pay levy to go casinos."

Months later, "the unexpected number of local visitors to casino have made them realise the barrier entry of levy is not high enough"

Not enough locals, these ppl will complain, "See lah, so stupid, collect levy in the end no one go. I will wait till there is no levy then I go"

Beyond expectations, these same ppl will complain, "See lah, levy put so low, too many people go in, now so much social problems in Singapore."

Singaporeans complaints is 1st World Standard, roti prata peng here peng there. No wonder elsewhere people love to condemn Singaporeans for being dependent on parents. Because they just love to Kao Peh Kao Bu (Cry father cry mother) :p

 

[Ramseth]

No details on how the proposed refund will work. It however 100% will NOT be $2000/365 = $5.47 per visit.

Even according to your maths, it should be per day, not per visit. It's quite a reasonable pro rata way of refunding regardless of how many visits.

Anyway, in this I even disagree with GMS. I support a total abolition of all levies, per entry and per year. Your suggestion of a casino card system, pre-qualified with income and credit rating requirement sounds not bad.

 

[silverfox@]

These two stalls usually do breakfast and lunch business anyway. Without the breakfast and lunch takings, how to have big capital to gamble?

Hawkers last time like to punt on horse betting. Some even lost their stalls. So why didn't anyone suggested then to ban horse betting? And if these people are spending their hard earned money, who are we to tell them not to do that?

Try doing that and they will tell you, Sg zhenghu, CPF want to control, now own money must control?

I also have businesses to run, jobs to do. I go casino when my time allows. try telling the govt to control too much of our lives will only increase my displeasure with them. And if the opposition wants to use this subject to raise the issue, are they really fighting for the people.

No, they are selfish. They are just making use of this issue for their selfish reason of opposing the govt. It gives them self justification that they are doing it for the people when in actual fact, they are doing it to win the election.