Cowboy Caleb the liberal arts, grown-up stuff & random mischief

Subscribe to my blog feed

Cowboy Caleb recommends NuffNang and Text Link ads to earn money from your blog



A Casino In Your Future

There has been much fanfare about the social problems that come with the building of a casino (or two) in Sillypore.

Disclaimer: All views are my own

Let me dispel some myths here. Despite popular belief, there is no harm a casino can do to Singapore that Singapore has already done to itself.

  1. Experienced gamblers will not want the odds and wagers offered by a local casino. A 1-2 percentage point difference makes a lot of difference if you’re betting 5 figure niggers. They will continue to visit cruise ships with casinos that also offer easy financing and tax-free payouts.
  2. Gamblers are already having a great time with online casinos. Some of them (the China-based ones) offer extremely low minimum bets with attractive female dealers streamed real-time into your web browser. While you ogle the pretty dealers, you also get to chat with other patrons betting at the same table.
  3. The proximity of the casino greatly diminishes its glamour. There is nothing exciting about hopping into a cab and reaching the casino in 10 mins now is there? Nothing romantic at all. In fact, most gamblers would rather go to Genting or a cruise ship instead.

While I agree that desperate times call for desperate measures and the building of a casino of two will create nearly 10,000 new jobs - the real issue about having a casino is that we’re having a major shift in our lifestyle and this makes the man on the street uncomfortable. A local guy did not go through 2 years of hell in NS and salute the flag only to realize that his children are going to be exposed to this sort of Las Vegas shite. Indeed Confucious would not be amused.

What worries me are the underlying issues - for an example:

  1. That nobody bothered that gambling in a multi-racial society is offensive to some religions. Indeed, deeply offensive. How insensetive of them.
  2. A man who has won money at a casino likes nothing better then a good shag. Inversely, a man who has lost money at a casino likes nothing better then a good shag as well. Say hello to a booming increase in AIDS cases.
  3. The children are watching us. What kind of messages are we sending out to our children?

But at the same time, the gahmen did not wake up one morning and decide, “Hey let’s build a casino for fun and profit”. In an imperfect world, there are no perfect solutions. This is really not the sort of thing that a politician cooks up to further his own career - in fact this is the sort of project with a high probability of failure, social scorn and going down in history as an asshat. The gahmen has thought long and hard on this.

Conclusion: I’m not 100% for this idea, and I’m not 100% against it as well. I’m just glad that I’m 100% sure that no one individual is lining his pockets with this casino idea, because if this was another country, then I would be 100% against it because I know greed and corruption would be the major motivating factors instead of local economic reasons.

Peace.

Note: The Idler also has her views on this


16 Comments

Posted by
~Z~
18 April 2005 @ 10am

I get your points, but mostly I’m wondering where “if you’re betting 5 figure niggers” came from. Aiming for street credibility, Cowboy?


Posted by
caleb
18 April 2005 @ 11am

spend enough time gambling with the english speaking crowd and you’ll pickup the slang

nigger here refers to blackmarket money. A highroller will usually finance himself with borrowed money to last the night.

No racisism intended here. Just the slang.


Posted by
Anthony
18 April 2005 @ 11am

Nice post, caleb.

Just wanted to hear your thoughts on the accessibility of blackmarket money? I’m not naive enough to think that Singapore has no access to that kind of money - but I’m fairly certain that it would be one of the aspects that the Gahmen has considered.


Posted by
juicypout*
18 April 2005 @ 11am

There are actually licensed finance company that sends their representatives into the casino (you see lots of them in the VIP room) and basically like what Caleb says, the highroller would usually finance himself with borrowed chips to last through the night. Huge transactions like tens of thousands can easily occur in one shot.

I don’t think many people would borrow from loan sharks if they were rich in the first place, because such finance companies now practice great hospitality service and they would check your credit status before giving you a credit line.


Posted by
Idle Days » Blog Archive » Kaching-apore
18 April 2005 @ 11am

[…] d it change unless the decision to build a casino goes ahead? Let me state that just like Cowboy Caleb, I’m neither for nor against because […]


Posted by
caleb
18 April 2005 @ 12pm

Just like no real punters bet on Singapore pools football, they probably have figured out legal financing for the casino industry.


Posted by
~Z~
18 April 2005 @ 12pm

Thanks for the clarification. As you can probably tell by now, I’m not a gambling man.


Posted by
straydog
18 April 2005 @ 1pm

The gahmen is building the casino exactly for fun and profit, maybe not fun but definitely for profit.

The biggest nightmare for them now is the risk that the whole thing fails. (They built it and no one came… profits way lower than projection … social issues and as you say an increase in Aids cases)


Posted by
aberwyn
18 April 2005 @ 4pm

Singapore’s status as an economical stronghold in SE Asia cannot be maintain for long with lower cost of business from our neighbours. That is why gahment trying to sell us as a ‘hub’ or control centre where the expertise in centralise. But will that be enough to give us the competitive edge? Chances are we need more. And the Casino(s) might just create a new chain of jobs and boost our tourism/retail industries.
Which is more important? survival of a country or the survival of the individual compulsive gambler?
IF you know the answer of that question, you should be able to guess what the gahment will do. They will just have to come up to measures to reduce social issues that would crop up.


Posted by
Seth
18 April 2005 @ 4pm

I am constantly amused by Caleb’s train of thought. Like how casinos will lead to an increase in AIDS patients.

In related news, the government is not going to build one casino but 2. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/143186/1/.html


Posted by
Simon World
18 April 2005 @ 5pm

Daily linklets 18th April

Thank you to everyone who responded to my plea for feedback and guest bloggers. The feedback has been invaluable and will be incorporated in the weeks to come. For those who offered to guest blog I have or will be in touch with details. Now on with the…


Posted by
caleb
18 April 2005 @ 5pm

seth > I have not been taking enough cold showers I think, that’s why.


Posted by
yj
18 April 2005 @ 7pm

Hmm. About the multiracial / religious offensiveness issue: how would one explain Genting, assuming you’re referring to Islam? Or rather, how did Malaysia approve that, given that gambling is taboo under Islam?


Posted by
HUICHIEH LOY
22 April 2005 @ 5am

Dear sir, may I link this post from here? Much oblidged.


Posted by
caleb
22 April 2005 @ 7am

Dear sir, link away.


Posted by
From a Singapore Angle
22 April 2005 @ 1pm

Web Symposium…

…Blogosphere reactions to the Casino/Integrated Resort decision 2005