As I said, no measures are perfect. They are trying ways and
means, with the exclusion list, with all the counselling etc....
they are trying, but we all know it wun stop all addicts but it
will stop SOME addicts. Just like the $100 Levy, it will not stop
ALL SENSIBLE people but it will stop SOME SENSIBLE people. The
thing is we cannot expect them to please everyone. The IRS and
Casinos are definitely going to reap in economic benefits for the
country (of cos how it will benefit the citizens are up for
debate). The fear is of course that citizens might fall into more
social issues. They are trying to balance that out now. They are
starting out to weed out those people like me I will not even step
into the casino now. I will not even think about it cos of the
Levy. So in time to come, as they review their regulations, they
might find better ways to stop those people which the Levy could
not stop. But all these take time, dun they. But for now, I am sure
the levy has worked its course to a certain, whether it needs to be
changed or revised, only time will tell.
If the S$100 "will not stop ALL SENSIBLE people but it will
stop SOME SENSIBLE people" - then it has already failed its
purpose.
If "not ALL SENSIBLE people" can be stopped, can
these "unstoppable" people be "SENSIBLE" in the first place
?
Seriously, the $100 levy is another PAP ploy to collect
"loose change" while at the same time "pretending" to address
the social concerns from the outcry by the many NGOs who
are representing the various facets of the larger
Singapore Society.
Just as the PAP Government had implemented the ERP system
by charging loose change of $0.50 and $1.00 along major trunk
routes used by Singaporeans, the situation has not improved, and
require the introduction of either higher charges or more ERP gates
along the same routes.
This can be seen in the additional ERP gantries along the CTE,
along Orchard Road, and now even the inner City Area; and as seen
in the new ERP gantries that are in the directions of traffic
heading home and operational in the evening up to 10p.m.
The immediate economic benefit that comes from the IR is
the supposed 10,000 jobs created - (although no clear figure can be
available to be confirmed by NGOs as to how many are taken by
Singaporeans).
Then there is the spin off support industries supplying the two
IRs, the new and old visitors attracted to Singapore by the
IRs.
More importantly, there is the supposedly all important
MICE activities that draw more down-stream benefits.
What will the social cost be to Singapore when the FTs from the
lower strata are allowed into the IRs - as there are nothing
stopping them except their own good sense of responsibility to
their distant families ?
Will industrial accidents increase ?
Will there be more - petty or serious -
crimes committed ?