Casino gambling has been legalized in Singapore. Give economic arguments for and against legalization. There has been much debate in Singapore both amongst the politicians, religious leaders, senior people in the community, and the lay people at large. It is a hot topic. But, the decision has finally been made, the casino will be built. There are many arguments both for and against building a casino.
The government, which is for, cites the economic advantages and everyone who is against cites the social impact the casino will have. Arguments FOR the casino The government’s main argument for the casino is increased revenue leading to a boost in the economy. Currently, Singapore’s revenue comes from high tech electronics manufacturing, pharmaceuticals and finance. These industries are starting to slow.
According to Reuters Singapore employment in the manufacturing sector has dropped 9% since 1990. In 2004, 14 per 1, 000 were laid off in the manufacturing sector and 8. 5 per 1, 000 in the services sector. The government’s alternative has been to reverse a 4 decade ban on casino’s to help the Singapore economy. The majority of the focus in the long term is from tourism and the flow on effects of tourism such as hospitality, food, retail, taxi, conventions and aviation. The government fears that a steady decline in tourism is already happening.
The Term Paper on Hong Kong Singapore Financial Government
Could a burgeoning China drive Singapore and Hong Kong the way of the dinosaur? Some economists fear the answer could be yes. China's emergence as a manufacturing powerhouse spells competition for every Asian economy, but none face a more compelling need to shape up for the challenge than the two city economies. Each has got a different response strategy -- while Singapore scrambles to reshape ...
The Prime Minister in his ministerial statement on April 18 2005 said:” First, we are losing ground in tourism. Tourism in Asia is growing phenomenally, especially the traffic from China and India. Singapore’s tourist numbers are up too, but we see warning signs of problems ahead. Our market share is declining (from 8% in the Asia Pacific region in 1998 to 6% in 2002).
Tourists are spending less time in Singapore. They used to stay an average of about 4 days in 1991, but now they stay only for 3 days.
In contrast, on average, they are staying for about 4 days in Hong Kong, 5 days in London and almost a week in New York City. We are losing attractiveness as a tourist destination.” In 2004, Singapore earned US$6 billion from 8. 3 million tourists. Tourism currently accounts for 3% of Singapore’s GDP, it needs to be at 7% if it is to be a real growth driver. By 2015, Singapore is aiming at 17 million tourists which alone will bring in US$18 billion. It is predicted that by 2010, Asians will spend $23 billion on gambling, and Singapore wants it share.
It is not only the tourist dollar and the tourist gambling money that the government is trying to capture. At present it is estimated that Singaporeans spend around US$1 billion 2 annually in casinos outside Singapore. Singaporeans wanting to gamble can drive a few hours to Genting Highlands in Malaysia, or take a short ferry ride to Bint an or jump on a floating casino. Why should the government lose such a lucrative source of income to Malaysia and Indonesia? Another argument for the casino is that it is an industry that can remain within Singapore. That is, a manufacturing plant has the potential to be moved from Singapore to China because of cheaper labour, a casino cannot be moved. Currently, the government redirects a considerable amount of money from gambling taxes that it accumulates back into social services.
With a larger tax income from the casino, the government should be able to redirect a greater amount of money towards the existing services provided and theoretically be able to add more and better social services. In particular, services for those affected by gambling and gambling related problems. Overseas investors (and hence the Singapore economy) could also benefit from the casino and the gambling taxes. At present the government gives tax incentives to the corporate sector to encourage foreign investment and starting of overseas companies. The government could use some of the tax revenue it collects from the casino to further lower taxes or encourage more investment leading again to increased employment. In addition to revenue from tourism and gambling in the long term, the casino project will create a US$5 billion investment in Singapore from the 2 separate “Integrated Resorts” which are to be built, one at Marina Bayfront and one at Sentosa Island to house the 2 proposed casinos.
The Essay on Legalize Gambling People Business Government
Whether or not to legalize gambling is a tough decision. The pros and cons of the question are almost equal, and while some say it will boost economy others say it can destroy it. No one argues that gambling is a big, profitable business, they only question whether it is a business doing good, or the opposite. Arguments both ways are very compelling and both sides have many examples that ...
It will also generate an estimated 35, 000 new jobs. Of course, no FOR argument would be complete without discussion the construction sector. At present, the construction sector is struggling to get out of the slump caused by the Asian Crisis in the ’90’s. The immediate benefits of the casino will be realized by the construction sector, not only at the 2 sites for the casino, but also from the proposed US$1 billion upgrading of Orchard Road according to a local economist Mr Song Seng Wun. 1 References Construction and tourism, winners in Singapore’s casino plans, Agence France Presse, 19 April 2005 Casino aces to boost economy, Asia Time Online, 20 April 2005 Lee Hsien Loong (Prime Minister), Proposal to Develop Integrated Resorts, Ministerial Statement, 18 April 2005.
