Thailand To Legalize Gambling

[Tammi]

Awesome!! Let's get some poker games going!!!! FINALLY!

I love the quote, "by legalizing gambling it will reduce the amount of time police use to find gambling dens"... LOL... ya, no shit sherlocknakrub... try legalizing drugs too and watch how you don't even need police. Duh.

Won't there still be gambling dens avoiding taxes?

[jonniebkk]

No more MIB raiding baht gambling dens???

Guess Mr T will be building a few casino(s) now.

Why stoop to raiding the dens and scooping up a little loose change when you can own the casino

Edited March 3, 2008 by jonniebkk

[Payboy]

needs to be changed now to..."inside & outside"

[PaulHamon]

It's happening anyway... i think it should be taken out of the hands of organized crime and put into the hands of government (but maybe that's just dis-organised crime, sorry bad joke).

[davejonesbkk]

I agree with what Mobi said, can't see it happening, once word of this starts to spread you will see all the old generation, hard-core Buddhists kicking up a right stink and I'd expect the old coup lot to support them....This is a shame though, I'm not a gambler but I like it for a bit of a laugh every now and then, would love it if they had a greyhound track here....

[Thai at Heart]

It's happening anyway... i think it should be taken out of the hands of organized crime and put into the hands of government (but maybe that's just dis-organised crime, sorry bad joke).

The purest oxymoron I have ever read

[Jingthing]

I think casinos are a great idea, especially for Pattaya, which I view as the Asian Las Vegas anyway.

[basjke]

The coup prevented Thaksin's plan to build the first casino in Thailand. Gordon Brown prevented his plan to build one in Manchester. He seems to be fixated on this idea. He's been back in Thailand only a few days and now we hear this. Any connection I wonder?

The rumour was that all those five star hotels being built in Chiang Mai had received heads up that the first mega casino was going to built there. Now we'll see.

For about 5 years now the rumour is going that the first casino in thailand is gonna be build in the ambassador city in jomtien.Hence the sharp rise in property prices in that area.Now guess who is the owner of the ambassador city complex.

[OlRedEyes]

may as well have a portion of gambling profits going to the state rather than organized crime.

There's a difference?

[tennisontang]

I think the government should do like an election. Let the thais choose whether casino should be build as government listen to the public judgement. That's what the elected government for..... let the ppl choose, am i right ?

[icemaniac]

In Thai schools you CANNOT even broach the subject of statistics using these very common and practical methods.

Why not? I am interested in why you say this. Is numerology that ingrained in this society? I find it hard to believe that stastics are not taught in universities here.

[drunken]

Should not be very bad but certainly its not gonna be gud as well, Gambling one big place where one or two become big bug and where thousands become zero, So when thousands become ZERO hundresd of crime.

But its hard to say any thing as there is both gud and bad every thing.

Any way if its for gud best of luck

[absolutelyBangkok]

Finally the Ambassador hotel complex in Jomtien can make use of its over-capacities and become that casino.

During the first reign of Thaksin people were already buying up land around the Ambassador.

Well, the Thaksinists are back, I sense the Ambassador already partying.

Gambling furthermore is an ideal ticket for money laundering - if you don't have a strong system of checks and balances in place.

[Jandajoy]

"the machines have already been bought in"

Did Frankie boy bring them in with him? Who bought them?

It's looking like a done deal.

[icemaniac]

"Thailand to Legalize Gambling" is a misnomer. The legal process has to run its course with a law change. Do any of you people understand the legislative process?

A bill has to be introduced, debated and amended in committee, voted on by committee, debated and amended in the House floor, voted on in the house floor, sent to the senate, debated in and amended in committee, voted on in committee, debated and amended on the senate floor, voted on the senate floor. If it's been amended in the Senate it needs to go back to the House floor for a concurrence vote.

Not a done deal by a long shot, especially considering the makeup of the Senate. And in the House, PPP does not enjoy an absolute majority.

[steveromagnino]

There is also a lot of drunken driving, wife beating, prostitution, arms dealing, drug selling and land encroachment. And of course drinking and smoking are legal already, so we have a precedent.

Let's legalise all of them, after all, they are already happening.

This is surely an argument along the lines of the 'that's what Hitler would say' rebuttal. It opens the gates for everything. CO2 is bad for the environment, and that's legal, so therefore let's just pump out CFCs as much as we want..... There are still pedofiles around now, we can't stop it so let's eliminate the minimum age of consent....people get abortions illegally even at 6 months and kill new borns, so let's legalise abortions to 9 months.....

The fact is there are countries where casinos have NOT succeeded as expected (e.g. Australia) or where the negative consequences have encouraged the country in place to ban further licences from being issued (e.g. New Zealand).

Perhaps some sort of casino that was for people who pay tax only, thus eliminating the chances of the hoi polloi getting in and losing their rice paddies might help, but as always, a casino and other forms of gambling tend to attract those least able to afford it.

The end benefit to many countries is that the tax on casino revenues is channelled into worthwhile projects, education etc. However, being that the likelihood of a casino license being given in a non transparent way with a massive skim on top to the owners, we can assume that the Thai casino would probably set new standards in removing money from the economy and channelling it into BVI bank accounts and the like.

There is even the site rumoured to be chosen already for a casino in Pattaya, and most know who owns that. Alledgedly of course Interestingly, the main reason why the casino proposal suffered last time was also because it was not a fully supported TRT initative. As many know, Sanoh and I think it is Suriya or Suwat are the owners of many of the casinos in Poipet, which are effectively 95% Thai based revenues, being that Cambodians without connections cannot get in. They would not be in favour of such a scheme.

And this is not even getting into the tourist vs. .local market issue; I am not against the idea of having a casino and i am not against the idea of privatising Thai state owned enterprises, but I am against the idea of a few people benefiting only rather than the entire country as would happen elsewhere.

The claim of creating jobs is a joke; we could create jobs doing lots of other things and enterprises other than casinos, that is what the BOI and other government bodies do. Look at a casino with 10,000 staff, mostly poorly low paid service staff. Compare how that helps Thailand's competitive advantage vs. composite construction factory such as Cobra (world leader in lamination for boats/surfboards/automotive) and Cobra got there with almost NO government handouts and dodgy deals. Surely we want more cobras, not more cookie cutter Wynn/ho Casinos in Jomtien using a fairly old crummy building as the base!

As for the legalised 2/3 number lotteries, AFAIK there has not been any resaerch showing a reduction (or increase) in levels of gambling from illegal to legal. Certainly the jao pors have not had any problems keeping their own customers as they offer credit and multiple betting amounts that the legal version does not. The main beneficiaries would be the shops selling the tickets...but the terms were structured so you really needed to operate a business like...guess what....a 7:11 to be able to operate the machine.

Guess who run 7:11.

You would think this would be researched, but it has not been. Primarily because it would probably show an increase overall in the amount of gambling PLUS it would highlight the FACT that there is a ton of money missing that was supposed to be distributed for charity projects etc from funds raised by the lottery. TRT used this set of funds as their own party promotion fund. And it was never set up legally in the first place.

If i see some NESDB study then I will believe it, but I'd guess with no data that the legalised lottery certainly didn't reduce the amount of gambling and probably increased it as introducing new flavours of lottery generally does (there is plenty of data for this in New Zealand - with each new lottery mechanic, the total amount gambled increases).

But other than that...sure what the hel_l legalise it. Last time round after the village fund and lottery fiascos the rich families lending money acquired a bunch of land pledged as collateral, another round for a few more rai will be fine :-)

Edit - added to address the belief:

'THE COUP STOPPED THE FIRST CASINO'

Sorry, the majority of Thais do not want a casino, there were studies on this and many were not in favour of it; the religious group waded in and it was dead in the water back in 2005 at least a year and possibly 2 years before the coup. Similar time to resentment regarding the sale of EGAT and subsequently Thai Bev were blocked from listing also.

Like the social order campaign, you will find many people anti the idea of legalisation, even though they may engage in the same thing themselves. Prostitution....exactly the same. But in the case of the casino, there were factions within TRT that were dead opposed to having Thai casinos, because their revenue stream comes from Poipet casinos which they own.

my guess is this is smoke and mirrors to distract.

Edited March 3, 2008 by steveromagnino

[Donnyboy]

The Singaporean PM said a few years back during a speech that Thaksin (when he was PM) already hinted that Thailand would legalise casinos and that there were plans to make tourist zones into mega casino complexes. Im sure Thaksin already has plots of land in the various zones and will be in the forefront in this venture.

Chiang Mai will be one area as Thaksin was promoting it as a tourist hub.

[Polsevogn]

I think it's a great idea. The existing ban never was enforceable in any way, so why bother, might as well regulate and make some money that can be put to good use.

Places that should have casinos could include for example Pattaya, Chiang Mai, Phuket, and Bangkok I guess.

[zakk9]

One step closer to the next coup, are we?

[onethailand]

Responding to a question from his audience, Samak said he would follow the legal model that is practised in Malaysia, Macao, Singapore and Shanghai.

Shows he has no clue. Each of these locations has different rules and regulations which apply to their own situations.

Former NLA member Wallop Tangkhananurak said Samak's policy would only result in illegal casinos mushrooming amid legal casinos - a problem that could prove harder to control than the current underground operations.

Citing Samak's reference to authorised casinos in Malaysia, Wallop said he doubted the premier understood how it was run.

He said Malaysian authorities are mainly targeting foreign tourists. They built their casino in a remote area and issued regulations that curb many locals from gambling there.

Wallop also doesn't seem to have a clue. The "remote" area is Genting, which has been turned into a resort/entertainment area for family and kids as well.

Furthermore - the regulations that curb locals are to curb Muslims from gambling for religious reasons. They don't address any other issue - as long as you are not Muslim and have money, you can go in.

Former Bangkok senator Sopon Supapong said the government should not initiate anything that turns young Thais into addicts of gambling.

Good idea - except they are essentially talking about regulation, which will protect young Thais, rather than no regulation, which allows young Thais to patronize the underground casinos and bookies.

Democrat Party spokesman Ong-art Klampaiboon said Samak's plan was vague and contained no details about what form of gambling would be allowed or how it would be regulated.

Exactly.

Way too early to tell. Legalisation of gambling is a good idea - but they are a long, long way from understanding what it takes to protect the people.

[grahamhc]

Guess Mr T will be building a few casino(s) now.

No need in Pattaya, as we have a suitable ("purpose build?") one already. As you come into Pattaya from the Bangkok direction, just near Cholchan Hoetel, you will see a beatifule blue series of buildings, looking like an Indian Summer Palace. I think is it callelled Sukawadee House, or soething like that.

This is the PRIVATE HOUSE of the Saha Farms magnate, which he lets people use for charitable functions and conferences.

All it needs is a container load of gambling machines to be unloaded and installed. Shouldn't take more that a couple of days to convert the place into a casino.

Always wondered why you needed 36 urinals in the toilets in a private house and an escalator to get you there...

[steveromagnino]

Always wondered why you needed 36 urinals in the toilets in a private house and an escalator to get you there...

He uses it for Saha farms functions and the like, so it is a company retreat as well as a house.

BTW I doubt he would sell it, it is the owner's idea of paradise goodness knows why.

Nah....site too small with not enough rooms. Ambassador is the site for Pattaya if there is such a spot.

[Chris Lawrence]

Great Idea. Young Packer is into this. Maybe some money redirected back home.

In Oz, a lot of the gambling money is distributed back into the community. 1.5% is given back into NSW thru clubs poker machine tax. Amounts of $1m from a single club are common & will go back into the community. I have used some of this money in community work; competitive to get but is given mainly to the locals. The model works well for organisations that struggle to compete with national community organisations.

The 1.5% is broken in half, with .75% going to sporting and the other to community groups.

Then there is the Casino funds, not sure of the amounts coming from here, but have seen grants of several hundred thousand going to groups.

All I can say is that it is there; the need is to accept and take the cut. The big thing after that is how it is then distributed.

[dsys]

oh good god nooooooo......

Please don't tell my wife or my bank manager

[patsfangr]

There are certain things which have been a part of the personality of most humans for as far back as we can trace behavior. Among them are: survival, motherly instinct, and social contact. Other behaviors and desires, which most consider far less "positive", are: the desire to "feel better" by using drugs; the desire (much stronger in men, of course) to have sex frequently; and the desire to have more of whatever serves as currency in any society. No society has ever been able to eliminate drugs. No society has ever been able to eliminate prostitution. No society has ever been able to eliminate gambling.

Attempts to eliminate these things have always, without exception, led to the growth of an "evil empire", of one sort or another, which takes control of the illegal distribution and management of these things. This, in turn, often, perhaps even always, leads to fights over that control. The vast majority of violent crimes committed in the world are directly attributable to disputes of one kind or another over illegal drugs, prostitution, and gambling.

What happens with legalization, and control? Well, there is still danger, of course. The danger is that some people will abuse, or become addicted to these things, and create terrible hardship for themselves and/or their families. But let's face facts. There are many people who use legal drugs (alcohol); who seek sexual satisfaction from prostitutes; who gamble legally (state lotteries, "Vegas" type venues). The majority of those people do so without creating any serious hardships for themselves or their families. I would submit to you that the minority who suffer from doing these things are people who, one way or another, would fail in their lives sooner or later, one way or another. These are people who lack the intelligence, discipline, and self-control to understand the priorities of life, and limit the impact of alcohol, sex, and/or gambling upon the other aspects of their life.

Now I realize that many people don't agree with all, or even parts of that. It's my opinion, and my philosophy, and it, combined with the "benefits" side that I'll discuss next, is the reason why I fully support regulated legalization of all 3 of these "vices".

Benefits? Well, let's start with that issue of ganster control, and the incredible amount of violence that springs from it. Take away the illegality; allow law abiding people to produce, manage, and own the "objects" of vice (alcohol, prostitution, gambling); and the need or "gain" from violence is significantly reduced. (Greed will still motivate some violence, as it does in all legal businesses.)

Next comes the benefit of regulation. Alcohol is pretty much already there, in this regard. Abusers still cause problems; but the manufacture and distribution of alcohol does not provoke widespread killing. And, depending upon the effectiveness of the police, and "volunteer" organizations, the abusers and addicts are controlled and minimized to some degree. So why not marijuana and cocaine. People foolish enough to use the harder drugs will pay the physical price. They pay it now, plus often turn to crime to pay for it. .... Prostitution is legal in some places. Where it is (parts of Nevada, for example), the girls make very good money; receive regular medical checkups; and the clients are assured both safety and discretion. Legalization on a broad scope would also greatly reduce the cost for clients, which is beyond the means of most people in those Nevada towns. .... Gambling is the most obvious one. Where it is legal and regulated, there is very little violence. .... The kicker on all 3 of these vices is that, where legal. the government collects taxes on the revenue earned by those selling these products and services. Those taxes provide significant funds for all of the good things that a government can provide.

Personally, I see no good reason for this, or any other country, to continue to waste money trying to stop the unstoppable. Humans will find and use drugs to give them a "high". Nobody will ever stop that. A large number of men will always seek sex to "supplement" what is available at home, if any. Nothing will ever stop that. And people will always gamble to try to "hit the jackpot" that will change their lives; and just for the thrill of playing the game and winning, even if small amounts. But, if legalized, none of these activities will generate anywhere near the amount of lawlessness and violence that they do when illegal. They will all become significant sources of income, rather than significant expenses for law enforcement, for governments. Use some of that income to provide education about the dangers of drugs and gambling; and to provide counselling for those who become addicted, and need help to beat it.

OK. Let the pious light their torches, and burn me at the stake. But that's my philosophy. It's built up over a lot of years of observing life; and it's not going to change.

[icemaniac]

Great Idea. Young Packer is into this. Maybe some money redirected back home.

In Oz, a lot of the gambling money is distributed back into the community. 1.5% is given back into NSW thru clubs poker machine tax. Amounts of $1m from a single club are common & will go back into the community. I have used some of this money in community work; competitive to get but is given mainly to the locals. The model works well for organisations that struggle to compete with national community organisations.

The 1.5% is broken in half, with .75% going to sporting and the other to community groups.

Then there is the Casino funds, not sure of the amounts coming from here, but have seen grants of several hundred thousand going to groups.

All I can say is that it is there; the need is to accept and take the cut. The big thing after that is how it is then distributed.

The difference is that in Thailand all of these funds would go into the hands of corrupt schmucks that have an inside track to the government and they'll use it to buy new mercedes for themselves and their spoiled children. You can never entrust bureaucrat and political Thais to do the right thing with such funds. They steal it everytime from the mouths of the poor somchais of the world.

[steveromagnino]

The 1.5% is broken in half, with .75% going to sporting and the other to community groups.

All I can say is that it is there; the need is to accept and take the cut. The big thing after that is how it is then distributed.

this is nothing new. That is how the lottery works now.

Of course, the poor don't really see most of the proceeds, it is not transparent at all where the money goes and there was/is a perception that it is TRT/Thaksin himself distributing the proceeds when there are a few odd projects. Additionally, the revenues from selling the tickets (both 2/3 number before and the current ticket system) are set up in such a way as to have major barriers to entry for new players to retail without dealing with multiple middle men.

As an Aussie, how do you respond to claims from people like Xenophon that:

"We know from study after study that so much gambling revenue from the pokies comes from problem gamblers. Up to 50 per cent, more than 50 per cent, comes from problem gamblers and this is why the industry is cynical."

"One study shows that for every dollar a state Government gets in gambling taxes, there are negative costs of at least $3 in terms of the costs of family breakdown, of small businesses going broke, of the costs of gambling-related suicide and gambling-related crime," he said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/01/12/2137107.htm

I worked in Auckland's casino for a while. Back then senior management referred to paying a jackpot as 'an investment' as they knew they would get it back 50% of the time within 6 weeks. They also referred to the casino as being the tax department for Chinese - a comment on the massive losses sustained by many local chinese business people and an amusing anecdote as so many SMEs run by Asians don't pay tax ;-) Amusing stuff, but it doesn't get around the element of unsavoury individuals that casinos attract - the majority of patrons are working class/welfare beneficiaries (although majority of revenues are VIPs) who can least afford to play. And the casino is surrounded by brothels, which are now legal in New Zealand as the police cannot be bothered trying to stop them anymore. hel_l, working as a dealer there, the number of 'working ladies' even when it was illegal to do so was pretty high. And the subsequent stories of pawn brokers and the like hanging out in the lobbies etc.... lovely stuff. And that's NZ.

In other words, it is a dream opportunity, and given the complete lack of transparency of existing gambling, the high likelihood of corruption, the worldwide research which seems unable to confirm that casinos are the best thing ever, the ease with which criminals can wash their money via a casino and the likelihood that all Thais especially poor ones will be welcomed to this bastion of culture and art......I cannot wait to see it start operation.

Wonderful.

Cynicism aside, i am all for it if it is done right. Nationality restrictions might be a good idea, if they do that, then yeah, sure why not. Of course, it will still be removing cash from other potential industries (people in casinos aren't going to be out playing golf) but if they stay longer then great.

Just requires some planning and forethought.

Which based on everything else involving PPP/TRT seems unlikely to occur.

I still think the best location would be Surin...one of the poorest provinces and isolated and needing more tourists. Pattaya is already Thailand's number 1 tourist drawcard beachside destination...why does it need still more people????

If this really is for tourists.....plonk it somewhere poor. Not somewhere already successful.

Edited March 3, 2008 by steveromagnino

[wasabi]

I can't see legalizing gambling making the problem of gambling in Thailand worse. However it will allow Thailand to have another angle for tourism and to draw some revenue towards improving Thailand. Naturally a lot of the money will slip under the radar but even a percentage of the money going towards government projects could be beneficial. I don't subscribe to the fatalistic notion that by legalizing this you must legalize all vices. I think this is a rational choice and in line with the trend of the region.

[grantbkk]

This is the best news corporate Thailand has heard since they began pushing for nuclear power plants. More free money in construction, corruption and operations. Jobs for everyone who are unemployed, now that anything can be produced cheaper in neighboring countries. The opponents will not have to worry much about gambling because one or more of the free thinking ministers will push for restricted hours. No gambling between 2:00 AM and 11:00 AM and 2:00 PM to 5:00 PM. Like in most other areas Thailand will end up shooting itself in the foot rather than make a successful business venture out of this.

[BlackArtemis]

This has been speculation for a long time in Chiang mai with all the random land grabs and large 5 star hotels popping up.