Government workers cannot play but politicians can own a casino?

[macson]

What’s so surprising about that? In my country, gambling is banned, but the fact is that the majority of illegal casinos operating in Cambodia, Myanmar, and the surrounding areas are connected to officials or authorities in my country. They’re able to freely rake in so much money from these illegal gambling operations, yet at the same time they’re arresting people who bet there. It’s really ironic, but that’s just how it is, these people have authority and power, and they use it to line their own pockets.

[demonica]

Because they're in the position, they'll always find ways to play around with law. Owning a casino is a big money maker. Regardless of how hypocritical it is to own one when they aren't allowed to play, if there's money in there, they'll do it.

Corruption is very rampant in our country. As long as these people are gaining something from it, they'll just help and protect each other. It seems like they care but they're just milking out and earning money from ordinary people who are slowly getting addicted to gambling.

This is one thing they could also revise or implement about the law. However, I doubt that they would do that. Some may raise this but the chances of getting approved is low because most politicians are benefiting from gambling sites/casinos.

[rachael9385]

I'm ok with laws that prohibit government workers from playing in casinos, but I'm baffled that politicians can own a casino. One example, our country, the Philippines, has many casinos, online or offline, that are owned or operated by politicians, or they have a share from the family corporation that owns casinos in the country.

One congressman admitted to operating an e-sabong in his province, and one mayor is a major shareholder and founder of the company that operates BingoPlus and related gaming brands.

I don't want to spotlight these politicians, but records show that they have shares on this casinos online and physical casinos

So what's the difference between an average government worker and a politician? I consider them both as government workers, as they get their salary from the taxes of the people.

Correct me if I'm wrong with my assumption that they both should have no connection to a gambling platform.

It is true that government workers cannot gamble because they are not allowed to do so but most of the casinos you know are owned by by politicians. They prefer to keep it anonymous so that there wouldn't be anything to link them to the casino they have. Running a casino business is very profitable and most corrupt politicians invest the money they embezzle into it.

[uneng]

Because they're in the position, they'll always find ways to play around with law. Owning a casino is a big money maker. Regardless of how hypocritical it is to own one when they aren't allowed to play, if there's money in there, they'll do it.

Corruption is very rampant in our country. As long as these people are gaining something from it, they'll just help and protect each other. It seems like they care but they're just milking out and earning money from ordinary people who are slowly getting addicted to gambling.

This is one thing they could also revise or implement about the law. However, I doubt that they would do that. Some may raise this but the chances of getting approved is low because most politicians are benefiting from gambling sites/casinos.

This reality will never change, because the politicians are the ones who make the laws and interpret them on their own favour. The only force which could prevent this from happening is the judiciary system, but the problem is that judiciary members also have deep connections and ties with the politicians. After all, they protect each other from having to follow laws which aren't interesting for their personal interests.

And who sponsor all the hypocrisy show are the common average citizens through taxes.

[alani123]

In the past here I've gotten in bouts with Filipinos for simply stating the obvious and saying that the Philippines as a country has throughout time been ruled by ruthless political dynasties. Be it Marcos or Duterte, these politicians are not much different.

The west tolerates their antics so long as they keep the people poor. The entire globe benefits from exploiting the Philippines even through we're supposedly past the colonial era. The new colonial rule isn't just enslavement though, it's more polished. It happens through economic exploitation of resources and labour.

A dictatorial politician and his cronies that care more about enriching themselves than helping their own people even a little server this purpose well.

So why would a government prohibit its public workers from gambling? It's a form of control. Of course gambling is bad but they can't dissalow it for everyone. But they can keep public sector salaries low if they forbid them from pleasure. The excuse could be that they might have insider knowledge or whatever unreasonable argument like this.

In any case, the politicians of course are not going to impose real restrictions on themselves. Since the media is also on their side nobody will criticise them.

[Cryptomultiplier]

Because they're in the position, they'll always find ways to play around with law. Owning a casino is a big money maker. Regardless of how hypocritical it is to own one when they aren't allowed to play, if there's money in there, they'll do it.

Corruption is very rampant in our country. As long as these people are gaining something from it, they'll just help and protect each other. It seems like they care but they're just milking out and earning money from ordinary people who are slowly getting addicted to gambling.

This is one thing they could also revise or implement about the law. However, I doubt that they would do that. Some may raise this but the chances of getting approved is low because most politicians are benefiting from gambling sites/casinos.

This reality will never change, because the politicians are the ones who make the laws and interpret them on their own favour. The only force which could prevent this from happening is the judiciary system, but the problem is that judiciary members also have deep connections and ties with the politicians. After all, they protect each other from having to follow laws which aren't interesting for their personal interests.

And who sponsor all the hypocrisy show are the common average citizens through taxes.

It's just to show how hypocrisy, corruption of the system and how the rich and powerful get to bend the rules to their favor, while those being led are subject to the laws made by these politicians.
It's just how the system is these days, politicians launder funds alot and are not disciplined for it because they are in power, but what can the common man say or do, if not to attain power and be able to do things they were restricted to do.

I think politicians should firstly declare their assets before entering power, so as to deter them from being corrupt or use illegal means to acquire wealth.

[Peanutswar]

Im at the Philippines at the same time thats how does the law and regulations of the philippines so weak and why its so worst when it comes with the government officials most of the people who are the law makers are do always in favor with the businesses and politicians, recently there is an issue regarding with the flood control which most of the government personnel gamble the budget and enjoy the luxury life with the use of the funds for the flood control management projects.

Back on the gambling they knew that they can operate gambling activities because they can get a license immediately because they are part of government and possible a cut on these.

[Fortify]

I'm ok with laws that prohibit government workers from playing in casinos, but I'm baffled that politicians can own a casino. One example, our country, the Philippines, has many casinos, online or offline, that are owned or operated by politicians, or they have a share from the family corporation that owns casinos in the country.

One congressman admitted to operating an e-sabong in his province, and one mayor is a major shareholder and founder of the company that operates BingoPlus and related gaming brands.

I don't want to spotlight these politicians, but records show that they have shares on this casinos online and physical casinos

So what's the difference between an average government worker and a politician? I consider them both as government workers, as they get their salary from the taxes of the people.

Correct me if I'm wrong with my assumption that they both should have no connection to a gambling platform.

The one simple trick is: money. You must have enough that you can write certain rules in your favor while designing hypocritical laws that you wave around to gain votes. It's much easier to say that you ban 100,000 government workers from this "nasty and sinful" activity compared to hiding when you are 2-3 ministers who own the gambling outlets. It's only with open records and detective work by journalists that we become aware of this sort of corruption. No government should have such contradictory rules but it is often a form of corruption. Just look at the huge medicinal cannabis industry in the UK owned by the husband of an MP, yet the drug itself is still illegal.

[justinlamode]

What could be the rationale for such decision by the authorities? I find it confusing because if the government consider casino as bad and harmful to society, then politicians and public servants ought to be banned from owning one. If it is on the basis that the government workers are not paid much, hence not allowed to gamble, then they ought to raise their money rather than dictating for them what they should do and should not do. Finally, if casino is not banned in your country, then such law is an infringement on their freedom.

[Localhostspeed]

What’s so surprising about that? In my country, gambling is banned, but the fact is that the majority of illegal casinos operating in Cambodia, Myanmar, and the surrounding areas are connected to officials or authorities in my country. They’re able to freely rake in so much money from these illegal gambling operations, yet at the same time they’re arresting people who bet there. It’s really ironic, but that’s just how it is, these people have authority and power, and they use it to line their own pockets.

Oboi, is that serious. May I know why gambling is bad in your country because this looks bad for the fact that gambling is banned. There are ways to social life but gambling is one way to have fun and spare good times. Even if it's not physical casino, online casino should be allow for people to have time and also bet for passion. Imagine that you will watch football for a complete season and not even be able to make one prediction about the club you support, it's bad.

I think when government workers are not allow to gamble is about government regulation to gambling, there must be something that must have happen to why the government has decided to make that rule. Though it's not fair but if that will let people gamble and not banned it, that's fair. Last I check, it's very difficult to see people in government offices that gamble, it's people that are not government workers that gamble, in my country we all allowed to gamble.

[fuguebtc]

I'm ok with laws that prohibit government workers from playing in casinos, but I'm baffled that politicians can own a casino. One example, our country, the Philippines, has many casinos, online or offline, that are owned or operated by politicians, or they have a share from the family corporation that owns casinos in the country.

I think the main problem is their conflict of interest, it is not so important that politicians have casino, they can have casino. These are the people who pass gambling law or control licenses through PAGCOR, while ordinary government employe are strictly prohibited from entering casino, let alone playing.

This has created a system where those who make the rule and control them are lining their pocket from the industry they control. This is not only unfair it is a clear example of corruption

[Strongkored]

Correct me if I'm wrong with my assumption that they both should have no connection to a gambling platform.

That is the inequality that we often see, even though both of them eat tax money from the public, politicians get a more special place than government workers.
But I guess the reason there are rules like this is because owning a casino and being a player are two different things, the player spends money while the owner makes money.

[Findingnemo]

~
So what's the difference between an average government worker and a politician? I consider them both as government workers, as they get their salary from the taxes of the people.

Correct me if I'm wrong with my assumption that they both should have no connection to a gambling platform.

Government workers are permanent slaves while politicians are the ones who make the laws that explain why it favours them, right?

Weird laws exist everywhere and as a citizen, we don't have much of a choice but to comply it, if that is bothering most of the people, then it will be forced to change in one or another.

[Dareo]

I think the issue is not just who is gambling or who is the owner, but whether there is a conflict of interest here. Yes if an ordinary government employee is directly involved in gambling, it is a personal behavior but if a politician is involved in this industry, then his decision making ability can be affected that is the big risk. So in my opinion transparency and strict rules are more important than a complete ban, so that there is no abuse of power.

[Doan9269]

So what's the difference between an average government worker and a politician? I consider them both as government workers, as they get their salary from the taxes of the people.

They are different from each other, a government worker is only tied to his salary and he is being paid without any opportunity to get more beyond what is limited to end every month, why the politician has the biggest fishing net to get as many as possible as long as he can adjust some things and manipulate to his own taste or standard, they are the one in charge of government funds and dispose to every project that is meant to be done to the community, they are being query by no one because they have the position that immunity covers, so this makes it possible that a politician can afford having a casino, but a common government worker cannot try such because of the financial aspect in demand.

[letteredhub]

Logically, let's assume a doctor warned you against eating of white bread probably due to your health condition, that doesn't mean that you can not own and run a bread production company, right? In my point of view, the government policy can ban government works from gambling but might not ban them from owning a casino but in a situation where by this government officials (politician like you called it) participates in gambling in their own casino or the one they are affiliated to, they have gone against the law and that's where they can be sanctioned.

But, man, your analogy of bread and owning the bakery is different in this matter, it's like you agreeing that doctors should own a bakery but nurses shouldn't because they're nurse and not doctors, whereas both are health workers and shouldn't be made one above the other.

Politicians are just bunch of self centered people who gather to make laws that suits them first and better than it does the citizens. Obviously a civil servant can't own a casino with what they earn as salary because it's not even enough for his immediate responsibilities and bills, but the politicians are capable due to what they know how to do best in getting money that they can't really account for by their position. So putting such laws is a bias to the average civil servant and it denies him a right to fun for his own money he laboured for. I see indirect financial control happening there.

[Davidvictorson]

I'm ok with laws that prohibit government workers from playing in casinos, but I'm baffled that politicians can own a casino. One example, our country, the Philippines, has many casinos, online or offline, that are owned or operated by politicians, or they have a share from the family corporation that owns casinos in the country.

Government workers and politicians are not on the same level whatsoever. The former is on the pay roll of the latter.
The latter has the power to do stuff that the former can't. And mind you, it is the politicians that make the laws and they can make in their favour.

Correct me if I'm wrong with my assumption that they both should have no connection to a gambling platform.

Your assumption is not wrong but that is not the reality. It is the same thing in my country as well which is why we continue to see a rise in unregulated gambling platforms and there is yet to be a bill to tackle this growing problem.

[khiholangkang]

I think the issue is not just who is gambling or who is the owner, but whether there is a conflict of interest here. Yes if an ordinary government employee is directly involved in gambling, it is a personal behavior but if a politician is involved in this industry, then his decision making ability can be affected that is the big risk. So in my opinion transparency and strict rules are more important than a complete ban, so that there is no abuse of power.

Is it quite possible that politicians have their minds contaminated by the gambling they do? so that they can make wrong decisions or ideas in making policies? if that is possible then this ban is very good for maintaining the government, on the other hand the state also gives freedom to its citizens to continue gambling even in casinos owned by politicians, but indirectly also this thought is collided with, will the casino owner never gamble to test his own casino, isn't it the same as breaking the rules if the situation is like that?