Yuenyong 'Ad Carabao' Opakul. Picture courtesy of Wikipedia

 

Renowned singer Yuenyong Opakul, popularly known as "Ad Carabao," has publicly criticised the planned casino-entertainment project proposed by the Thai government, arguing that it's not worth the potential adverse impacts. Through a Facebook post, he expressed strong opposition to the legalisation of casinos and online gambling, suggesting that these ventures lead to societal detriment rather than benefit.

 

Ad Carabao's concerns centre on the idea that while some individuals may profit, the overall cost to the country outweighs any potential gains. He also alluded to political controversies, referencing former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s hospital stay, albeit expressing that his primary focus is the negative implications of gambling establishments.

 

The government's proposed casino-entertainment complex aims to legalise and regulate such ventures to boost economic growth and create new revenue streams. However, in light of robust public dissent, scrutiny of the bill has been deferred until the next parliamentary session commencing on July 2.

 

Adding to the scrutiny, Assoc Prof Chittawan Chanagul from Kasetsart University's Faculty of Economics criticised Deputy Finance Minister Julapun Amornvivat for engaging with potential casino operators prematurely, before the bill has been ratified by the House. Furthermore, Bank of Thailand governor Sethaput Suthiwartnarueput warned that the project resides in a "grey area" that could harm Thailand's international standing, advocating for a focus on fully legitimate businesses.

 

Responding to criticism, Deputy Finance Minister Julapun argued that countries like Singapore and the United States successfully operate such facilities without reputational harm. However, Assoc Prof Chittawan countered, pointing to the casino industry's links to money laundering and crime, referencing a Las Vegas incident as a cautionary example.

 

Moreover, Assoc Prof Chittawan highlighted Thailand’s low ranking on Transparency International's 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index, emphasising that the country's position is significantly lower than that of Singapore and the US, thus presenting additional challenges to effectively regulating such an industry.

 

The debate around the casino project underscores the complex intersection of economic ambition and ethical governance, with significant voices like Ad Carabao amplifying public discontent and cautioning against policies perceived to risk societal values and integrity.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from Bangkok Post 2025-05-26

 

 

4 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Moreover, Assoc Prof Chittawan highlighted Thailand’s low ranking on Transparency International's 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index, emphasising that the country's position is significantly lower than that of Singapore and the US, thus presenting additional challenges to effectively regulating such an industry.

 

Interesting to hear of a Thai making such a statement.  "They can manage this, but we cannot."

15 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

The government's proposed casino-entertainment complex aims to legalise and regulate such ventures to boost economic growth and create new revenue streams

For the elites.

Carabao has always been an upright man with principles👍

Troll posts and replies have been removed

Thais love to gamble 

Better a casino on thai soil that the government can manage than for thais to flock to the borders to gamble 

8 minutes ago, Hunz Kittisak said:

Thais love to gamble 

Better a casino on thai soil that the government can manage than for thais to flock to the borders to gamble 

Better? 

 

That word is too vague to use in a matter which most likely will impact so many Thai lives.

 

Is it better if more Thai people can visit the casino if it's located in Thailand?

Is it better if the regulatory bodies that oversee the casino's operation are inexperienced Thai or foreign?

Is it better if the tax revenue is increased by facilitating what can be described as a tax on gambling addicts?

 

Despite a 25 year career as a professional gambler, I would vote NO on the introduction of casinos when given the chance.  By far most casino patrons have reasonable limits on their gambling activities, but the impacts on the customers that don't is often tragic.  Many of the societal costs that occur are not considered along with the legalization of gambling.

 

I did my best to make the Las Vegas casinos lose money and leave, but I failed despite having great results and an exciting lifestyle.

I think casinos at designated areas outside of the main cities may be ok. Maybe even creating a special zone as a gambling and entertainment area. But placing it in Bangkok, Pattaya, Phuket, etc will only serve to increase the wrong kind of tourists, traffic, rents, and basically make things worse for anyone actually living there Thais and expats alike. Tourist areas are already too packed - wouldn't hurt to create a new one specifically for that.

 

The issues of gambling accesibility and addiction are moot because Thais already have ample local access to illegal gambling operations. If anything making it legal and administered by established large scale operators like MGM will probably decrease illegal activities while making profits taxable. As long as they keep operations clean and avoid corruption and bribery. This being Thailand....I'm not so optimistic about that.

 

P.S. Online gambling should be legalized. No reason not to.

Far too many Thais have problems with gambling already, it's madness and evil in my view to add to the availability of this insidious vice.

Those who propose such casinos only think of money, not the social consequences, shame on them for their moral bankruptcy.