Got a problem?

I am always amused at how Big Papa (read: gahment) has a solution, or so-called, to every problem that is inherent in society.

Take today for example. There was an ad on TV. Well, it wasn't really an ad but rather, this organisation was a sponsor for some show, or as I see it, for propaganda. The organisation in question is the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG). Is this a joke or what?

Since time memorial, or maybe let's not go too far back. Since recorded history when immigrants from China & elsewhere in the world came to this Little Red Dot to make their living, gambling dens had already made their presence & significance in society felt. Today, it's as normal to Q to buy a lottery ticket as normal as it is to be Q-ing to pay for a bag on sale. You mean that it's taken this long to realise that it *IS* a problem and therefore, an organisation is set up to address it? Or is it saying that people these days have less self-control than our forefathers in the past that professional help is enlisted so as to prevent further destruction to personal fortunes and society?

The NCPG was appointed in 2005 to address problems of gambling. Why, we have the IR project to thank so people who have or are liable to have problems related to gambling have a helping hand or shoulder to cry on. Actually, the IR project is still in stages of infancy, or perhaps not even infancy. It's been conceived but nobody wants to take the responsibility of carrying it through. It's like a foetus conceived through some fertilisation project but nobody wants to carry it to full term - a few potential players have pulled out of their bid in the IR project. I'm digressing - back to the point.

So all the talk & concerns on how gambling will damage society. So what really *IS* the problem?

(A) Gambling really *IS* a problem. Therefore, an organisation must be set up to solve the problems that gambling poses.
(B) There is a camp that thinks that gambling is a great vice. Therefore, an organisation must be set up to appease this camp so as to show that there is a back-up/support to help the fallen ones and/or the would-be fallen ones.

As typical as things get on Little Red Dot, a committee or some organisation must be formed to appease the furore surrounding the go-ahead for a IR. Such is the state of things in a state where everyone's life is dictated - from having children to who to cast the vote for in an election. It's easy, I suppose, on an island where 4 million live in and out of that number, a fair number don't have roots to call this place home. (Actually, I feel pretty displaced too, but that's another thing altogether.)

Here on the Little Red Dot, most decisions have already been made. Problems? Quite easily solved. Afterall, no one is going to argue about what's good & what's not. So what has age-old habit got to do with personal freedom of choice?

A big debate preceeded the announcement of the arrival of IR on our shores. The discerning ones among us would know what the answer is - it is a go-ahead project. So much for public opinion, consultation papers, etc etc. A well-put up show. To appease every corner of us, even the NCPG is set up to show that adequate steps have been taken to ensure that nobody falls in too deeply with obesession for the habit. A little too late?

Whatever happened to free will, I don't know. I suppose Rousseau was right - that the condition of freedom was inherent to humanity, with the implication that all social interactions subsequent to birth imply a loss of freedom, voluntarily or involuntarily.

My problem is this - why provide counter measures when it is a fact that such an organisation can only do this much, or rather education can do this much. Afterall, it is one's personal choice to dig further & deeper into the habit. You can force the food into my mouth but I can still choose to spit it out.

Got a problem with that?