Slashdot Mirror
Push To End Online Gambling Ban Gains Steam
The Washington Post updates a story we discussed last spring about a push in the Democratic-controlled congress to legalize some forms of Internet gambling in the US. "Partly bankrolled by offshore gambling companies, the campaign has already persuaded the Obama administration to delay enforcement of a 2006 law cracking down on Internet wagers. ... The federal government, which rarely prosecutes online gambling, would net billions of dollars in tax and licensing revenue if it were legalized, proponents say. ... The outlook on Capitol Hill, however, is uncertain given a slate of unfinished business... [and] nervousness among Democrats about November midterm challenges. ... [A politically conservative poker player said] 'There's a part of the party that always believes this isn't something people should do. But I think it behooves the party to be a little more broad-minded on this issue.'"
... as opposite to making them unlawful ?
I do not understand, if they make it unlawful it still gives the same incentives, isn't it ?
Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?
We already have internet gambling. I gu
"He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
It's harder to regulate, and easier for people to get addicted and gamble away all their assets at home.
So, are you trying to ban etrade.com and "flipping houses"? Or is risk taking in general ok, and you just want to impose your peculiar morality about playing cards on others?
I'm not sure how its easier to get addicted to gambling at home. I can tell you don't have a spouse, house, and little kids, as god knows I can't accomplish any tasks at home anymore. Back in the bachelor apartment days, well yeah, maybe, and in addition to spare time, I also had more available cash to "gamble". D-n-D, watching sports, and MMORPGs suffer the same fate.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Mmmm. The same can be said about all e-commerce. Or all e-anything, pretty much. Do you want to ban the internet ?
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
It's harder to regulate
Why should gambling be regulated at all? Cheating is fraud, that's already illegal. With illegal gambling, fraud is harder to prosecute, since the victim is also breaking the law.
and easier for people to get addicted and gamble away all their assets at home
It's not up to government to keep you from eating too much, drinking too much, or gambling too much. It should not be government's role to protect you from yourself, government's role should protect you from ME. You would like them to outlaw McDonald's because too many people can't help but shove so much junk food down their gullets that they become unhealthily obese? I supppose you want to outlaw World of Warcraft because some people screw their lives up with that? Outlaw alcohol because some people are alcoholics?
If you have a problem with gambling, that's a personal problem, not a public problem and is non of my or government's business.
and gets people out of the house
Dude, this is slashdot. Most of us don't even come out of the basement. HIBT?
Free Martian Whores!
Of course there is no 100% guarantee that the online gambling site is not putting an employee that can see the cards in on a table, but that would really net them so little money in comparison to hosting 100's or even thousands of tables simultaneously, and getting their little fee from each of them. Not the mention the damage to their reputation if it were discovered (there is great competition amongst online poker sites.)
I'm not a democrat or a republican so lets clear that political nonsense up right now. I'm so sick and tired of having to protect people from themselves when it's something that THEY can control. Sure some people may need help but it shouldn't be the governments job to prevent this.
If someone doesn't do research on something they put money into... well... that's their loss. If they are STUPID enough to think that gambling will eventually pay off then they deserve to lose everything they bet. That's why it's called gambling.
There HAS to be a point where responsibility is the burden of the risk taker. "I didn't know" or "I'm addicted" just won't cut it. You pay the price for the decisions you make in life.
This isn't like insider trading, or drug testing. You know exactly what you are getting into simply via the title of what you're doing. I'm so sick and tired of hearing people complain about gambling addiction and then blaming the Casino's or online companies. NOONE forced you to bet the money, you did it.
I do not want this great country to start managing my life choices. If I want to be an idiot and gamble away something I can't afford... then that's MY responsibility.
If you want to have a chance at monitoring things like this then you need to set ground rules that CAN be enforced.
1) Anything over $10,000 must be claimed (just like current customs rules) and taxes applied. If caught not doing so, the penalty is severe (20% of amount brought in) + jailtime/community service
2) Gambling income is considered just like typical earnings. You have to pay appropriate taxes on income. Some people are good enough to make this profitable. Why stop them if they are willing to pay taxes on it.
There is ZERO need to regulate this. People go to Vegas for the experience. There is a world of difference between betting $1000 online and sitting at a table with a crowd around you as you bed $1000 and win. I'd know.
Buncha hypocrites. The whole dispute over online gaming is similar to the war on some drugs. Legal online gambling
Some people make money, others lose a lot. Some can get quite addicted to it and go really bust, and suffer all the social ills they worry about with online poker or whatever other game.
And we have never had any big economic meltdown from online poker or blackjack, but we sure as heck had a major problem with credit default swaps and so on "gaming", including the use of bots for gambling with massive bets that are large enough to move the markets themselves, plus crony gambling insiders being shuffled into and out of the official currency creation/interest setting and so called "regulation" part of that scene.
A key feature of gambling against the house is that, over the long run, the house will always take its cut.
Aka sales commission
http://www.flipkart.com/customers-yachts-schwed-fred-jr/0471770892-1xw3frp8bb
"The title refers to a story about a visitor to New York who admired the yachts of the bankers and brokers. Naively, he asked where all the customers' yachts were? Of course, none of the customers could afford yachts, even though they dutifully followed the advice of their bankers and brokers."
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
I think the sooner, the better. Solid competition from USA-based casinos would allow for a well-regulated, well-run environment. Even Reservation Casinos would do well. Why? Only US-based casinos could offer incentives to players to come to their hotels and restaurants. If Caesar's offered their player-points to players away from the casino, they'd be able to make money without a customer there, but then when they have some points, they can come in and take care of them. Customers will want to go, and will inherently trust domestic bookmakers more than offshore. Just ensure that all online-gambling is FEDERALLY taxed. Get something out of it, please. Tax the stupid.
Did you volunteer for your doctor to cut off the wrong leg? No.
Did you voluntarily eat contaminated food (hint: you can't volunteer for something you didn't know existed)? No.
Did you ask that drunk driver to smash into your car at 80 mph? Of course not.
You really need to think about what the word "volunteer" means before trying to say I'm using it incorrectly.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.