Long Odds For Online Gaming Legislation In US

crimeandpunishment writes "The odds of Congress passing legislation to legalize and tax online gaming are probably no better than those of filling an inside straight, but some lawmakers are pushing for it anyway, hoping to lay the foundation for future passage. At a hearing Wednesday, one lawmaker cited numbers from industry analysts that Americans bet nearly $100 billion a year on the Internet, generating $5 billion for offshore operators. He said laws to prevent online gaming are no more effective than Prohibition was to alcohol."

Comments

Correction: gambling

[Anonymous Coward]

NewSpeak is not spoken here. The word you are looking for is gambling, not gaming. Big difference.

Re:Correction: gambling

[Anonymous Coward]

NewSpeak is not spoken here. The word you are looking for is gambling, not gaming. Big difference.

Nevada Gaming Comission

Founded in 1959. Using "Gaming" to refer to "Gambling" has been around for at least a bit of time.

And if anyone would have some input on Gambling / Gaming, Nevada would.

Re:Correction: gambling

[musth]

Of course it has, because Nevada has every reason to sell gambling with an image of harmless fun, just like all gambling profiteers do. Just because a bulls**t locution has been around a long time doesn't make it less of a bulls**t locution.

Re:Correction: gambling

[PopeRatzo]

Gambling is gaming

Not the way I do it.

Re:Correction: gambling

[MightyMartian]

Indeed. Where does the line get drawn? Alcohol does all these things, and is the most commonly used drug out there, and yet, despite whatever good the Temperance Movement hoped to produce by prohibiting its sale and intake, it proved an absolute failure, for precisely the same reason that prohibitions on narcotics, gambling and prostitution have been dismal failures.

The only reason alcohol, and to a limited extent gambling, are more permissible than narcotics and prostitution is because of what amounts to an irrational motivation based on prejudices. Alcohol is seen, quite wrongly, as a largely harmless recreational drink (despite the clear short-term physiological and mental effects and the absolutely horrible effects of long-term heavy consumption). Gambling is somewhat lower on society's list of vices, so governments opt to allow it with one degree or another of state control, and attempts to shut down illegal gambling don't amount to enforcement of public morals so much as enforcement of a state monopoly. But yet again, an addicted gambler is an addicted gambler, regardless of whether he's punching the money into a heavily taxed slot machine or he's doing it through some online gambling site in the Grand Caymans or, heck, playing an illegal craps game in the back alley.

As to prostitution and narcotics, well, yes, they're bad. Are they worse, overall, than alcohol and gambling? All of them have the capacity to destroy lives, and certainly alcohol has to be the king of destroying lives. When we get rid of a motivation that amounts to legislating based on ick and fear factors (I mean, what other reason would you be able to buy a case of beer legally but get nailed for buying a couple of joints), it becomes awfully hard to justify these morality laws. You will never get rid of prostitution, no matter how harsh the laws. You will never get rid of narcotics use. The issue then should be not pointless and endless wars against them, but rather finding ways to accept that prostitution and narcotics and, yes, online gambling, will happen and then work to mitigate them. For the state, that usually amounts to taxation and control. Admittedly doing that online is a considerable challenge, maybe even impossible, just as impossible as it would be to stop all street walkers even with legal brothels or all back alley craps games even with legal casinos.

No more effective than Prohibition

[H0p313ss]

I'm sure that depends on who you talk to. Lots of people made lots of money because of Prohibition.

Your money is not yours

[exigentsky]

I find it strange that there is a discussion about this issue at all. What people do with their money as long as they aren't hurting others is their business. The government has no right to snoop around and play Big Brother.

Moreover, it gets even more ridiculous due to the sheer hypocrisy of it all. The government is just fine with lotteries or land-based gaming interests (with powerful lobbies) but suddenly when it's online everything changes. They want a piece of the pie but are too stupid to know how and so they try to destroy everything.

The whole thing is completely absurd and incoherent - especially when it comes to poker. Poker is not even gambling, it's a game of skill. It's not chess but the skill element is still undeniable - as players who've won millions of dollars over millions of hands have proven. It could almost be considered a branch of applied mathematics for some forms that are almost solved like limit holdem. Yes, luck plays a big role in any hand but once you get to a reasonable sample size like 100k hands or more it's negligible. I play poker in my spare time and I think it's an interesting challenge that also helps me better understand myself. The variance and multitude of situations will help you become more disciplined, aware when you're not at peak performance and help you deal with failure better. Poker players constantly face failure even when they are ahead but good players don't let it affect them and play the same logical, disciplined game - weighing the odds and understanding their opponents. Online poker is still legal but the thought of the government intruding into one of my hobbies disgusts me.

Re:Your money is not yours

[Pharmboy]

The government is just fine with lotteries

Because THEY are making the profit. Here in NC, alcohol is considered so evil, that only The State is allowed to sell it. In both cases, it is a scam for politicians to insure that the government makes the money instead of private businesses (ie: socialism), and it is easy to get the votes from people who are against gambling and alcohol, because "at least the state is making sure people aren't abusing it", which should send you into a laughing fit.

Here in NC, the justification for the lotto was that it became the "Education Lottery" (ie: think of the children). This way they can give "extra money" to schools. Of course, general funding goes down as it supplanted by the lotto money, so the net result is that the money really goes to the general fund, but unfortunately, most people just don't understand this shell game even if you explain it. "Well, its a good thing we gots the lottery! They cut the budget and the lotto money will make up the difference! Think of dah chilren!"

The worse abuse is that part of the justification was "well, people are going to gamble anyway, we are just providing an outlet". Then wtf do you need to advertise? Why do you need to drum up new business, if your goals are so honorable and only to take care of existing demand? Again, it is a socialistic way to control something popular and take the profit, where it can be divided up by special interests as pay back for the money that lobbyists invested in our elected officials.

Re:Your money is not yours

[jtownatpunk.net]

For #3, It's no more gambling for a bad/new player than for a good/seasoned player. The fact that they're bad at poker doesn't change what poker is unless we're getting into a "cat in the box" thing here where actions/observation determine the outcome.

For #4, I think Full Tilt is onto something with their new Rush Poker. They'll never come right out and say that this new method greatly reduces the possibility of cheating because that would acknowledge the fact that cheating among players is very possible in standard games. But, in Rush Poker, each table is created on the fly from a pool of players for each new hand. So there's no way to get several of your buddies seated at the same table unless you happen to randomly be seated together but then you won't have time to do anything about it because you're only there for one hand then you're moved to a completely new table with a new group of players. It has kind of a "crack heads on meth drinking Red Bull" feel because it moves so fast but it definitely cuts down on the potential for cheating among players.

As for cheating on the server side, I'm all for regulation. Bring those servers onto US soil with independent oversight and auditing.

Yes, people could still get to offshore sites and try to avoid taxes, no problem. But, if iTunes has shown us anything, it's that people are willing to pay a premium price for a product that's trusted and easy to use.

Online poker should be a freakin' DREAM for the government. There's no hiding your activity. Every deposit is logged. Every transfer is logged. Every withdrawal is logged. It should be the easiest thing in the world to tax accurately and efficiently. Way easier than the bajillion card rooms scattered all over the country. And it should be easy to spot and flag problem "gamblers". As I just said, everything is logged. Mine the data and use it to reach out to those people.

Re:First Thought

[Enigma2175]

They will probably just attach it to the net neutrality bill.

Why would they attach it to something that was even remotely related? When they passed the current ban it was attached to the "Safe Ports Act". It's a common practice to attach unrelated amendments to popular bills (What, you don't want safe ports? You terrorist!), I'm sure they will just attach a new ban on the "Safe Children Act" or the "America, Fuck Yeah! Act".