Protectionalism - US Gambling

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by Neodude, Jul 18, 2006.

  1. Neodude


    Looks like gambling sites are in for a rough patch. The American Gambling establishment has lobbied high enough to get the US authorities to start legal actions against over-seas based gambling sites.

  2. Cesko


    Scumbags in Washington have nothing better to do. I guess they are going to close all state loteries, the whole fucking LV, horse betting etc. Morally speaking gambling is gambling, isn't it? God I hate those Washington whores.
  3. Yeah, too funny. I can remember as a kid in CA when the legalized the lottery saying we were supporting schools and BS. I would love to see if those funds were misappropriated or not. I know the answer.

    I think the fat cats would feel different if they could find away to suck taxes off of online gambling.
  4. cashonly

    cashonly Bright Trading, LLC

    It will inconvenience gamblers and just cost them a little more.

    What will happen is that they will hook up with an offshore payments company. You will pay that company with your US credit card (just like paypal) and seeing as how that company is not under the jursdication of the US, they can put the money in your account at the gambling site, and because you are not paying for gambling, just putting money in a payment system the same as you would paypal, credit card companies are under no legal obligation to block the transaction.

    I'm sure the sites will make it all extremely easy for even the most bleary-eyed drunken gambler to be able to use with no problem!

    So, gambling sites still make money, credit cards still make money, and now a middleman makes money which is taken out of the gamblers pocket.

    I have nothing against gamblers, gambling, or offshore companies making money in a niche. I just have a problem with a legislature that's wasting it's time doing something like this when the effect will be minimal and they could be spending time on more productive stuff (maybe on the other hand it is a good time, cause otherwise, they'd be spending time figuring out how to spend even MORE of our money!)
  5. Neodude


    I agree with cashonly however, I think there are some broader implications here, namely the arrest of executives who's companies are domiciled out of the US for the crime of accepting American's gambling money.

  6. they are still saying lottery is to fund schools. i wonder where those money go. i know when i went to school, anything cool like computer, and tv were all donated.
  7. kbeck


    man, war in iraq killing thousands, al-quaeda scumbags everywhere, genocide in africa, neocons vs. libs here in u.s. hating each other, destruction of gulf coast, on and on. and these guys are worried about the second oldest occupation of gambling. man give me a break.

    regulate it and tax it

  8. I agreed with you on this until I thought about how Congress might muck up the really important issues. Now, I'm totally in favor of political masturbation -- let Congress get its panties in a twist over whether gay couples can gamble about flag burning. As long as they are shooting legislative blanks, they're not ruining the country.
  9. Agreed like cigarettes. I don't want my taxes going to pay for some poor trailer park dude that doesn't have health care and needs lung cancer treatments. Tax the shit of it. Smokers will pay $7 a pack if they have to. Gamblers would pay too. It's all about addiction. I know I used to smoke. How many ppl, not even alchoholics, would say I am not buying that alcohol because the taxes are too high. Prohibition proved that ppl will pay what the market will bear.
  10. gaj


    i mentioned this exact idea to a lawyer friend of mine two weeks ago, and he agreed with me (and you, and others) that it would be the likely outcome, if this ever come to fruition.

    i also said that, if the ISPs had to 'ban' party poker, we'd see something like this:

    an offshore company is created. your information would be passed to *that* site, which would pass it on to party poker, and back again. so your ISP would see things from (offshore company)'s IP address...

    interestingly enough, banks will start to complain if this does pass - they'd have a tremendous amount of time and money to make sure payments weren't sent to the 'wrong' places, and the banks have some good lobbyists there.
    #10     Jul 18, 2006