Business Week Article Today - Please post comments

[ECB]

http://www.businessweek.com/debateroom/archives/2007/09/internet_gambli.html

Internet Gambling Deserves a New Chance
The U.S. should heed the wrath of the World Trade Organization by making betting games legal on the Web. Pro or con?

Please leave a comment on their site.

[Grasshopp3r]

Thank you for posting this. We need to weigh in with careful responses.

[Robin Foolz]

i think i'm going on tilt by having to convo with all the fascist and socialist agendas on there. i think i just made my last post for now.

[ECB]

I know it gets frustrating.

I just found out yesterday by watching the news that I cant do Yoga any longer because the church wont permit it. I can only pray to Jesus now. Couldn't belieive what I was watching. It seems that when a person does Yoga they are also praying and chanting to other false gods. I thought I was just staying healthy and increasing my flexibility.

Things are really getting out of hand folks.

[oldbookguy]

Comment Posted, thanks for linking in.

As follows:
The Con:
1. The U.S. government’s obligation to
protect its citizens from a toxic, addictive product
TRUTH - OK, I’ll buy that, now, lets start next with home shopping Network – MANY are addicted to shopping, we MUST make shoppers go to the mall, no more on TV and shopping on the Internet.

2. If it can’t be controlled, then how could it be responsibly regulated or taxed? States already have a difficult enough time………
Ok, so, tell me how is it States seem to have NO PROBLEM regulating and taxing INTERNET GAMBLING via AOL, MSN, YAHOO! Games where “Skill / Cash Competitions run 24/7, marketed NEXT TO Children's games where children ARE playing 24/7. OK, so, perhaps the target IS NOT online gaming after all, the target IS perhaps, simply a sector DEEMED un-Christian or immoral. AS TO the Muslim countries and pornography and the WTO, they OPTED OUT the same as the United States COULD have done, instead, the U. S. simply wrote in as an objection, NON-Sports, I.E. Ok, just no sports betting. Why, see above, AOL, MSN & YAHOO! Cash Wagering on, ok this is too funny…….
1. Solitaire
2. Hearts
3. Spades
4. Free Cell
5. Rummy poker
6. CHILDREN’S Video Games
7. etc, etc, etc

Look for yourself, Please Mr. Please, tell the truth, the WHOLE truth and NOTHING but, er, the truth?

Nah, too simple……

Enough on the CON for now......

[Uglyowl]

We are Americans, when making decisions we should err on the side of freedom. The argument that if you want to gamble we have plenty of it is absurd. I do not like scratch tickets or betting on horses, it is not my thing.

Through the past 5 years I had different reasons why internet poker was preferable to going to a casino. While I battled cancer a few years back I was unable to go to a casino due to fatigue and a weakened immune system. They do not offer couches to lay down and play cards everywhere! Online poker allowed me to continue to enjoy the game I love even while I was sick, it was a great distraction during a very difficult time in my life.

Today, if I want to play poker where the government says is ok, the closest place is 2 hour drive to, $35 worth of gas, 1 hour wait, and then a 2 hour drive home. With a 3 year old at home, it is better to play a $20 tournament after a long days work after he goes to bed than be out all night.

I agree that gambling can be a problem for some, but we should help those people, not ban it for everyone.

-Joe

[Grasshopp3r]

There are some really good responses in the debate for the pro, but the con relies only upon addiction as the justification for prohibition. Where are the statistics for addiction rates? That ought to end the debate.

[Uglyowl]

Reading our opponents responses is almost infuriating. "Freedom is great, but....."

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]

There are some really good responses in the debate for the pro, but the con relies only upon addiction as the justification for prohibition. Where are the statistics for addiction rates? That ought to end the debate.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I recall correctly gambling addiction rates correspond almost exactly with alcohol and drug addiction rates. This leads me to believe the problem is a certain part of the population with addictive personalities.

[BrianBigNFun]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

There are some really good responses in the debate for the pro, but the con relies only upon addiction as the justification for prohibition. Where are the statistics for addiction rates? That ought to end the debate.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I recall correctly gambling addiction rates correspond almost exactly with alcohol and drug addiction rates. This leads me to believe the problem is a certain part of the population with addictive personalities.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmmmm...seems to me that we shouldnt outlaw the addictive acts but the addicts themselves....

[TheEngineer]

John Pappas' post:

John A. Pappas
September 13, 2007 02:03 PM
Yes, this issue is about freedom, but it is also about the appropriate government response to Internet gambling.

In full disclosure, I am executive director of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA). I would argue that the PPA and our more than 740,000 members agree with the stated goals of those who promoted the UIGEA--preventing underage gambling, helping problem gamblers, combating fraud and abuse--we have a drastically different approach to addressing those legitimate issues, however.

A prohibition won't work; Americans learned this long ago. In order to have safeguards and controls to protect vulnerable populations, the federal government must regulate this industry. Some common-sense legislators understand this, and they are working to promote legislation that would regulate the industry and put in place the necessary protections. Interestingly, Internet gaming, particularly Internet poker, provides opportunities for operators to deliver responsible gaming programs that meet or exceed what is currently done in the "brick and mortar" industry.

Our organization and our nearly 1 million members will continue to educate lawmakers about the benefits of regulation. Someone once said that Americans will always do the right thing, once they've exhausted all other alternatives.

[sethypooh21]

Tried to post the following, but not sure it worked:[ QUOTE ]
Good ideas do not need lies, half-truths and personnel attacks to sell. Mr. Clark's rant offers all three within the space of his first statement of non-fact.

If your argument is based on the prevalence of societal harm, you bear the burden of demonstrating that harm. Unsupported, unsourced and outlandish repetitions of the same unproven allegations are simply insufficient. Anecdotal evidence of a few problem gamblers is similarly insufficient: the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.

So, even accepting for the purposes of argument that the government SHOULD regulate if these alleged societal harms are proven to exist in the magnitude you claim, you have failed to prove that such regulation will be either necessary or effective.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Grasshopp3r]

The postings have to be approved so that they do not contain profanity, etc. They will be posted, shortly.

By my count, the prohibitionists are exposed as the hypocritic loons that they are.

Also, the discussion has been centered on poker, which I think is good. Sports betting and other gaming have other negative issues. I am willing to throw them under the bus, if that is what it takes.

[Legislurker]

But sports betting is by far the most popular betting in the US.

[oldbookguy]

Yes, I just finished looking at the posts and we are looking good in this discussion the magazine wished to start.

Lets work to keep this conversation controlled in our favor, perhaps by continuing to point out the oddness of the governments position.

As a help, I might suggest if you have more than one e-mail address, add a second post with different positive points.

obg

EDITED:
My Follow Up post:
I find it disturbing that we continually hear from the halls of Congress, We ARE A Nation Of Laws and now a lawful ruling we do not like as a government happens we choose to ignore it (WTO ruling).

What is the USTR and governments position, well, we will negotiate a ‘settlement’ with the countries we are going to violate the law with and pay them off.

The cost? The European Communities want 15 BILLION per year, every year, in trade deals AGAINST American companies.

So, Congressman / Senator, what are you going to tell your constituent whose company will be put at a disadvantage and has to close or layoff employees/

Ah my friend, I banned online poker, sorry, but that is a price some will pay. I am sorry you cannot pay your mortgage, but I banned online poker.

Oh, by the way, in November please remember to vote for me, I DID ban online poker.

obg

[Robin Foolz]

[ QUOTE ]

Also, the discussion has been centered on poker, which I think is good. Sports betting and other gaming have other negative issues. I am willing to throw them under the bus, if that is what it takes.

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree. and is not so much that we're throwing sportsbetting under the bus, more like if we support it we'll be thrown (poker) under the bus along with it. supporting s-betting will be the surest way to kill our movement.

going against the dept. of justice, the professional and powerful lobbies of the sports leagues and the individual states who specifically frown upon s-betting, as opposed to simply exposing loonie arguments from the religious extremists who believe poker is inherently evil is, um, suicide.

[Tuff_Fish]

I have said it before. We need to separate ourselves as far from sportsbetting as we possibly can.

Sportsbetting is the third rail. It may be popular, but it has very powerful enemies. We, the poker playing community, do not need to have those same enemies.

Tuff

[Berge20]

[ QUOTE ]
I have said it before. We need to separate ourselves as far from sportsbetting as we possibly can.

Sportsbetting is the third rail. It may be popular, but it has very powerful enemies. We, the poker playing community, do not need to have those same enemies.

Tuff

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

[Robin Foolz]

oh wow. this dr. clark is a real goofball. first he starts his article by insulting the wto, its members, and goes on to completely ignore the trade repercussions the usa is currently facing by stonewalling antigua and the wto. how convenient.

now he is posting in the comments section and going off on a tangent on how wanting internet gambling is somehow akin to wanting cocaine being dispensed thru vending machines and how it is also somehow linked to the topic of prostitution. this guy is everywhere with this. what comedy.

[kidpokeher]

Added my post to the fire.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Added my post to the fire.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well done all. The overall effect was very good IMPO.

D$D

[Uglyowl]

Honestly I am shocked the debate is still going on..bravo.

[Legislurker]

Wow, huge amount of responses, maybe we can get a follow up story. Finally, put a comment in, took a while to sift through the comments to feel the conversation.

[Uglyowl]

Saw this billboard in a "best billboard" countdown, gotta good chuckle thinking of our leader here /images/graemlins/smile.gif

http://jheer.org/blog/archives/images/engineer_sex.jpg

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
Saw this billboard in a "best billboard" countdown, gotta good chuckle thinking of our leader here /images/graemlins/smile.gif

http://jheer.org/blog/archives/images/engineer_sex.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

If anyone ever doubts calling these people's home schooling and education agenda utter hogwash and filth, shove that billboard in their face. If I didn't know it was indicative
(and apparently true) of their thinking, Id think you made it up. Wow.

[kidpokeher]

Besides, everyone knows engineers can't get laid.

[kidpokeher]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, huge amount of responses, maybe we can get a follow up story. Finally, put a comment in, took a while to sift through the comments to feel the conversation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even Jay Cohen weighed in. I'm really starting to like teh interwebs thing.

[carlgraham]

Sweet article - it would be great to see the feds have to back down on this one.

If the suggestion of article is correct, by the time I figure out how to validate my bank account with EPassporte, we'll be back to direct transfers to the offshore casinos. . . /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Cheers, Carl.

[tangled]

Couldn't resist posting again.

[Legislurker]

If I didnn't know better I would say the anti-gambling forces are pushing for propaganda posts from their membership as well.

[IndyFish]

[ QUOTE ]
Added my post to the fire.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mine too, although it hasn't shown up yet. After reading through all 121 responses it seems to me like we're debating a bunch of three-year-olds. Their logic (or lack thereof) escapes me...

FWIW, I found the article through the PPA website before I saw it here. Good job, PPA.