|
|
#21
03-03-2007, 10:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Canada
[ QUOTE ]
I think you guys are missing the point. If France/China/Canada/wherever doesn't let unlicensed, unregulated, untaxed B&M gambling businesses operate in their territory, what logical, economic, or legal sense does it make to let offshore internet companies do the same thing? [/ QUOTE ] This is an example of the very common fallacy that lowering trade barriers is good for a nation only insofar as other nations lower their trade barriers. In fact, unilaterally lowering trade barriers is beneficial for almost everyone, regardless of what other nations do. 
|
|
#22
03-04-2007, 01:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canada
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I have discussed that directly with Firepay. There was nothing behind it. [/ QUOTE ] Theres gotta be a reason... no matter how seemingly innocent... [/ QUOTE ] So why did firepay pull out of the Canadian market? They are not abandoning the gaming market, as they still processing gaming transactions in the UK. If anyone recalls, they were the first, about a day or two ahead of Party Poker and 888.com to pull out after the UIGEA was passed. Now, they seem to be the first out of Canada. I'd like to know WHY
|
|
#23
03-04-2007, 02:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canada
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I think you guys are missing the point. If France/China/Canada/wherever doesn't let unlicensed, unregulated, untaxed B&M gambling businesses operate in their territory, what logical, economic, or legal sense does it make to let offshore internet companies do the same thing? [/ QUOTE ] This is an example of the very common fallacy that lowering trade barriers is good for a nation only insofar as other nations lower their trade barriers. In fact, unilaterally lowering trade barriers is beneficial for almost everyone, regardless of what other nations do. [/ QUOTE ] Excellent observation, excellent statement of the general principle. An excellent post all-around Zele!
|
|
#24
03-04-2007, 02:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canada
Edited
|
|
#28
03-04-2007, 04:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canada
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I think you guys are missing the point. If France/China/Canada/wherever doesn't let unlicensed, unregulated, untaxed B&M gambling businesses operate in their territory, what logical, economic, or legal sense does it make to let offshore internet companies do the same thing? [/ QUOTE ] This is an example of the very common fallacy that lowering trade barriers is good for a nation only insofar as other nations lower their trade barriers. In fact, unilaterally lowering trade barriers is beneficial for almost everyone, regardless of what other nations do. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know if you're right about that - that unilaterally eliminating trade barriers is good for everyone - but that's not exactly the point either. No government is going to willingly let a foreign company market a product within its borders that's illegal for its own citizens to market. In other words, if Harrah's can't sell internet poker, US authorities aren't going to let Party Poker do it.
|
|
#29
03-04-2007, 05:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canada
[ QUOTE ]
Well, he does have the paragraph thing down, but he is back to "fire and brimstone rain down upon you." [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Sweden has its own online poker site. No one has tried to stop my Danish friends from online play. The Netherlands has been cracking down on unauthorized B&M play, but has said nothing about the internet. Adanthar has covered France. Canada has not done anything. So about the only thing correct here is that China, that last great bastion of freedom, may also limit onine gambling. Sorry Gaboon, you are going to have to do better than this to scare me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. Skallagrim [/ QUOTE ] A week ago the former head of Finnish betting company - that has monopoly in here - said based on a report of high political level forum that online poker should be restricted or banned in Finland. We have an election here in couple of weeks and it remains to be seen if online poker will still be legal in the future. They say that it is addictive and thus should be restricted, but in reality they probably are worried that it takes money away from the companies that have the monopoly in slots, betting and horse racing to companies in tax havens. One of the arguments in here are the events in US.
|
|
#30
03-04-2007, 05:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: UIGEA \"Virus\" Spreading Like Plague Worldwide
[ QUOTE ]
--Canada has stated that it may follow the USA with similar legislation of internet gambling. [/ QUOTE ] "Canada" said this? Please provide a link to an official statement. [ QUOTE ] --China, which has potential for massive online poker growth, has stated that they will severly regulate online gambling. They have gone so far as to say they consider it a scourge. [/ QUOTE ] Isn't China basically anti-gambling? I don't think this has anything to do with an UIGEA reaction [ QUOTE ] --France looks like it is following us with severe legislative restrictions to such a degree that today Party Poker announced it is pulling out of France. [/ QUOTE ] Where is "France"? [ QUOTE ] --According to gambling 911.com the climate in Scandinavia and the Netherlands is not good right now for online poker. [/ QUOTE ] A reliable source, indeed.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
