Dinner With A Congressman

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
There is not a significant number of people with a daytime-trading problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

I personally know half a dozen people who have blown a small fortune doing this. (Very smart people in other aspects of life also)

Makes the kid who robbed a bank over $6,000 in poker losses look like he dropped some change on the ground and couldn't find it.

[rokstedy]

Addicted to day trading

[D.L.M.]

poker is the stock market. there are some sure things and some risks. and on any given day you can lose your shirt.

[zyqwert]

Interest allows money to flow from those who have it to those who want it and compensates for the risk involved. The free flow of capital has economic benefits, but there are cases with bad outcomes (deadbeat + loanshark). Many muslim countries have laws against charging interest (and sham workarounds) because their religon tells them usury is evil.

Gambling is a market for information. The free flow of information has social benefits. When I wanted to know election results, I went to Tradesports, not CNN.

The poker sites did a very fair job of preventing underaged players, far better than you'd find for alcohol, drugs, or porn. Credit cards (the mechanism he mentions) were largely worthless, thanks to charge backs.

Is there any activity he would not be willing to prohibit in the name of protecting the children? Where, exactly, is the victim when I commit the crime of donking off $20 on Stars in an hour?

If he really wants to help me he should ban golf -- that game sucks up my cash far too quickly.

[dlk9s]

1) Ask him when online porn is going to be made illegal, and if it isn't, why it is better for our society than a card game.

2) Be ready to have your socks blown off when he presents the undeniable proof that online poker benefits terrorism.

And not that you don't know this, don't be mean-spirited or confrontational. If this dinner is not set up for you to specifically discuss online poker, respect everyone else's time.

[binions]

The gambling that is business looks with disfavor on the business that is gambling.

[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is not a significant number of people with a daytime-trading problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

O RLY?

One of the more misguided statements I've heard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you prove your point a bit better than that? I'll accept that it seems to be a bigger problem then I realized, but I haven't found anything saying that it is close to or more than online gambling addictions.

Add to that that young people 15-25 are much more likely to get involved with online gambling than online day trading (I don't have statistics for this, but I think you could generally accept that. I knew many people that played poker in University and knew very few that messed around with stocks). Young people are more likely to develop a gambling problem or not be mature enough to risk money within their means.

Finally, even if Day Trading is a significant problem, it doesn't avoid the Government's responsibility to address the online gambling problem. Again I don't agree with their chosen approach, but I have no problem with extra regulations being added to make it harder for teenagers to gamble online or to make it harder to put money in these sites. The argument that poker shouldn't be illegal because cigarettes, day-trading, alcohol, ... aren't illegal isn't valid to me. Clearly somebody that supports making poker illegal could use the same argument for making alcohol illegal.

[FreakDaddy]

Acknowledge gambling can become a problem. Then explain why poker is different than gambling. I like to start by telling people that you don't see any professional slot players, but there are plenty of professional poker players.

The primary problem in this issue is that people in office lump all gambling with poker. The focus should be on why particular states like California recognize that poker is more than a game of chance. Thus it should be treated and regulated (if neccessary) differently than pure gambling (or games of chance like roulette, craps, etc...)

[jbrent33]

[ QUOTE ]
1) Ask him when online porn is going to be made illegal, and if it isn't, why it is better for our society than a card game.

2) Be ready to have your socks blown off when he presents the undeniable proof that online poker benefits terrorism.

And not that you don't know this, don't be mean-spirited or confrontational. If this dinner is not set up for you to specifically discuss online poker, respect everyone else's time.

[/ QUOTE ]

The porn question did come to mind. The terrorism issue was one I was specificly going to ask him about. In the past there have been certain issues, where he will publicly tow the party line but has privately said, "I would never vote for X or Y but it will never come to that" I think he is too smart of a guy to really believe the terrorism link. He's a Republican not a retard.

The conversation will mainly center around college football because that's about the only thing most people around here care about. From what I understand he enjoys it when I am around because I do have an interest in politics.

[donkeylove]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is not a significant number of people with a daytime-trading problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

O RLY?

One of the more misguided statements I've heard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you prove your point a bit better than that? I'll accept that it seems to be a bigger problem then I realized, but I haven't found anything saying that it is close to or more than online gambling addictions.

Add to that that young people 15-25 are much more likely to get involved with online gambling than online day trading (I don't have statistics for this, but I think you could generally accept that. I knew many people that played poker in University and knew very few that messed around with stocks). Young people are more likely to develop a gambling problem or not be mature enough to risk money within their means.

Finally, even if Day Trading is a significant problem, it doesn't avoid the Government's responsibility to address the online gambling problem. Again I don't agree with their chosen approach, but I have no problem with extra regulations being added to make it harder for teenagers to gamble online or to make it harder to put money in these sites. The argument that poker shouldn't be illegal because cigarettes, day-trading, alcohol, ... aren't illegal isn't valid to me. Clearly somebody that supports making poker illegal could use the same argument for making alcohol illegal.

[/ QUOTE ]


I can remember at least a half dozen stories of daytraders killing half an office and then themselves after the tech market went busto. I haven't heard of 1 poker pro killing himself or anyone else after losing his entire bankroll.