Article from The Economist

[Zele]

This article is in this week's Economist, in the leaders (front section). There is another article in the business section. It's great to see this in such a widely read and well-respected magazine.



-----------------------------------------------------------
Online gambling

Texas hold 'em
Jul 20th 2006
From The Economist print edition


American attempts to ban online gambling are self-defeating and hypocritical


"If you want to put the industry in the hands of dodgy dealers registered in Tuvalu or Vanuatu, if you want to guarantee websites without protection for children or restraints on compulsive gamblers, if you want to help money laundering and fraud, then prohibition is the policy for you."

"Registered, branded, taxed gambling companies are not perfect protection against the excesses of betting, but they are the best there is."

Edit Excerpts - Sorry had to cut it up, but we cant reproduce full articles here.
-Berge

[Berge20]

Guys - We've got to stop cutting/pasting whole articles like this. I realize there isn't a simple link since it is a pay subscription (part of the problem), but can you quote a few paragraphs and summarize it?

Sorry to have to do this, but it is a problem for 2+2 and if you don't do that I'll have to hack it up and it'll miss your point more than likely.

[Zele]

Sorry, Berge. I should have known better; I was just so excited they put this up front. Can you delete my earlier post, and let people read these excerpts?


"If you want to put the industry in the hands of dodgy dealers registered in Tuvalu or Vanuatu, if you want to guarantee websites without protection for children or restraints on compulsive gamblers, if you want to help money laundering and fraud, then prohibition is the policy for you."

and

"Registered, branded, taxed gambling companies are not perfect protection against the excesses of betting, but they are the best there is."

Thanks,
Zele

[whitepotatoe]

Beautiful article. It's good to see some reputable news that points out the blatant hypocrisy of this bill. Thanks for not cutting it up Berge.

[redbeard]

articles supporting our cause from reputible media outlets such as this can only serve to help us. score one for the good guys.

[MannyIsGod]

The problem is that the bill isn't meant to win over the demographic that reads The Economist. People who read the Economist tend to be educated people who lean torwards classic liberalism (Libertarians) who understand why this bill is foolish.

However, the average American is always going to see it as the Government looking out for their own good.

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is that the bill isn't meant to win over the demographic that reads The Economist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Precisely.

[Gregg777]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is that the bill isn't meant to win over the demographic that reads The Economist. People who read the Economist tend to be educated people who lean torwards classic liberalism (Libertarians) who understand why this bill is foolish.

However, the average American is always going to see it as the Government looking out for their own good.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, but the more logical pro online gambling views from reputable sources, the better.

[DING-DONG YO]

[ QUOTE ]
Guys - We've got to stop cutting/pasting whole articles like this. I realize there isn't a simple link since it is a pay subscription (part of the problem), but can you quote a few paragraphs and summarize it?

Sorry to have to do this, but it is a problem for 2+2 and if you don't do that I'll have to hack it up and it'll miss your point more than likely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Possible solution: For a paid subscription, there is often a link to "email" the article to friends. Email the article to yourself. Then there is usually a link to the article in the email that is good for X period of time without a subscription. I know the WSJ works that way.