Online gambling and the law
When someone takes away something you like, it is easy to find fault with the decision that took it away. You see this sort of behavior in children, but adults do it too. So the government takes away internet gambling (to some extent) and there are lots of people screaming about it and finding fault with the decision.
I can do without the online poker. I enjoy poker a great deal but in person is a lot more fun anyway. I just got back from a business trip and got to spend some time at a no-kidding real casino. I played some poker and realized (again) that online poker and real poker are two very different games. I think it has something to do with the pace of the game. Online is much faster, and requires less skill, IMHO.
My site doesn’t really need the advertising revenue from the online casinos either. For one thing I think i will continue to be allowed to carry the banners and for another I think the casinos will remain willing and able to spend money to advertise. So I can avoid being biased against the decision because of lost advertising revenue.
So how does this decision affect me?
I’m embarassed that the legislation had to be bundled with some other (completely unrelated) garbage just to get it passed. In other words, it didn’t have enough legs to stand on its own.
I’m embarassed that the goverment is pretending that the law is masquerading as a law to protect the US citizen against gambling addiction, yet is excludes my favorite form of gambling, horse racing. If it was about protecting us from ourselves, it would do a better job.
There is also the (ridiculous) assertion that these offshore entities cannot be regulated by US laws and thus we are all vulnerable to fraud if we frequent them. The fact of the matter is that given the nature of these sites, they have to work that much harder to be clean and operated on the up and up because if there is even the slightest hint of an unfair game, visitors will leave like rats leaving a sinking ship. In other words, it was pretty much self-polcing already.
I’m embarassed that the law appears to be supported by the conservatives in Congress, the group I tend to relate to the most closely. It just seems to me we could be a lot more clever than just putting a pinch on online gambling. It appears to be an industry that has a strong will to exist, not unlike the alcohol production industry in the days of prohibition. Surely there is a way to regulate and tax the activity. Being October, it stinks of a pre-election display of party morality.
October 21st, 2006 at 1:40 am
Mr. Liam, Your the 1st of many comments on On-Line gambling that expresses it the way I feel about it. I thought I was alone on tthis but good job in expressing it so well. I do not gamble online at all but I agree the law seems to be self serving for the politicians in some way, IMHO. Thanks for this site.
rcox1017.
October 22nd, 2006 at 1:44 am
Liam, I enjoyed your thoughtful comments on our Congress’ attempt to eliminate on-line casino gambling. Something to consider: The attempt to curtail gambling will have to face the reality that gamblers want to gamble and off-shore sites want gamblers to gamble, and between them they will find a way to get it done. The passage of the law won’t change a gambler’s desire to gamble, only the method he finds to scratch the itch.
From another perspective, the hypocracy of the situation is outrageous. The overwhelming majority of states sponsor lotteries, with a state take-out of about 50%. If a gambler wants the road to ruin, a state lottery is a short cut. But our congessional representatives choose to ignore this, observing that the proceeds serve some worthy purpose. Taxing and regulating on-line casino gambling is the obvious answer.
October 24th, 2006 at 5:22 pm
Well put reaction to the UIGEA, the bottomline being that it was passed in a very covert way, it just lacked the class and statesmanship one would expect from the likes of Bill Frist. This is an insult to the American system. Prohibition of gambling at this day and age is just way too backward. Regulation would have eliminated fly by night operators and protected consumers. But no. Conservatives will have it their way - don’t eat that apple, they say.