PDA

View Full Version : Keeping Us Safe From Poker



MannyIsGod
04-19-2011, 02:36 PM
There's a thread in the club on this subject here:

http://spurstalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=7

but I know many of you don't go into the club.

Many of you posting here for years know that I played professionally over the course of about 5 years and even though I left that behind its still a very personal subject for me. Whats more frustrating is that it is one of the main reasons I granted my vote for Obama. He's let me down a lot, but if you had honestly told me his DOJ would do this there is no way I vote for him much less go work for him.

Some history here:

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50031

and here:

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58189

In any event, this blog post seemed more fit for this forum than the club which is why I'm posting this thread.

http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2011/04/19/keeping-us-safe-from-poker/


Keeping Us Safe from Poker
Posted by BILL SAPORITO Tuesday, April 19, 2011 at 12:11 pm
2 Comments • Related Topics: gambling, poker, wall street

It's been an interesting couple of days in the place where money and gambling intersects, otherwise known as Wall Street. Over the weekend, the Internet gambling sites PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker and Absolute Poker got taken down by Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, which among other things covers lower Manhattan, where the NYSE lives. On Monday, the stock market got taken down by Standard & Poors, which dialed back its outlook on U.S. government debt to negative from stable.

This is hypocrisy doubled down. The connection between the two events is that Wall Streeters absolutely love poker. The big tournaments in Vegas are filled with quants, bankers, traders and other Street beasts. Puritan Preet's raid on Internet poker sites in a country where gambling is legal in all 50 states, where governments are pushing their own lottery games every day, seems a bit contradictory to say the least—and I'm willing to bet that some of Bharara's staff have played poker. Prosecutors have to have fun, too.

The outlawing of Internet gaming has excluded a potentially large business from the U.S. that could be mined for tax revenues that could help pay off some of the debt S&P is so worried about. The American gambling industry is chomping at the bit to get a piece of this action, which is now consigned to outposts like the Isle of Mann and Antigua. Wynn Resorts already had a deal with PokerStars, but had to walk on it when two of that company's executives, Isai Scheinberg and Paul Tate, neither of whom appears to be an American citizen, were charged with bank fraud, money laundering and illegal gambling. Good luck in extraditing them.

Granted, Bharara has to uphold U.S. law, however dumb it is, but who, exactly, is he protecting? The law the poker sites allegedly violated bars Internet gambling not already sanctioned by law. It was pushed by a couple of Republican blue noses and approved only because it was attached to a must-pass Port Security Act in 2006. So much for the Nanny State being a province of Democrats; so much for the Republican/libertarian/conservative conceit that government shouldn't regulate our personal behavior if it doesn't harm others. People love poker and they love to gamble. (That does not include me; I have no interest in either, given that gambling implies a negative return on investment. I'd much rather put my money in…stocks and real estate? ) But hasn't Bharara has now charged more people (11) for running poker sites that people like and that have harmed few, than he has for causing the financial collapse that has harmed all of us?

Meanwhile at S&P, whose intellectually compromised evaluations of mortgage securities helped underwrite the financial meltdown, they are now all worried about the soundness of U.S. government securities despite a rebounding economy and a Congress that, against the odds, has hammered out an agreement on spending and seems capable of doing same on our unsustainable $14.2 trillion in debt. S&P is shocked, shocked, to discover that we've borrowed too much to get the country out of the mess that S&P helped get us into. Thanks so much for the notice. It sent the Dow down 1.14% as investors, who last week were betting on economic recovery, went into full retreat. Did something change in the U.S. economy between Friday and Monday? Not really, and it's interesting to note that the bond market, the folks who expect to be compensated for long term risk to the economy, pretty much shrugged off the S&P downgrade. The yield on the 10-year bond actually fell a couple of ticks.

So where does this leave us? Politics perhaps. A shot across the bow like this one tells the Obama administration that S&P still has meaning and power and that the regulators should bear this in mind. Likewise, Bhahara may be impotent against the real malefactors on Wall Street, but at the very least he can be a killjoy to one of the Street's favorite leisure pursuits. Now they'll have to go back to gambling with our money.



My income no longer relies on internet poker. I've played live in a casino maybe 4 or 5 times over the past 6 months, and I've played online maybe the same amount of times. Poker has become something I do occasionally and yet this still exasperates the hell out of me. Nothing as ever made me feel so at the mercy of politicians as Bill Frist destroying my livelihood so thats probably while this still hits home.

clambake
04-19-2011, 02:38 PM
its to protect weak people.......and adolescent whores.

hater
04-19-2011, 02:49 PM
in a perfect world there would be no gambling or alcohol or drugs or fucking

they are not stopping gambling, they are stopping the internet to be used as gambling. They are also doing the same with internet provided drugs, sex and pornography.

I don't really see what's wrong with it. Ppl need to get off their fat ass and onto the streets to have fun.

Winehole23
04-19-2011, 02:51 PM
But hasn't Bharara has now charged more people (11) for running poker sites that people like and that have harmed few, than he has for causing the financial collapse that has harmed all of us?

Meanwhile at S&P, whose intellectually compromised evaluations of mortgage securities helped underwrite the financial meltdown, they are now all worried about the soundness of U.S. government securities despite a rebounding economy and a Congress that, against the odds, has hammered out an agreement on spending and seems capable of doing same on our unsustainable $14.2 trillion in debt. S&P is shocked, shocked, to discover that we've borrowed too much to get the country out of the mess that S&P helped get us into.Fussing with the window dressing while thieves are still using the back door. That's some effing bs.

MannyIsGod
04-19-2011, 03:18 PM
Fussing with the window dressing while thieves are still using the back door. That's some effing bs.

Its amazing man. Just flat out amazing.

coyotes_geek
04-19-2011, 05:59 PM
This is the type of nanny state move that I would have expected from Texas, not the FBI.

ManuBalboa
04-19-2011, 06:56 PM
Take down Madoff for running ponzi scheme, forbid anything touching your ponzi scheme (SS). The entire system of government, bankers, & whomever else is running the show is a joke - completely broken, no one is fixing shit.

Wild Cobra
04-20-2011, 02:26 AM
I would never trust internet poker. Too easy for someone to set up a cheat to win for themselves.

boutons_deux
04-20-2011, 04:33 AM
SS is not a Ponzi scheme, you fucking liar

MannyIsGod
04-20-2011, 09:08 AM
I would never trust internet poker. Too easy for someone to set up a cheat to win for themselves.

Too easy huh? :lol

What the hell is it with people talking out of their ass on this subject.

Explain to me how its too easy please.

Winehole23
02-07-2013, 10:37 AM
(http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50031&page=5&p=1256418&viewfull=1#post1256418)from a previous thread:


U.S. officials have declined to participate in Tuesday's gambling summit in London, where lawmakers from 30 countries will discuss ways to regulate the industry, including the protection of minors and keeping the industry free of crime.

Officials from Australia, South Africa and New Zealand, Malta, Costa Rica and Antigua and Barbuda are expected to attend.

Antigua in particular has been engaging in a strong defense of Internet gambling, one of the tiny Caribbean state's few economic success stories.

It argues that the U.S. ban is in direct contravention of a ruling by the World Trade Organization last year that the United States amend some of its legislation to permit Antiguan gambling operations to offer their services to U.S. citizens on a level playing field.



http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/news/ci_4566673
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50031&page=5&p=1256418&viewfull=1#post1256418

Winehole23
02-07-2013, 10:40 AM
upshot:


As a consequence of a long-running dispute (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/29/business/global/dispute-with-antigua-and-barbuda-threatens-us-copyrights.html?_r=0) over online gaming services, the Caribbean nation of Antigua and Barbuda (commonly known as Antigua) may soon begin providing online access to U.S.-copyrighted movies and music without compensating the owners of those copyrights.



Will it be lawful for consumers in the United States and elsewhere to avail themselves of this content? Not in most places. But, before getting to why, it’s helpful to provide some context.


Back in the 1990s, online sports books and casinos proliferated (http://www.nytimes.com/1998/01/31/us/with-technology-island-bookies-skirt-us-law.html) in Antigua thanks to the growing reach of the Internet and a favorable corporate tax environment. In response, American authorities began invoking statutes such as the Wire Act (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1084) to prevent offshore gambling providers from accessing the American market. Antigua considered those actions to be in violation of U.S. obligations under the World Trade Organization’s GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) treaty, and initiated a WTO dispute settlement proceeding (http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds285_e.htm) in 2003.


In a series of reports in 2004 and 2005, the WTO generally found in favor of Antigua, and in 2007, a WTO arbitrator pegged the resulting “impairment of benefits” to Antigua at $21 million annually. In principle, this could be remedied by allowing Antigua to suspend its own equivalently valued GATS obligations towards the United States. However, since this was not feasible given the enormous trade asymmetry between the two countries, the WTO allowed Antigua to request authorization to suspend its intellectual property obligations to the United States under a completely different WTO treaty (called TRIPS), up to an annual level of $21 million. Last week, the WTO formally granted (http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds285_e.htm) Antigua an “authorization to retaliate.”


The island nation is apparently planning to waste no time in doing just that. Harold Lovell, Antigua’s minister of finance, the economy and public administration, wrote (http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/02/01/antigua-world-trade-organization/1881557/) in USA Today on February 1 that his country has “reluctantly decided to suspend intellectual property rights protections for American firms and products.” And, in the international trade equivalent of “nice car; sure would be a shame if anything bad happened to it,” Mr. Lovell asked “why should, for example, the U.S. motion picture industry suffer just so the federal government can continue to protect the monopolies of the big American gambling interests?”

http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2013/02/04-download-copyrights-antigua-villasenor

coyotes_geek
02-07-2013, 10:41 AM
Tough shit, Antigua. We've got a State to Nanny.

Winehole23
02-07-2013, 10:43 AM
check the update, post just above yours

coyotes_geek
02-07-2013, 10:44 AM
Doh!

Antigua, party on!

boutons_deux
02-07-2013, 10:45 AM
Is Online Gambling Legal If Bitcoins, Not Dollars, Are At Stake?

http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/02/06/171182974/is-online-gambling-legal-if-bitcoins-not-dollars-are-at-stake