After GOP banned online gambling in 2006, Dems finally come through to reclaim our liberty

[ElTaino]

Both "toeing" and "towing" are acceptable spellings for this usage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toe_the_line


'Sometimes this phrase is written "tow the line," an eggcorn changing the meaning of the phrase from conformance with a rule to contribution to a cause or effort, as in the act of pulling something with a line, the way a canal man would along a barge canal's towpath.'

thats where i got it. either way it might behoove me to know things like that. thanks zit. i guess i do learn something everyday

 

[barman]

As do I.

I should realize that upon occasion, enough people will mangle an existing English word that it will result in a defacto creation of an alternate word

 

[barman]

This is about control, squeezing out offshore books,

Offshore books can't be "squeezed out" unless a realistic domestic competitor(s) exists

 

[Mistermj]

Offshore books can't be "squeezed out" unless a realistic domestic competitor(s) exists

Nonsense.

The language in the bill lays it out very clearly for us.

"Licensing" is politics 101. You must know that.

The bill seeks to issue licenses to online gambling operators, but only those who are in good financial and legal standing and of good character, honesty and integrity, and whose prior activities, reputation, habits and associations do not pose a threat to the public interest or to the effective regulation and control of of the licensed activities.

 

[barman]

Nothing in your last post supports the notion that the offshore sports wagering industry will be unduly affected by passage of the proposed bill.

The US can put together whatever licensing requirements they wish for online sportsbooks and casinos to operate from a domestic location.

But if those licensed, domestic operators don't offer a sincerely competitive product, they'll have minimal impact on the existing offshore sportsbook industry.

 

[Willie99]

Nothing in your last post supports the notion that the offshore sports wagering industry will be unduly affected by passage of the proposed bill.

The US can put together whatever licensing requirements they wish for online sportsbooks and casinos to operate from a domestic location.

But if those licensed, domestic operators don't offer a sincerely competitive product, they'll have minimal impact on the existing offshore sportsbook industry.

then offshore will still exist, but won't be licensed, eh? Rendering Frank's bill meaningless.

Maybe somebody who works offshore has more insight, or maybe we need to let people digest this bill a little longer.

 

[ElTaino]

But if those licensed, domestic operators don't offer a sincerely competitive product, they'll have minimal impact on the existing offshore sportsbook industry.

until the licensed file complaints and the Illegal Revenue Service realizes (they most likely already have) how much $$ they are missing out on. when that happens, the government will find a way to at least put a heavy dent in "illegal" business. how many big money businesses (big tax dollars) arnt regulated in the US?

 

[Mistermj]

Nothing in your last post supports the notion that the offshore sports wagering industry will be unduly affected by passage of the proposed bill.

The US can put together whatever licensing requirements they wish for online sportsbooks and casinos to operate from a domestic location.

But if those licensed, domestic operators don't offer a sincerely competitive product, they'll have minimal impact on the existing offshore sportsbook industry.

There is nothing in your post that supports the notion that this will be fair to offshore books, or that it is meant to foster competitive US online gaming.

I have greed, human nature and the history of politics regarding Barney Frank on my side.

Time will tell.

 

[Mistermj]

Can anyone find quotes for some of the UK online books yesterday?

I heard they took a hit...that should be a big hint how this is playing out.

 

[gtc08]

i thought the GOP was do whatever you want, individual freedoms rah rah government out of your life party. then you find out only in certain situations.

reason why they are against this is to please the religious part of the party that brings in the votes for them.

 

[barman]

then offshore will still exist, but won't be licensed, eh? Rendering Frank's bill meaningless.

Not exactly. Frank's bill - if enacted as currently written - appears to create and expand the exisiting legal gambling industry within the USA.

And that could be good for a lot of people.

But my entry into this thread was to challenge the notion that the offshore sportsbook industry can be unduly affected by competitors who offer a product of significantly less value.

 

[barman]

until the licensed file complaints and the Illegal Revenue Service realizes (they most likely already have) how much $$ they are missing out on. when that happens, the government will find a way to at least put a heavy dent in "illegal" business. how many big money businesses (big tax dollars) arnt regulated in the US?

The IRS has no legal jurisdiction over offshore sportsbook operations.

As for government "putting a heavy dent" into the illegal business, I think we all know that's somewhat preposterous if that business sells a product that is in heavy demand by tens of millions of Americans.

 

[barman]

There is nothing in your post that supports the notion that this will be fair to offshore books, or that it is meant to foster competitive US online gaming.

The bill is in the United States Congress. It is neither fair nor unfair to offshore books because they operate in complete independence from the US government.

Your first submission strongly implied that passage of the bill would create a domestic market delivering a very overpriced product to American consumers.

In such an event, the offshore market would continue to thrive simply by meeting the demands for a more competively priced product.

 

[Mistermj]

The IRS has no legal jurisdiction over offshore sportsbook operations.

I think you are wrong on that notion as well... the way it is now proposed anyway.

The bill also requires licensees not only to pay taxes on their own revenue but to collect any customer taxes as well "at the time of any payment of proceeds of Internet gambling" wherever presently required to do so by state and/or federal law. Amid these references to taxation, the bill does not outline specifically what activities shall be taxed or for how much, but simply refers to the dutiful payment of taxes "as required by law." A third bill introduced on Wednesday by Congressman James McDermott (D-MA) would provide such a mechanism to collect taxes on online gambling. If McDermott's bill were to be made law, H.R. 2267 would require licensees to follow such a mandate to pay and collect taxes as indicated.

Rep. Frank Introduces Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act | PokerNews.com (7 May 2009)

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2009/05/frank-introduces-internet-gambling-regulation-act-6533.htm

 

[Mistermj]

Hold it...stop the presses. It is in fact worse than I thought it was.

Online gaming will NOT include sports wagering. :>(

The bill also specifically distinguishes sports betting as a variety of online gambling not to be permitted by H.R. 2267

Rep. Frank Introduces Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act | PokerNews.com (7 May 2009)

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2009/05/frank-introduces-internet-gambling-regulation-act-6533.htm

Good call kiln LOL...Barney is in fact trying to kill ALL online sports wagering for his brick and mortar US casino interests.

Just as I thought. hno:

 

[barman]

Brother, you're not being intentionally obtuse, are you?

Forget the language of this bill which if passed would only hold legal sway over gambling operators who are based in the USA.

Offshore sportsbooks would pay as much attention to the language of this bill as they do all current gambling laws within the USA.

 

[barman]

Neither Barney or any other US Congressman can "kill offshore gambling"

That's the funniest post so far.

 

[Mistermj]

Brother, you're not being intentionally obtuse, are you?

Forget the language of this bill which if passed would only hold legal sway over gambling operators who are based in the USA.

Offshore sportsbooks would pay as much attention to the language of this bill as they do all current gambling laws within the USA.

I'm being obtuse? Did you read the title of this thread?

Geezus...Dems reclaiming our liberty?....LMAO.

Thats a real knee slapper.

 

[barman]

aha.....Well now, we're getting to it a dozen posts later.

The topic title is indeed absurd.

My complaint was to your stated notion that anything within this legislation would make the current offshore market less inviting. And I think we can agree that isn't so

 

[Coaster]

I believe it would be hard to shut down the internet.
Thus offshore books would be running and competing.

This being said "How did the US shutout Pinnacle"?