What is Digg?199 Comments
- Scheissen, on 10/15/2007, -5/+96Why is online gambling even illegal?
- inactive, on 11/11/2007, -8/+72Typical ***** lie in the title, as we have all come to expect from msaleem. A think tank accusing them, and suggesting that they could be liable for up to $100 Billion is NOT the same as facing a $100 Billion fine. Msaleem of course KNOWS this. But you don't get to the Digg front page by giving facts any more. And since Msaleem's whole life is judges based on his front page percentage, he can't take any chances just for the sake of accuracy.
- tehbored, on 10/27/2007, -14/+56Great. Just what we need, more debt. Out of curiosity, does Ron Paul want to leave the WTO?
- halavais, on 10/16/2007, -1/+39Yeah, but he also doesn't want to regulate gambling, so...
- Valhalla, on 10/14/2007, -3/+38There is a very real political implication in this, one that goes beyond the United States. The concept is that by joining an organization such as the WTO a country in all practicality agrees to abide by a set of rules established by an international organization or risk penalties. The risk to any member nation is that they will be forced into compliance with international will and will not do what maybe in the best interest of their people.
- JonForTheWin, on 10/27/2007, -1/+32Because the government hates freedom.
- brianbb98, on 10/27/2007, -2/+33Because its mainly based overseas so the money all goes out of country. Or to... "protect kids" who gamble online.
- Mast3rDigg3r, on 10/15/2007, -2/+28it was snuck in with the SAFE Port Act - which no congressman could vote against because it increased the security of our ports
- chukd, on 10/15/2007, -1/+23You are right about it having to do with states rights. Nevertheless Congress did pass a bill that became law a couple years ago banning online gambling sites in the United States. The sites that are common among internet poker are not based in the United States.
- DamnLogins, on 10/16/2007, -2/+23This is going to be MUCH bigger than you are probably imagining. Non-compliance could give other countries the ability to ignore US patents for example.
- vault, on 10/15/2007, -3/+19I can't stand people who automatically digg anti-American stuff without reading it, but in this case the ban on online gambling was attached to a port security bill that no one was going to vote against, and I find that abuse of Congress to be offensive as an American. Why is gambling suddenly morally acceptable in Las Vegas, Atlantic City, at horse tracks, and in state lotteries but if an adult wants to play poker online they're a heathen? What happened here is the WTO and Antigua sued over it because many of the casinos have their charters offshore.
- neshcom, on 11/08/2007, -3/+18Buried not for the crappy article, but for the wrong section. Put this ***** in news. Playable web games means links to playable games.
- inactive, on 10/17/2007, -0/+15wow, playable web games.../sigh
- Elderon, on 10/15/2007, -3/+18This is one of those cases where the government thinks it knows better than it's citizens. I don't gamble for a few reasons, one I don't have the spare money to gamble and 2, I understand the risks(ie I know I most likely WON"T win). That aside It is MY choice wether I gamble with my own money or not. I feel that as long as I can go to a casino and gamble I should have the right to gamble anywhere else I choose.
- BrandNewJesus, on 10/16/2007, -5/+19The Thing is, IF WE DON'T PAY
We will basically be kicked out of the "club" and the other countries wont have to follow any of our rules anymore. - BlackAle, on 10/14/2007, -4/+17not as retarded as one country declaring war on another.
- halavais, on 10/14/2007, -2/+15Are you from Mars? The WTO opens countries up to 1st world products for further exploitation. I say "exploitation" with all the love it deserves, since I think free trade raises all boats, but there can be little doubt that it favors the developed world.
- nizzy1115, on 10/15/2007, -2/+14im pissed i cant play poker online for money anymore. winning stacks of free chips doesnt do it for me. i like a large sum in a bank account better. i hope they can bring it back somehow.
- Awspire, on 10/18/2007, -1/+13Who's in? 50 bucks it'll never happen...
- mousky, on 10/15/2007, -1/+12That would be another stupid law based on protecting native casino's and the big boys in Vegas.
- Valhalla, on 10/14/2007, -3/+13Yes that is true, but the United States is the member of the WTO not the states and I guess they feel that by allowing the states to make their own decisions that may very well represent the feeling of the people the federal government is accountable for the states decisions that do not fall in line with the WTO.
- inactive, on 10/15/2007, -0/+9This may not affect most people, its a very bid deal for me however. When party poker went down in the us I was devastated. There were soooo many idiots just throwing money around. Im a college student and I work but playing cards online was a great supplemental income. Ive moved to other sites since but it took a while to get a decent deposit/withdrawal method. In the long run I definitely lost some money from this BS. Free trade ***** over 3rd world countries BTW. Very badly.
- slackerjack, on 10/14/2007, -2/+11one word response: TAXES
- ottodestruct, on 10/15/2007, -4/+13Yes. I believe he also wants to leave the UN, NATO, and possibly NAFTA. I'm not as sure on the last one as I am of the others.
- toasty168, on 10/15/2007, -0/+9like our government gives a flying *****. it's the tax payers' money not theirs.
- HHP2K, on 10/15/2007, -1/+10/drevil
You will pay me..
ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS!
WUAHAHAHAHAHA!! WUUAHHAHAHA!! - TheZorch, on 10/14/2007, -0/+8The WTO has the power to fine nations under the authority of the UN. Don't pay the fine and face heavy sanctions for doing so. The US could suffer if it doesn't pay the fine and change the law.
- haydesigner, on 10/15/2007, -1/+8George W.'s first campaign ran strongly on isolationism (but everyone seems to have forgotten that since he's done a complete 180).
- halavais, on 10/14/2007, -4/+11No, they will penalize the US by further limiting our exports, squeezing our economy even further.
- DigitAl56K, on 10/14/2007, -0/+7Jeez, there's a lot of whining on this thread!
If the you break the law you pay the price. You guys all cry foul when the government acts like it can do whatever it wants and faces no consequences, but then when there is a real possibility of them being held to account over something it's all "***** the WTO!".
Let me tell you something, I live in the US. The national debt and the weak dollar affects me as much as it does the next person. But if the WTO fines America $100bn and it _finally_ gets a real reaction from the people then it's $100bn well spent IMO. If you are a true American you should take pride in a) living in a country that leads the world in doing the right thing, and b) taking care of your responsibilities. All of the anti-WTO posters here are in essence saying "screw the rest of the world for expecting us to live up to our end of the bargain". Is that really the statement you want to be making? - perogi21, on 10/18/2007, -0/+7I think the US needs to go double or nothing on the fine.
- AdamMPkins, on 10/15/2007, -11/+18Rabble Rabble Rabble...Manifest Destiny. Seriously. That ban WAS ***** anyways. It was just another way to criminalize the American citizens. There is NOTHING wrong with internet gambling to begin with. Another stupid law based on Christian bible beliefs.
- topapito, on 10/14/2007, -0/+7That sounds pretty dictatorial considering the US created the WTO so that it could use it to hunt down the copyright thieves. Now that it is biting you in the ass, and legally I might add, you tell it to go ***** off. Bright, I love the smarts you display.
- mousky, on 10/15/2007, -0/+6Free trade favors all those involved. Farmers in Africa would fare much better if America and Europe eliminated all agricultural subsidies, direct and indirect.
- mousky, on 10/15/2007, -2/+8Easy to do. You charge a duty on American goods and services.
- inactive, on 10/15/2007, -4/+9Isolationism was tried prior to WWII and didn't work then. It won't work now. The United States needs to realize that we can remain autonomous and still work and play well with other countries. If online gambling is a problem there are more ways to solve it than by passing federal regulations against it. The closest comparison I can think of is the RIAA trying to regulate web sites in Sweden, i.e. The Piratebay. We made web sites in other countries illegal by banning on line gambling. Not really our place to do that. Diplomacy with the country that hosted the sites might be a better way to go.
- chukd, on 10/14/2007, -0/+5Just found the website.
http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Federal-Laws/intern ... - Bonzodog, on 10/14/2007, -0/+5Um..No we don't. US IP Laws are not applicable outside the US. Here in europe we do not have to listen to anything the US says or does regarding copyright or IP.
- Zique, on 10/15/2007, -0/+5What are you gonna do, occupy their offices?
- Awspire, on 11/11/2007, -3/+8Ya, I'm sure he's pushing to create unsafe work conditions. Last I knew, Ron Paul had no problems with organized unions working to safeguard their work environment, just no legislated preferential treatment.
- BlackAle, on 11/02/2007, -3/+7Ah a true xenophobe.
- inactive, on 10/14/2007, -1/+5I don't care if it protects them, I enjoy gambling, especially poker. I cant play cards online from the "freest country in the world" ? (which we aren't BTW) But we host the worlds biggest poker tournament. Ya that makes A LOT of sense??
- elipabst, on 10/15/2007, -1/+5@aadsfasdf: Many people who work in mines do so because it's the only decent paying job they can get in town and they don't have any other choice even though it still is a dangerous job. They basically live paycheck to paycheck and can't afford to move somewhere else (often because changing jobs would cause them to lose seniority and therefore salary). That may not make sense to you in your isolated little world of mommy's basement, but for many people that is reality. Your other suggestions are moronic.
- LeeSoong, on 10/15/2007, -5/+9big fine, really?
come and try to collect it ...
[think of the 'scarface' version of the above comment] - Bamborzled, on 10/15/2007, -1/+5Was that a joke, or are you really that asinine?
Maybe if I am working in a condition like that, I... CAN'T quit because then I wouldn't have any, you know, money? You Ron Paul supporters claim to know everything about it, right? - shadowsword232, on 10/14/2007, -1/+5It was taking money away from casinos. So they lobbied it to death.
- elipabst, on 10/14/2007, -2/+6Like abiding by our copyright and intellectual property laws.
- perogi21, on 10/14/2007, -0/+4There still is online poker, you just have to find it.
- elipabst, on 10/15/2007, -1/+5So what happens when *all* employers forgo safety measures because it isn't cost-effective? If a business cuts cost by ignoring safety measures, then all it's competitors are going to have to cut costs somehow as well. So like dominos they all cut safety measures and soon there is no option B for employees. You either work at your dangerous job or you and your family go on welfare...oh wait Ron Paul wants to cut welfare too, so you and your family just starve in the streets.
- duniyadnd, on 10/14/2007, -0/+4I would have thought the US companies don't exist cause it's illegal for them to have online gambling in the first place.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 193 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is