Group Admins
Bill HR2267 - Online Gambling Bill
Public Group active 3 days, 11 hours agoWith the House Financial Services Committee voting it forward by 41 to 22, Barney Frank’s HR2267 bill seeking to legalize online gambling in the United States.
-
Troy Potter joined the group Bill HR2267 - Online Gambling Bill 3 days, 11 hours ago · View
-
Santiago Epelde Ferrante joined the group Bill HR2267 - Online Gambling Bill 3 days, 14 hours ago · View
-
Glenn Grgurich joined the group Bill HR2267 - Online Gambling Bill 1 month ago · View
-
Todd MacPherson posted an update in the group Bill HR2267 - Online Gambling Bill: 1 month ago · View
I personally think that this will become law because the Feds stand to make a fortune in tax revenue. The Vegas Lobby Group stand in its way but I think that money will win out in the end.
So Assuming that this becomes law, will that not legitimize the ASM platform? SRI is great but I love my ASM.
Thoughts?
I was made aware of this bill being drafted right after we engaged our principal law firm in Washington. They are part of the main group involved in moving this forward. In fact, I had a number of discussions concerning the potential impact of passage and what it could mean for our efforts.
First, this will not be easy to pass. Yes, there is a HUGE and growing need for new sources of tax revenues. However, ”gambling” is a dirty word on Capitol Hill. Expect big opposition from the far right and, most importantly, the sports leagues and industry itself. I specifically made these comments to our lead counsel and he agreed with me but said ”there is a lot of money behind this”. If I were making a bet, I would say this will not pass in the present environment… regardless of the need for taxes. On top of this, there must be a coordinated effort to get cooperation at the state level. That will be a huge undertaking with nothing close to a certain outcome. Bottom line, this is a long shot in my opinion.
Now, if I am wrong, it could definitely open the door for a restart of ASM in the United States and a big expansion push. As far as the effect on the SRI, there would be none either way. By definition and by design, the SRI is not a gambling instrument.
No disrespect intended, but I hope you are dead wrong. I will not bother arguing the hypocrisy of the anti-gambling lobby, but suffice to say that most, if not all, are all involved in gambling in some way.
I have never been a fan of Barney Frank, but I am rooting for him on this.
I still do not think that ASM was gambling but others disagree with that assessment.
Personally, I have an issue with gambling because it is not a productive enterprise. It serves no beneficial systemic economic purpose and generally creates more social damage that must be paid by society across the tax base (bankruptcies, foreclosures, divorce, substance abuse, etc.). There is plenty of broad-based long-term data supporting this position. For every ”responsible gambler”, there is addict or two. So, I’m not sure that we need more of this type of enterprise. There are better ways to solve the income issues without creating long-term damage. In my view, we must take a much broader perspective when making these types of wide-sweeping policy changes that will affect generations to come.
If you look back across history, when an economy becomes driven by playing with numbers, it fails. We nearly destroyed ourselves with this last economic implosion cutely called ”The Great Recession” by crafty bets against bets against bets against your HOME.
I’m assuming that you support this because you personally like to gamble. Is there another reason?
Well that depends on your definition of gambling - as far as playing poker, one-armed bandits, etc - very very rarely. I actually become bored with that rather quickly.
So where am I coming from? Three reasons that I can think of.
- The stock market is nothing but a casino (and, with high-frequency trading software, CDO’s, credit default swaps, etc, make it, in my opinion, a rigged one at that)
- Collectively governments make billions off of gambling now. It is hypocritical of them to say gambling is wrong, while raising billions from lottery tickets.
- lastly, and purely for selfish reasons, I want ASM back
I will bet you the large sum of $1.00 that ASM will be legalized in the USA because this bill will pass. heh heh
The stock markets CAN be gambling but are not by nature. They do serve a legitimate economic purpose in the economy.
Yes, governments certainly make a great deal of money taxing gambling operations of various kinds. That doesn’t make an extension automatically justified. Governments also make a great deal of money taxing tobacco, alcohol and other ”vices”. The bottom line is that this quickly becomes a discussion of what kind of society we want. I’d be more than happy to expand on my personal views but that is a discussion that will never end as it never has and never will (for mankind).
Personally, I would love to re-ignite ASM. It was in the search of legal certainty that we ended up with a business model that wouldn’t function (without the 80% U.S. clients we had). The strategic decision to invest in the alternative (the SRI) doesn’t preclude going back to ASM and operating both. In fact, I would love to see that happen. It would be the absolute ideal scenario and all our stakeholders will be vested in both.
The ASM model will have a legal footing in Canada, the U.K. and/or Europe long before it happens here in the United States. Mark my words.
As far as ASM being a gambling instrument, this is something we had studied at the Federal level by the same firm that helped us draft the SRI. While it is not absolutely clear in the code, as long as the dividend payment system based on match wins/losses remains in the protocol, the consensus was that it COULD be construed as a gambling instrument by Federal and State law.
Both of you have some good points. While on one hand I can see the downside of gambling as Chris suggested I can also see the hypocrisy of how things are structured now as Todd has suggested.
I certainly do not want to start a subject outside of what’s being discussed but how do either of you feel about the FairTax? If we’re on the subject (sort of) raising revenues for the feds this would allow you and I to keep all of what we’ve invested in capital gains to reinvest.
I think the atmosphere in congress right now is that while they are skittish about anything associated with gambling they are more so with the talk of derivatives. Gambling…derivatives…different definitions but risk-taking nonetheless.
I am always amused by references to ”the Feds” and ”the Government” like it is some separate entity from us. We are a self-governed people. However, in my view, we are a people governed by the people (who show up). So… show up..
Tax policy at the highest level goes back to the fundamental question of ”What kind of society do we want?” That discussion goes well beyond the scope of what we are talking about here.
Specifically I am not familiar with the Fair Tax proposals so I can’t comment.
What I’m finding tough to do is reconcile the excitement of ASM with the SRI. I’ll be honest. I haven’t found it yet. ASM while I think it was a form of gambling was exciting because it was in real-time and based on the outcome of games or athlete performance. And dividends were tied to those outcomes. For me personally that element essentially is removed from the SRI. I’d love to find a way to get that excitement incorporated into the SRI. I just don’t have a clue as to how.
We are bidding out the MLB SRI simulator project right now. That will help everyone understand what trading the SRI looks like in real-time using historical data. I believe the simulator and the educational system will make it much easier to understand what the SRI is all about.
As far as game-related payments, that simply won’t be possible with the SRI (at least not under the present regulatory environment). Trading ”waves”, however, will happen intra-game.
As far as the general public is concerned, remember that almost all of them will have no reference whatsoever. So, the SRI WILL be the first ”sports stock market” as far as they are concerned. How their expectations will be set will be a product of our marketing and messaging platforms.
Great reading everyone. Thank you all for your great insights and discussion.
-
Todd MacPherson created the group Bill HR2267 - Online Gambling Bill 1 month ago · View