View Full Version : Rand Paul opposes online gambling restrictions
ItsTime
04-24-2015, 12:30 PM
I support this.
What are your thoughts on recent movements to curb or restrict online poker?
Paul: I’m opposed to restrictions on online gambling. The government needs to stay out of that business.
Read more at http://rare.us/story/rand-paul-opposes-online-gambling-restrictions-but-not-without-heavy-pushback/#UITlmoMIFTxD6HY4.99
Source: http://rare.us/story/rand-paul-opposes-online-gambling-restrictions-but-not-without-heavy-pushback/
JohnGalt23g
04-24-2015, 12:32 PM
Which has, unfortunately, earned him the ire of one Sheldon Adelson, of Gaming Inc. HQ, LVNV...
CaptUSA
04-24-2015, 01:05 PM
This guy reminds me of a James Bond super villain.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00339/adelson_nica1137438_339839c.jpg
"I will get you Dr. Paul... and use the power of law to prevent any competition!"
Krugminator2
04-24-2015, 02:35 PM
That's funny. That's actually my question that I requested they ask a year or two ago.
I was reading an article on their site and saw on the side tabs that they were going to interview Rand for their magazine so I shot the guy an email. Glad to see they asked it and got Rand on the record supporting poker.
Crashland
04-24-2015, 03:00 PM
I wonder where the GOP base is on this issue?
presence
04-24-2015, 03:18 PM
I wonder where the GOP base is on this issue?
gambling is a scourge! we the conservatives must protect the weak from their own demise!
wizardwatson
04-24-2015, 03:24 PM
Maybe gov doesn't like online gambling cuz the odds are too good.
State lotteries pay out about 40%.
EDIT: According to KS website it's 56.6% https://www.kslottery.com/aboutus/wherethemoneygoes.aspx
69360
04-24-2015, 03:34 PM
Smart move. The online poker lobby is large and well funded.
RandallFan
04-24-2015, 03:58 PM
Mike Lee, Trent Franks and a bunch of liberals support the online gambling ban. A real diverse gang Adelson has put together.
Id say most Republicans support online gambling.
hells_unicorn
04-24-2015, 04:00 PM
gambling is a scourge! we the conservatives must protect the weak from their own demise!
Not a scourge, just an act of stupidity on the part of those who go into it thinking they are doing anything other than losing money or on rare occasions, obtaining loot that some other fool threw away on a mythical concept known as luck.
I don't necessarily support regulating this junk, but I reserve the right to mock anybody who celebrates it.
cocrehamster
04-24-2015, 06:17 PM
Not a scourge, just an act of stupidity on the part of those who go into it thinking they are doing anything other than losing money or on rare occasions, obtaining loot that some other fool threw away on a mythical concept known as luck.
I don't necessarily support regulating this junk, but I reserve the right to mock anybody who celebrates it.
This is not true for poker, people can and do play poker online for a living.
hells_unicorn
04-24-2015, 11:53 PM
This is not true for poker, people can and do play poker online for a living.
Making a living off of whom? Do the online brokers simply conjure the money out of thin air perhaps?
Unlike actual productive labor, gambling IS a zero sum game. Somebody has to lose in order for a living to be made doing it. Sure, the person throwing their mortgage money away has a choice in the matter, just like a violent drunk has the free choice to get liquored up and then take his anger at his sorry life out on his family.
Again, I'm not talking laws and regulation, just those stubborn things that people refer to as facts.
RabbitMan
04-25-2015, 03:06 AM
Making a living off of whom? Do the online brokers simply conjure the money out of thin air perhaps?
Unlike actual productive labor, gambling IS a zero sum game. Somebody has to lose in order for a living to be made doing it. Sure, the person throwing their mortgage money away has a choice in the matter, just like a violent drunk has the free choice to get liquored up and then take his anger at his sorry life out on his family.
Again, I'm not talking laws and regulation, just those stubborn things that people refer to as facts.
That's fair, but I think the other poster was referring to poker as a game of skill rather than chance. A good poker player will win 9 times out of 10 versus a poor one. It's not like a lottery or slot machine.
hells_unicorn
04-25-2015, 10:20 AM
That's fair, but I think the other poster was referring to poker as a game of skill rather than chance. A good poker player will win 9 times out of 10 versus a poor one. It's not like a lottery or slot machine.
Sure, analogy wise it's not all that different from betting on a sporting event when you have good information about who plays well and who is having an off year, but the degree of "chance" involved is still a reality, to speak nothing for the fact that somebody who is an actual gambler/addict as opposed to a card-counter or a skilled shark provides a substantial bulk of the winnings of the latter.
Another poster by the name of "presence" being dismissive of someone's objections to gambling as being the ravings of a kooky, backwater Fundamentalist was the initial reason for my posting on this thread, as it requires ignoring a lot of real information about the downside of certain types of "amusement seeking". I for one think it is a noble idea to convince people to voluntarily abstain from something that is, on one level of another, personally and economically destructive.
twomp
04-25-2015, 10:48 AM
Sure, analogy wise it's not all that different from betting on a sporting event when you have good information about who plays well and who is having an off year, but the degree of "chance" involved is still a reality, to speak nothing for the fact that somebody who is an actual gambler/addict as opposed to a card-counter or a skilled shark provides a substantial bulk of the winnings of the latter.
Another poster by the name of "presence" being dismissive of someone's objections to gambling as being the ravings of a kooky, backwater Fundamentalist was the initial reason for my posting on this thread, as it requires ignoring a lot of real information about the downside of certain types of "amusement seeking". I for one think it is a noble idea to convince people to voluntarily abstain from something that is, on one level of another, personally and economically destructive.
Everyone in America should be smart and righteous just like you!
That's fair, but I think the other poster was referring to poker as a game of skill rather than chance. A good poker player will win 9 times out of 10 versus a poor one. It's not like a lottery or slot machine.
i'm not so sure that's true. I'd say i'm ahead in my poker life (and I think that hold 'em is a shit game anyway). but if you look at the WSOP, the guy that gets dealt the best cards generally wins. that entire industry, which was flying a few years ago (remember "celebrity poker"?), has built up a myth about the skill and strategy involved in the game.
i'm slightly ahead in my football betting career, but so what? I often like to have a small incentive ($20 - $100) in games on Saturday (screw the nfl), but the computerized establishment of lines has made it more difficult to find value. combine that with the recent downswing in Washington football and my bets have turned to $1 friendly bets leading to monumental $1 victories based on Apple Cup outcomes.
I've long had the idea of creating a secondary market for futures bets - if you had Seattle at 5:1 at the start of the season to win the superbowl I think you should be able to sell that ticket when the team to gets to even $ and turn a profit.
anyway, good for Rand.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.