Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

WTO Wants USA to Gamble Online

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the bingo dept.

United States 1287

revtom writes "The WTO has ruled that the U.S. must allow online gambling or face trade barriers. My favorite quote from the article (Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va), 'It cannot be allowed to stand that another nation can impose its values on the U.S. and make it a trade issue.' Pot/Kettle black?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682649)

it's a bit of a gamble. did i win?

CONGRATULATIONS!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682724)

DING DING DING !!! WE HAVE A WINNAR! OMG YOU ARE ON TEH SPOKE!!!

It really takes balls to go for the first post. On one hand, if you win, you earn the respect of your peers and the satisfaction of knowing you and only you got the first post. On the other hand, if you lose, someone will inform you that YOU FUCKING FAIL IT! and you will be labeled a failure for the rest of your pathetic life. It's sort of like Russian roulette. Anyway, once again let me congratulate you on your beating the odds and achieving first post!

Reading Slashdot and watching STNG (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682876)

That's what I'm doing on a Friday afternoon.

Kind of sad, really.

Nothing New Here (3, Insightful)

andyrut (300890) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682654)

The United States is notorious for ignoring the actions of global organizations, even ones they fought to create. If they were to receive a third grade report card they'd receive low marks in the "plays well with others" category.

Let's see, there's the invasion of Iraq (against the wishes of the U.N.) and withdrawl from the Kyoto Protocol [vexen.co.uk] to name a couple.

Re:Nothing New Here (-1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682714)

And yet other countries are falling all over themselves to follow the US. You'd think other countries would have learned by now that the US should just be ignored while larger populations like China and India could provide more.

Re:Nothing New Here (-1, Flamebait)

Tuxinatorium (463682) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682862)

you're not making any fucking sense at all.

Re:Nothing New Here (5, Informative)

aengblom (123492) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682738)

The U.S. did not withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol... it never agreed to abide by it.

Re:Nothing New Here (4, Informative)

gcaseye6677 (694805) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682849)

Nobody really agreed to abide by it, once they actually understood the thing. It sounded great at first but then nations realized it would bankrupt their manufacturing economy. And before anyone says it was a Bush thing, the senate voted, before Bush took office, 98-0 in favor of scrapping it. Clinton signed it in his final days to make himself look good, knowing he wouldn't be around for the fallout.

Re:Nothing New Here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682764)

Whoa, hold on sport. There's a HUGE difference between political/environmental issues and agreements in a free world economy. Sure, everything can be pinned against money and earnings (politicswealth). Howver, when we're specifically talking about free/fair trade, any country has a right to protest a policy demand by another country.

Just remember that the US, despite the obvious political turmoil, imports more than it exports. That's been the mainstay for years and the US hasn't imposed massive sanctions or held up a gun to stop this. In other words: the US isn't a bad guy for wanting to give a little less considering its past record.

Re:Nothing New Here (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682780)

I can't wait for some Muslim country to be affected by this same ruling. Then the same hypocritical nitwits that bend over backwards to criticize the US will be besides themselves defending the 'poor third world countries losing their sovereign rights'.

Re:Nothing New Here (0, Flamebait)

USAPatriot (730422) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682804)

The UN is a corrupt organization where the inmates run the asylum.

The US doesn't need to ask for permission to defend itself or take actions where it is in its own best interests. The Kyoto Protocol was a joke and was never ratified here anyways. You can't withdraw something you don't formally enter in.

Bottom line, we can do it because we have the power and the might. We don't need to play well with others, others need to play well with us.

Re:Nothing New Here (4, Insightful)

The Queen (56621) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682873)

Bottom line, we can do it because we have the power and the might. We don't need to play well with others, others need to play well with us.

Just curious, where do you propose that will leave us as a citizen of the planet? Everyone will fear us and do what we say? Do we want to bully everyone just because we believe we're right, and everyone else is 3rd world? Personally I'd rather have people "play nice" with us out of respect and admiration, rather than fear.

Re:Nothing New Here (5, Insightful)

spellraiser (764337) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682805)

Hear, hear

This particular quote from the story is quite interesting in this context:

"It's appalling," said Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. "It cannot be allowed to stand that another nation can impose its values on the U.S. and make it a trade issue."

OK, so when the U.S. imposes its values on other countries, they shouldn't complain, but when others try to do it to them, it's A Bad Thing? Talk about double standards...

The U.S. politicians (I hate it when they are equated with the U.S. itself - there is a big difference) need to learn that in order for maintain good relations with other nations, everyone must follow the same set of rules.

make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (4, Interesting)

garcia (6573) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682666)

It's really funny to me that we have this "separation" of Church and State yet we have to worry about "values"? Blue Laws, gambling restrictions, anti-abortion, etc, are all issues stemming from *religious* beliefs whether those in office say they are or not.

If we are talking about banning paying for your gambling via the net w/credit cards that's one thing (protecting people and companies from the fortunes lost via this method of payment) but if we are seriously worried about GROWN PEOPLE becoming corrupt by the evils that await them through alcohol and gambling we seriously need to rethink what the fuck is going on in our country.

As an adult you should be allowed to choose what happens to you. I wasn't aware that I needed people in Washington telling me what is and is not good for me... Especially when it comes to gambling, the purchase of adult beverages, and the premature ending of pregnancy. These are NOT issues that should be regulated by the State, Federal, or local governments.

So the rest of us are going to pay a price due to WTO trade sanctions because our government would rather play Parents than government. I don't think that this is the way to go.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682682)

Religion is a security blanket for the weak-minded and stupid.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682809)

Religion is a security blanket for the weak-minded and stupid.

Why thank you for your well thought-out and reasoned analysis of the world situation. This comment is clearly worth my time and considera...wait a minute! It's a troll! Yipes! It's got my leg! My only leg left! AAAAAARrghrarhhhggggghh!

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682857)

That was a troll? Thank goodness you pointed it out for everyone else.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (2, Troll)

Quarters (18322) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682712)

Yes, please, go become a destitute street living alcoholic gambling addict. I so love it when my taxes go up to fund addtional services and welfare costs so that you can feel free to make a total ass of yourself.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (2, Insightful)

Mattintosh (758112) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682866)

On the other hand, if the government says, "Go ahead and become a drinking, gambling, pot smoking, hippie bum," they can also stipulate something like, "but if you do, we won't save you from yourself. Good luck."

Basically, they need to back off and let people ruin themselves. Once they stop protecting the stupid and all the Darwin awards have been handed out, we'll be left with a better overall society.

In this light, we can see that this is the only logical course of action (since the War on Drugs and the rest of the idiotic moral enforcement laws aren't working), and it's about eventually lowering taxes.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (5, Insightful)

Rura Penthe (154319) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682722)

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but don't you think any body of laws represents a moral code? Every law legislates morality in some form or another. Killing a man, stealing what he earned, etc are all wrong because we believe them to be morally reprehensible and thus created laws to punish those who do it. Does the belief that gambling is a vice have to be predicated on religion in everyone's mind? It clearly has roots there, but not everyone who opposes its legalization is religious.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (2, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682781)

Washington *SHOULD* have a group of people of varying backgrounds, religions, belief systems, and values... It should lead to a great deal of positive discussion about what should and should not be acceptable.

Problem is... We have a two party majority and those two parties have chosen their "values". We no longer have this diverse group. We have this party and ITS belief system.

Gambling, alcohol, and abortion are not inherently evil and should not be treated as if they are because of relgious backed beliefs. Especially when we claim that we are seperate from those values rooted in the Church.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682844)

I think alcohol can be considered evil on the basis that drunk drivers kill people all over the place. Religion has nothing to do with it for a lot of people.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682882)

I think alcohol can be considered evil on the basis that drunk drivers kill people all over the place. Religion has nothing to do with it for a lot of people.

shouldn't cars be evil then?
when was the last time you heard of a drunk walking over someone to death?

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (3, Insightful)

ceswiedler (165311) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682872)

Why do you think these two parties have these particular values? Could it be that these two parties have 'chosen' values which actually do manage to accurately represent the values of a majority of the people in this country?

Do you think that a political party would survive long if it DIDN'T match what people thought?

Indeed ... that is the problem with globalization (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682806)

It will be funny to see how your government will wriggle out of this one. They are between a rock and a hard place ... WTO loving big money versus religious fundies, they cant afford to piss off either.

Re:Indeed ... that is the problem with globalizati (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682867)

They just have to hold out until election time. Let the Democrats take the heat after they take office.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682810)

No, laws about killing people and whatnot are laws to protect what are called "negative rights" (such as the right not to be murdered). These rights are basically rights of not being interfered with.

Morals actually don't come into play for most laws. A good example of this is the business world, where immoral activity is rewarded with more shiny new money.

Laws and morals are completely separate. Sometimes there may be a moral motivation for a law, but it's generally a case of rights.

Not morals (4, Insightful)

DreadSpoon (653424) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682846)

Those aren't codified in law for moral reasons. They're law to ensure we continue functioning as society, which *is* what government is supposed to do. You can't kill a man because if you could kill at a whim, society would tear itself apart. Likewise, if anything you have could be taken from you, things would fall apart. It's not "killing is evil," it's "we can't allow killing and continue to be a functioning, growing society."

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (1)

maximilln (654768) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682885)

I've already addressed the majority of this in my journal.

There's really nothing that we can do about.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682742)

You say that as if drunk driving, alcholism and problem gambling were not issues...

Besides, you forgot other laws that are based on our values: you're not allowed to kill people, nor steal, nor lie under oath, adultery counts against you in the military and in divorce court, etc.

All of those are even listed in the 10 commandments, whereas the Bible has comparatively less to say about gambling (though it does condemn drunkenness, if not drinking).

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (1)

netfool (623800) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682743)

Excellent post

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682761)

Values and morals are independent of religion. So your mockery of the separation of Church and State makes no sense (of course, the "under God" and prayers in Congress already proved this point for you =)

Also, the reason that you're not allowed to do whatever you won't while not violating others' rights is that there are just way to many sue-happy morons out there that will mindlessly throw their money at contests or gambling and go completely broke until they are picked up by a Dateline special to sue whoever conned them out of their money (even if it happened legally).

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682762)

It's really funny to me that we have this "separation" of Church and State yet we have to worry about "values"? Blue Laws, gambling restrictions, anti-abortion, etc, are all issues stemming from *religious* beliefs whether those in office say they are or not.

Let's see--huge, sweeping claim with insufficient evidence?

(you at home can sing along to your favorite tune)

Troll, troll, troll, trolltrolltrolltrolltrolltroooooool . . . troll trolltroll TROLL troll troll, troll, troll! Troll troll Tro-tro-troll Tro-tro-troll, Troll troll troll troll TROLL troll troll trroooooooll troll . . . etc.

Taliban (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682767)

That's funny.

I thought the US has embarked on an open-ended war on exactly the kind of artificially imposed "values" you advocate by confronting Taliban.

Oh, but I forgot. The Christians (and Jews) are the good guys.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (0, Insightful)

Atzanteol (99067) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682771)

premature ending of pregnancy.

You mean murder? Not everybody against murdering fetuses is against it for religious reasons. Not to mention a few other vices you mention in your little rant.

Gambling is legal in some areas. But nobody wants the casinos near their house. Got any ideas why? (hint: crime rates sky-rocket around a casino). This is a big issue in Massachusetts lately. Some people want the casinos as a way to increase state revenue, but they can't find any town willing to allow a casino.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682851)

Did I talk about on-shore gambling? No. I was talking about Internet gambling (as was the article). I didn't know that Internet gambling operations increased crime.

Oh wait, they don't.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682774)

"and the premature ending of pregnancy. These are NOT issues that should be regulated by the State, Federal, or local governments."

I have to disagree on a point. Although abortion is heralded by those who are religious it isn't a religion only divide. There is a question of whether or not it is murder. If, as some claim, it is murder then it is quite indeed the governments place to stop it. If it is not, then it is in no way the governments place to stop it.

The real question is whether or not an unborn fetus/child/etc. is a human being, at what point, etc.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (1)

Fammy2000 (612663) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682778)

I think it is a matter of the common good of the people (and their wants in this crazy thing called a democracy).

I have no problem with you getting piss drunk, gambling away all your money, and killing your unborn child. But some of those actions have effects on others.

I think we know enough of the effects of drunkedness in public (explains most celebrities, anyway). Gambling brings a certain class of people into a town. Many residents don't want that. Ask The Rock. And for abortion, there are plenty of arguments out there already.

I'm all for you having the ability to choose what's best for you. But when it effects my and my family, I have to step in.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (2, Insightful)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682834)

Gambling brings a certain class of people into a town.

This is an interesting argument, because if gambling were legal everywhere, this argument would be completely moot.

Careful, man, there's a beverage here (1)

WormholeFiend (674934) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682814)

you know most laws are there cuz most people wont play fair?

living in society is complicated... lotta ins, lotta outs.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (1)

Dave114 (168228) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682815)

It's really funny to me that we have this "separation" of Church and State yet we have to worry about "values"? Blue Laws, gambling restrictions, anti-abortion, etc, are all issues stemming from *religious* beliefs whether those in office say they are or not.

I've heard many times the argument that a persons' right to due something ends when their fist hits another individual 's nose. Ignoring moralistic motivations, there can be a "hit" on another person's wallet in order to pay for social programs that may be required to deal with gambling addictions, or perhaps to cover the additional healthcare costs associated with smoking (I'm Canadian ... with our "wonderful" socialistic healthcare system which many not apply to you Americans). Hence, there can also be practical reasons keeping many of these laws in place.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (4, Insightful)

Anml4ixoye (264762) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682831)

I wasn't aware that I needed people in Washington telling me what is and is not good for me

My wife and I have had discussions about this, especially in relation to Gay marriages and how the gov't wants to ban them. We don't agree with the gov't banning gay marriages (and we are "Christians" ), but I can clearly see why they would want to.

Think about it from this perspective. You are a "good Christian" in a high position of power who sees the country "going to hell in a handbasket" because of all the "immoral things" going on. You feel it is your place to enact laws to stop these "evils" from "infecting" the county.

So you do. And because there are lots of other lawmakers like you, they go along with it. And who would, when it is put in the context that *you* are going to the great lake of fire for going against a law that says it's bad to have gay marriages, etc, etc. In fact, if you are going against it, you must be ready to be destroyed like all of those other immoral sinners from Sodom & Gomorrah.

As an adult you should be allowed to choose what happens to you.

Which is the whole point behind free will. If you are gay, and you get married to your partner, then go for it. If my wife or daughter has to have an abortion to save her life, yes it would hurt us terribly, but that should be our choice to make.

So basically, right on brother. If we are willing to impose our values on the rest of the world, we should be prepared to have their values imposed on us.

Not religious value (5, Insightful)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682848)

I'm an atheist and this story still troubles me. There are nonreligious reasons you don't want gambling going on. It causes all sorts of problems. Usually these are offset by the additional revenue that gambling brings into an area, so casinos are tolerated. But that isn't the case here since the casinos are based in remote Pacific islands, and presumably those economies will be the only ones to benefit.

The U.S. knew what it was getting into when it signed GATT. We figured the screwing was going to be one-way, as if people in the Third World are too stupid to take advantage of us in return. It hasn't exactly turned out that way.

Grow up (0, Troll)

N8F8 (4562) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682855)

As an adult you should be allowed to choose what happens to you.

The hidden fact missing is that addicts behaviour only effects themselves. I'd agree with you if we could tell the junkies to pack sand when they want medical treatment or put them to death for destroying other peoples lives or property. But we can't. That is the balance we have to live with.

Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (0, Offtopic)

Meech (166762) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682886)

I have always thought that there were stupid laws. For example, in NYS, you have to wear a seatbelt when in an automobile. This should not be a law, but something that is simply common sense. If someone is too stupid to wear a seatbelt, then who cares if they crash into a tree?

The argument is though, that the government is responsible for scraping people off of trees, and this becomes expensive, which every tax payer knows.

The root of this problem is that there are two types of politicians (for the most part). The first is the democrats. They want more government, yet, they do not want to tell people how to live. The second is the republicans. They want less government, yet they love to impose their strict rules and values on people. This has never made sense to me.

Pot/Kettle Black (3, Insightful)

mishehu (712452) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682670)

Absolutely, the US does this all the time to other countries as well as other countries doing it to the US.

Re:Pot/Kettle Black (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682711)

Absolutely, the US does this all the time to other countries as well as other countries doing it to the US.

Being the 1000 pound garilla, the US has this right to be flaky. What are you going to do about it? Huh? Huh? Thought so...

Re:Pot/Kettle Black (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682830)

What are you going to do about it? Huh? Huh?

Uhmm, ruin your economy? Sorry, done.
Take your jobs? Done.
Ridicule you in the rest of the world? Done.

Tell you to fuck off and go home? FUCK OFF AND GO HOME!

Done!

Not Quite (1)

millahtime (710421) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682840)

It's sort of different. Where has the US gone to a country and told them to go against their laws. This isn't trying to influence us, the WTO is telling us our laws are wrong. By the constitution they are not wrong to us and we are not under some world law.

The US may go influence other countries but when do we tell them to go against laws of their country.

Great... now we'll be outsourcing (5, Funny)

Throtex (708974) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682675)

...our indian casinos to India.

Re:Great... now we'll be outsourcing (1)

platypussrex (594064) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682709)

Don't have to look that far. We already let a lot of native american tribes run casinos. Why not let them have the internet business too? Charge a share of the profits (some states already do), fool the WTO, sounds like a winner to me!

Re:Great... now we'll be outsourcing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682813)

I bet you are a real hit at parties.

Oh wait. You never get invited to any. I wonder if your lack of sense of humor (or at least recognize that someone made a joke) has anything to do with it.

Re:Great... now we'll be outsourcing (1)

J-B0nd (682712) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682779)

Yeah, we couldn't have any casinos run by Indians...

Non-issue (5, Funny)

El (94934) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682679)

Anybody running Windows & IE is already gambling every time they go online!

Re:Non-issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682790)

This is the sort of true genius that I visit Slashdot for. And no, I'm not being sarcastic, you twits.

Re:Non-issue (5, Insightful)

jayhawk88 (160512) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682843)

Dear Slashdot Editors:

This comment is the perfect example of why we need a "-1 Predictable" comment moderation.

Sincerely,

Everyone tired of reading the same 5 jokes in every fucking thread.

iirc aesop once said in one of his fables, (-1, Offtopic)

unix mutant (765746) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682686)

you can bet on rabbits and tortoise racing, but its not as good as sleeping with your neighbors wife.

I hear that the WTO will let the USA go if (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682687)

they are able to hit the monkey.

Article title (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682691)

"WTO Wants USA to Gamble Online"

sed -e "s/Gamble/Allow Gambling/"

But they DO (4, Insightful)

fuzzy12345 (745891) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682700)

Online gambling? No problem, just ask for a "brokerage account."

I do wish the government would force the SEC to clamp down on dodgy reporting, accounting and corporate governance.

Interesting quote -- huh? (5, Interesting)

randyest (589159) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682702)

It is not clear precisely why the WTO ruled in favor of Antigua and Barbuda, because the specifics remain confidential. The ruling covers only online casinos based on the islands, but other nations could seek similar rulings.

Isn't that odd? Why would the "specifics" remain confidential while the decision isn't? Is this typical of WTO activity, or is there some relevant info to be inferred from this?

Re:Interesting quote -- huh? (1)

blackmonday (607916) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682868)

Put your tinfoil hat on. The WTO is definitely one organization with power so incredible that America can pushed around just like we have a habit of pushing others around. Read Greg Palast's "The Greatest Democracy Money Can Buy" and make up your own mind. It's not just american corporations pushing the world anymore. its multi-national corporations and organizations like the WTO that contain power than *at times* supercedes the American Government's. Our elected officials signed into these treaties and organizations, we have no else to blame.

what ? (3, Insightful)

terrymr (316118) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682703)

To be fair this ruling is about the US trying to impose our values on the rest of the world, by trying to prevent US banks & other business from dealing with online casinos which are legal in the country they are based in.

Re:what ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682824)

Slavery is still legal in some countries. You want your banks to deal with those people, too?

Not all country's laws are created equal.

What kind of issue should it be made? (4, Interesting)

way2trivial (601132) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682734)

hmm, criminal?
political?

I suppose you could make something of it, why is it that porn site eula's (which NO one concerns themselves with) all contain language to the effect that, you must be in a region/country/community where this is legal..

Much like the RIAA finally realized they must go after the individual. Legitimate enforcement is to have to be made against the folks doing the gambling, not the gambling sites. that's where the law is being broken.

If I am from a state that bans gambling, and go to vegas, I'm not breaking the law. if I go to montecarlo.com, where am I? in whose jurisdiction?

USA USA USA !!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682735)

USA USA USA !!!!

I second this motion. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682786)

USA USA USA !!!!!

Australia! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682801)

Aussie! Aussie! Oi Oi Oi!

barbados? (1)

zrobotics (760688) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682739)

so the WTO is writing our laws for us so that 19 whole companies in these teeney little islands can allow us citizens to gamble while at work? right...

Re:barbados? (1)

nnet (20306) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682770)

As opposed to the US writing laws for Australia, and the whole middle/far east?

Re:barbados? (1)

gorbachev (512743) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682859)

The US has been doing this to European Union, Japan and others ever since the process was enacted and agreed upon.

What you just said is exactly what's wrong with the WTO process. It enables other countries, mainly the one that's the biggest and the baddest, i.e. US, to impose their own laws on others in the name of free trade and globalization.

Guess who the biggest proponent of the WTO is? I'll give you a free clue: it's one of the two Northern American nations.

What's eventually going to happen though is that the US is going to ignore the ruling, just as they always do when they don't like the international treaty or ruling in question, and work to undermine the process under which they were ruled to have done something wrong.

Proletariat of the world, unite to kill hypocricy

Re:barbados? (1)

flossie (135232) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682878)

so the WTO is writing our laws for us so that 19 whole companies in these teeney little islands can allow us citizens to gamble while at work? right...

Kind of similar to the way that the WTO tells the EU's 300 million citizens that they must allow GM crops to be grown on their land so that one or two US companies can try and sell seeds that nobody wants.

The sooner the WTO is abolished, the better it will be for the whole world.

imposing values (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682741)


as in like democracy and freedom under the guise of capitalism to the middle east ?

USA is trying really hard to piss the world off, if you want to be ruined economically you keep going down the path you are going

The congressman in the article (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682746)

Say what you will about Rep. Bob Goodlatte, but his coffee is delicious!

gambling everywhere (-1, Troll)

millahtime (710421) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682748)

So, I guess this means gambling will be available everywhere. Watch out... the Indians might form a war party and go after the WTO.

"Imposing Views"? (5, Insightful)

Hi_2k (567317) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682750)

This shouldn't be about wether or not gambling should be legal or not: It should be about wether or not online gambling is trustworthy. In casinos, the cards are laid out for checking after the game. You know that the casino didn't cheat. On the other hand, an online casino could set it so you win 50% of the time for bets under $5, but almost never with $100. Methods of verification/Proving legitimacy for online casinos don't exist, so they shouldn't. You could argue that they will police themselves: nobody will play if they keep losing, but building false confidence is all too easy: Look at Nigerian scams.

Seems crazy to me... (4, Insightful)

FroMan (111520) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682751)

What is the actual product in gambling? There is no trade going on here.

Re:Seems crazy to me... (1)

gaj (1933) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682850)

It is crazy, but you're coment is -1 Stupid. Of course there's trade going on. The product is entertainment. People enjoy the thrill of risk. I predict that if the Nanny State continues to nerf Real Life, people will more often turn to gambling.

On the other hand... (1)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682752)

Who the hell is the WTO to tell a nation they have to do this?

Moron. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682753)

Pot = elected body of government

Kettle = group of appointed professional beaurocrats

You = troll.

The US can ban gambling for the same reason the government bans porn on TV -- it is, in fact, the will of the majority. Deal with it or fuck off.

Re:Moron. (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682860)

There's a "morals exception" to some WTO regulations. But it's not a very credible argument, given that most US state governments already have a hand in the till. Moreover, the WTO can and does impose sanctions for popular but unfair trade barriers.

Consultations, please (3, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682757)

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va), 'It cannot be allowed to stand that another nation can impose its values on the U.S. and make it a trade issue.'

Perhaps he could consult with William Bennett regarding virtue and gambling.

International Trade Law (1, Flamebait)

Mateito (746185) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682775)

> U.S. policy prohibiting online gambling violates
> its obligations under international trade law.

Sorry, but no matter what the WTO thinks, the US *IS* International Trade Law. The worlds most important economy protected by the worlds biggest guns.

That is not going to change in the short term, as I can't see any politician taking the initiative to truly integrate the US in a Global "Free Trade" economy (and, no, all the Free Trade agreements that the US have signed have been anything but "Free"). There would be an immediate loss of jobs, especially in the Agriculture sector, and an across-the-board downgrading of quality of life.. maybe falling as low as that experienced by Europeans and Australians!

No, IMHO eventually the US economy will collapse and take the rest of the world with it. To all us dotcom bust survivors... well.. you aint seen nothing yet.

Worst thing, chances are is that it will happen in my lifetime.

I couldn't agree more with this comment (5, Insightful)

Fluidic Binary (554336) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682782)

'It cannot be allowed to stand that another nation can impose its values on the U.S. and make it a trade issue.' Pot/Kettle black?"

Setting the issue of morality aside this is an issue of hypocrisy incarnate.

The United States is the big brother of the world and that is quite possibly the weakest argument I could possibly imagine. It seems to me that our governing body in the US needs massive replacement if the best persuasive arguments they can make sound like this.

If the United States is really the leader of the free world it should really start leading by example and drop this 'do as I say not as I do' attitude. It is utter crap and my vote at the polls will reflect this.

We use economics threats as a diplomatic tool and if we can dish it out we should be able to take it right back!

Am I off base here?

Re: Gambling? (2, Informative)

seaswahoo (765528) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682793)

It's not gonna happen.

Gambling is illegal in most states (except for Nevada, I think). If the federal govt were to all of a sudden say, "Okay, online gambling is legal everywhere!", it might set a precedent upon which state gambling laws would be overturned.

(Note that then the state govts would lose the advantage they have in that the only legit gambling ops are lotteries.)

what's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682797)

Huge box office returns for The Passion Of The Roulette Mouseclick?

Article 20 of the GATT protects morals but... (5, Informative)

AtlanticCarbon (760109) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682798)

GATT:
Article XX: General Exceptions
Subject to the requirement that such measures are not applied in a manner which would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between countries where the same conditions prevail, or a disguised restriction on international trade, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent the adoption or enforcement by any contracting party of measures:

(a) necessary to protect public morals;

The WTO probably decided the US is discriminating since it allows gambling in a lot of similar situations. Anyways, with lotteries, Nevada, and Indian Casinos its probably hard to argue gambling is against America's public morals.

US on path to lowest common denominator... (0)

FerretFrottage (714136) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682799)

In regards to a previous post and "not having the gov tell them what to do", that's almost what many of the mindless drones here in the US have demanded because we've become to lazy to think for ourselves. We have the V-chip, we now have the FCC telling us what we can/can not hear, the list goes on....are people too lazy to turn the channel/station. So now our "values" are threatened, watch out because soon the drones will demand that the gov tell us what our values are and then have them imposed it on us. Thanks but no thanks, the non-drones (darn I say /. readers) want to think for ourselves. "No child left behind == No child gets ahead"... just what the drones want so that we all can agree to have equal values...their values.....bah I say

Gotta Draw Line Somewhere (1)

N8F8 (4562) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682802)

I think sooner or later we need to draw lines. This might as well be it. This is a values based dicision based on many years of dealing with the corruption and addiction that pop up in the gambling industry. This goes to the heart of the philosophy that communities should have soem sayso in the culture they want to foster. Can't wait for the illegal drugs and kiddeporn WTO ruling.

Re:Gotta Draw Line Somewhere (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682825)

Draw lines for youself and your children and keep them off of me. As with drug prohibition, the corruption is all *because* you try to prohibit it.

Not in my back yard (1)

the_diesel (754959) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682808)

A reason why a lot of the blue laws about gambling, or even drugs and prostitution, are not so much because people are against them per se, they just don't want the elements that they bring in their neighborhood. Obviously a good portion of the US enjoys gambling; most communities would hate to have a casino in their neighborhood. Most people really don't care about prostitution; they just don't want hookers, pimps, and such lowering their property value.

Not the first time. (3, Insightful)

amigoro (761348) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682816)

'It cannot be allowed to stand that another nation can impose its values on the U.S. and make it a trade issue.'

Good point Sir. But hasn't the US imposed its values on other countries?

Iraq will soon be a democracy because you didn't like dictatorships. Chile became a dictatorship because you didn't like a left-wing president.

It's not only that, Sir. You have even violated the Intellectual Property Act [eu.int] . You tried to extradite an Australian under the similar regulations. And let's not forget the Byrd Ammendment [japantoday.com]

Sir, your government has shown over and over again that it is nothing but nasty playground bully, and shown great contempt and disregard towards the wishes of other sovereign nations.

But fear not, sir. Empires rise. Empires fall. The taller they stand, the harder they fall.

Moderate this comment
Negative: Offtopic [mithuro.com] Flamebait [mithuro.com] Troll [mithuro.com] Redundant [mithuro.com]
Positive: Insightful [mithuro.com] Interesting [mithuro.com] Informative [mithuro.com] Funny [mithuro.com]

bogus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8682822)

I play a lot of poker online and i'm still not a fan of this ruling. There's no way a body like the WTO should be able to decide internal maters of how and what a country decides to regulate or prosecute. While I think the American policy should be changed, that's an internal matter and not a matter for the WTO to get involved with.

stabn

Gambling, shmambaling (0)

thebra (707939) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682835)

I've never gambled and I don't see the appeal of online gambling. If I'm gonnna throw my money away I at least expect some "free" liqour.

You mean!?!?! (1, Redundant)

Cytlid (95255) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682837)

Offshore gambling sites are sucking american money from the american economy?!?! OMG! Someone call the in the republicans!

Seriously folks... I went on a cruise last year (first ever!) and the casino didn't open till we were like 12 miles off the coast.

How many people were lined up outside, waiting? How many were americans? I think the WTO is in the right in this decision...

It's our job... (3, Funny)

erobertstad (442529) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682838)

"It's appalling," said Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. "It cannot be allowed to stand that another nation can impose its values on the U.S. and make it a trade issue."

And damn right too, it's our job to force OUR values on other countrys, who ever gave the idea to the world that this was a two way street here?!

*sigh*

Gambling is, at its heart, a con game, a scam. (3, Insightful)

The I Shing (700142) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682841)

Gambling is basically a scam. People participate willingly in the scam, often under the mistaken notion that somehow they'll get ahead of the game and strike it rich, but it's a scam nonetheless, in my book.

Gambling sites are popular with identity thieves, and I applaud credit card companies that refuse to authorize transactions originating with offshore gambling websites.

I'm not some neo-conservative, either. My objections to gambling websites are mathematical and ethical, not moral.

As far as keeping them off of US soil, I guess I'm in favor of keeping the ban in place. It's not like there are hordes of consumers clamoring to blow their money on rigged online gambling. Or are there?

Pot/kettle black? no, this is more like (1)

Savatte (111615) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682863)

the pot calling the kettle black while throwing stones in glass houses

Huh. (5, Insightful)

Dirtside (91468) | more than 10 years ago | (#8682871)

Don't want the WTO to impose laws on us? Guess we probably shouldn't have been a founding member and signed treaties saying we'd abide by their rules, which allow them to do this. Good work, U.S. government!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?