Intrade

[alfred russel]

There has been some off and on discussion about Intrade (a trading/gambling platform) over the years on the forum...Back in 2008 I made some money by betting a reasonably large sum against Ron Paul getting the republican nomination (I never made any more bets as it occurred to me that giving a questionably legal internet website your money probably isn't wise). DGuller always talked a big game as though he could make money on the site, but never had the balls to deposit anything. I also had some message board discussions with the founder of the website before he died climbing Mount Everest.

Anyway, it seems the worst fears about the site might have been true.

http://www.intrade.com/v4/home/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Delaney_%28businessman%29

[DGuller]

[Tamas]

So what was so illegal about this compared to betting sites?

[DGuller]

So what was so illegal about this compared to betting sites?

Embezzling, for one.

[alfred russel]

So what was so illegal about this compared to betting sites?

Betting sites are of dubious legality in the US, and this one seemed to cater to Americans (by far the most activity was on US based events). Also, it was mimicking financial market activity, but was doing so under the guise of gambling.

But I'd describe other betting sites catering to americans as questionably legal too (from an American pov).

[Tamas]

"questionable legality" of gambling sites in the US is because brick and mortar casinos effectively bribed... sorry I mean lobbied lawmakers.

[alfred russel]

"questionable legality" of gambling sites in the US is because brick and mortar casinos effectively bribed... sorry I mean lobbied lawmakers.

I don't think it is so simple.

[DGuller]

"questionable legality" of gambling sites in the US is because brick and mortar casinos effectively bribed... sorry I mean lobbied lawmakers.

I don't think it is so simple.

[Tamas]

elaborate plz

[DGuller]

elaborate plz

Many Americans genuinely believe that too much access to gambling is a bad thing for society, and that Internet gambling is pretty much unrestricted access to gambling.  Personally, I'm very ambivalent myself.  Politicians don't need to be bought to prohibit Internet gambling.

[Tamas]

ah, I see.

[Tamas]

I can understand that, and will not start a debate, it's just that's kind of an interesting take on personal freedom.

[Admiral Yi]

The one other factor is that casino gambling is regulated to hell (rightly so IMO) to guarantee that games are fair and winners get paid.  That is one legitimate concern about overseas betting sites.

[Tamas]

The one other factor is that casino gambling is regulated to hell (rightly so IMO) to guarantee that games are fair and winners get paid.  That is one legitimate concern about overseas betting sites.

fair point, altough on that basis you could ban online purchases from outside of US borders

[DGuller]

The one other factor is that casino gambling is regulated to hell (rightly so IMO) to guarantee that games are fair and winners get paid.  That is one legitimate concern about overseas betting sites.

And, as practice shows, without regulation, it's almost certain that sooner or later the gambling site operator is going to start pocketing money that should be segregated and set aside.  It's not an argument against prohibition of Internet gambling, though;  in fact, it's an argument for legalization of Internet gambling.  Justifying ban on Internet gambling because of lack of regulation of sites is like justifying Prohibition because only gangsters are involved in the liquor trade.