yep sux alot there slots look pretty cool. Also just found out we can't play at circus casino (baptism by fire) and there playtech.Originally Posted by baabaa006
|
|
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Senior Member
Achievements:
yep sux alot there slots look pretty cool. Also just found out we can't play at circus casino (baptism by fire) and there playtech.
Meister Member
Achievements:
You are not getting a 'better' game by betting higher. The house edge is still exactly the same. This is because the jackpot is the same for small and high bets. So to have constant house edge the chance of winning the jackpot is proportional (Linear) to bet size.
Banned User
That's 100% correct. In fact (and this is disputed by some and complicated by overlapping federal v state legislation which has seen some updates in recent years further complicating the matter), the federal legislation actually appears to make it illegal for any online gaming company in the world to offer their products to Australian residents.
The stupidity of this element of federal gambling legislation is surreal. Australian government has no jurisdiction over international gaming companies so it's not only a pointless piece of legislation as almost every operator in the world continue to market in Australia - it's basically shooting themselves in the foot as well because they could tax Australian online gaming companies and they cannot tax overseas operators (obv).
There are online casinos and poker rooms that block Australian residents in deference to this legislation (some are mentioned in this thread) yet you have publicly owned companies like PartyGaming and 888 (listed on the UK stock exchange and VERY much able to be squeezed by the Australian government) continuing to market actively in Australia - so clearly their legal teams have green-lit them to do so. The whole thing is a shambles and a joke, basically.
There's actually a handful of them, but yes your point stands. It makes little sense to base yourself in Australia and subject yourself to heavy Australian tax burdens when you can't even market to Australians. I have to wonder if the operators of these companies are brain-dead. Move their servers offshore = don't pay the huge taxes AND offer products to Australian residents (not to mention decreasing their overheads by SKATZLOL amounts).
The clubs have taken advantage of the situation for so long and to such an extent that they are actually the villains here. Have you seen the Souths Sydney Juniors Club? It's like a mega-casino (only Slots obv) complex. It's nauseating, sick and just very very wrong on many levels. They've been pretty much bankrolling the colossal financial disaster that was the Rabbitohs NRL side for many, many years now. This money isn't mostly going to grassroots juniors projects or, in the case of the RSL, supporting various veterans' issues - it's mostly going into shady and dark places, lining the pockets of people you and I and every Australian would not (and should not) approve of (or indirectly allow the government to allow).
As far as the government compensating itself, the issue is that the revenue generated from taxing the industry isn't greater than the overall cost to society. Thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of families have been torn apart - suicides, domestic violence, crime etc etc. It's a disastrous mess - it's just that a lot of people (particularly governments) can't think long-term on this kind of stuff. Governments find it hard to put the brakes on incoming revenue short-term even though it would be the 'smart' play long-term for the same reason your average Joe Blow finds it hard to save rather than spend. But...where there is an incentive for Joe Blow to save rather than spend; if you're darkly cynical (i.e. realist), there is an incentive for government to do exactly the opposite (and governments around the world often do exactly that - take the easy or populist route, hand-balling the issue [further complicated by their actions in ignoring or worsening it] to future governments / generations).
Fielding is a world-class moron and I have no idea whether his position as Christian anti-gambling Independent Conservative holding an element of the balance of power in government will result in positive changes or retarded ones.
People get too caught up on Big Government v Small Government. The real issue is Smart Government v Stupid Government. You can enact legislation which you hope will protect your constituents from themselves; but if you're a grade-A Moron, all you end up doing is endangering them further by giving up control of regulation and effectively handing the industry to unregulated parties (UIGEA, US Drug War, etc).
Where you're 100% correct Paul is that the Australian system of representative government is so horribly flawed, it's almost sickening. I have a Politics degree but even 2 months into 1st Year Pol, pretty much every 17 yr old student in our faculty could see how stupidly flawed the system is (for the reasons you mention).
For a very brief period of time at university (a lifetime ago), I was considering getting into politics to take advantage of this. Basically, wait for a polarising or controversial issue to develop (you don't even need to wait, they're all around you)...position yourself on one of the extreme poles of that issue (if you have no actual position, you could just choose the side most likely to get you elected)...build your entire campaign around that....Presto!
It's how this moron Fielding got elected to the Senate and it's how the xenophobic Pauline Hanson became such a huge threat at one point to the country that the two major parties effectively stitched her up and sent her to prison over a technicality - a very rare case where you *could* make the argument 2 HUGE Wrongs = a *kind* of Right. Definitely the lesser of two evils I think - but in no way do I support what Labor/Liberal did to her. What I support is changing the unbelievably retarded electoral system so that single issue campaigners who get voted in on that issue (and who represent maybe 3% or w/e of the nation) don't effectively control the balance of power for the state / federal government Coalitions.
I have to go win 1mil Euro now at 32Red and you're probably getting tired of this long post already - but if there's any Israelis or Jewish posters here, I wrote a long paper years ago basically arguing (perfectly and 100% correctly, I might add) that the greatest threat to Israel's long-term security is not their Arab enemies. It's the "representative" electoral system Israel uses (very much like Australia's) which could (some argue WILL) result in Israel's sovereignty being kaput in our lifetimes. You can't have ultra-Orthodox / Haredim representatives (who already control the balance of power, I might add) continue to increase their foothold in the Knesset based on 1 person = 1 vote representation. The system is never representative. And (darkly) ironically for Israel, even if it were truly representative - it will eventually result in disaster (end of Israel as a nation) anyway due to Haredim mothers having 8 children EACH (that's the nation-wide average) compared with secular Israeli mothers (avg comparable with rest of the secular world).
Not to mention the dozen or so other contributing factors intertwined with this Haredim issue which, if not addressed soon by the Israeli citizenry, will result in Civil War or worse within 50-70 years - and maybe a hell of a lot sooner.
The world is a depressing place. I'm going to go drink and gamble now!
Ueber Meister
I believe this is incorrect. Obviously the Australian Government has no jurisdiction over companies located overseas - so what they basically said is that they will NOT recognize gambling debts incurred by Australians participating in online gambling.
Banned User
Nah, I'm right. But it's not important anyway - the fact is that the government isn't making any efforts to prosecute so it's a dummy-law in Australia (like jaywalking).
Wikipedia isn't the definitive legal authority on the matter (the Australian High Court would be) - but the gambling legislation itself is fairly unambiguous.
Wikipedia Interactive Gambling Act 2001 (Australia) page
I've read all the legislation myself for state and federal and it's really straight-forward. But obviously, all that matters is the reality, not the law. And the reality is that 888 and PartyGaming wouldn't be marketing so proactively in Australia if their legal teams had serious concerns regarding the legislation.
Banned User
I guess the law only becomes important when someone decides to use it - oops Gary Kaplan, John Lefebvre, Steve Lawrence and co.
Bad luck guys...
----
(Edit: I should note for others [you would obv already be aware of this spearmaster] that Australia uses the "common law" system for judicial proceedings. Whilst "common law" ostensibly deals with historical judicial decisions, stare decisis comes into play when complexities arise between common law, constitutional law, state laws, etc.
I lasted around 3 weeks of Masters Law before I was evicted from UQ for non-payment of tuition fees (my total net worth was negative $3400 and I couldn't pay even Term 1 bill) - so I am definitely no lawyer. But I'm almost certain that stare decisis was used successfully by the defence in some squatters legal dispute awhile back. And I'm almost certain that it would apply to gambling operators providing services in Australia (perhaps this is the logic 888/Party Legal are using also).stare decisis, the principle that similar cases should be decided according to consistent principled rules so that they will reach similar results, lies at the heart of all common law systems.
This legal approach for judicial proceedings is vastly different to the more 'codified' approach used in the US. I simply cannot see a Gary Kaplan type of case occurring in a country using "common law". There would have to be some type of "test case" which would go all the way to the High Court of Australia if the government wanted to start arresting owners of gambling companies visiting Australia and whatnot - and they'd almost certainly rewrite the legislation first, I would think. Then again, the stupidity of the world never ceases to amaze me - so who knows really...)
Ueber Meister
I stand corrected. But the law is still basically toothless
I do find it funny that there are carve-outs - such as horse racing, for example - and lotteries (except scratchies and instants!!). The latter was obviously designed to protect Tatts when it still had the monopoly on scratchies... for that matter, Tatts was probably the most influential lobbyist in getting the IGA passed since they also had the majority of installed pokies in Australia...
As stupid as this law may seem, it looks almost decent compared to the UIGEA in the US - completely useless since they haven't been able to come up with regulations for financial institutions to prohibit gaming transactions in the three years since the UIGEA was passed...
Banned User
We agree on 3 / 3 there.
The law is toothless.
The crap going on behind the scenes with Australian lotteries and who has the monopolies and stuff is sordid, dark stuff when you get into it. I try not to after watching a doco about Tattersalls many years ago and...yea. 'nauseating' but so obviously how these things work - it was depressing obv.
The UIGEA is one of the most stupid laws passed in the history of laws. I'm not a pot smoker, but probably banning marijuana was right up there - considering 70% (according to some reports) have smoked it at least once and up to 20% regularly smoke it. And it's classed Schedule 1 above cocaine and meth? On a Schedule which puts people in prison but no one cares to update it for decades?
We live in a wonderful world of incompetence. Which is ok - except when it's coming from government and their incompetence is regulating morality in moronic ways and putting innocent people in prison - that's not so ok imo.
Dormant account
I remember when the pokies (Tatts™ Pokies & Tabaret™ Pokies) hit Victoria. This was even before Crown Casino open at its temporary site.
These things were wound up loose as goose's. At a guess 99% RTP. In Victoria the minimum legal RTP is 87.1%, it's the same is South Australia not sure on other states.
Was the reason for setting such a high RTP to get people who had a predisposition to being addicted to the "pokies", hooked?
Granted not everyone who plays the pokies get addicted. Just like everyone who drinks, bets on the horse or any number of other activities. However of those that do, a percentage will get addicted.
What gets my goat up is again people who may enjoy an activity that does not present detrimental affects in their lives, are again, as always, being penalised because of other people's addictions.
What's worse is that its selective. I mean the number of people who have committed suicide or lost everything due to horse racing or alcohol would far out weight the issues with pokies. But nothing is done to limit these bet sizes.
Personal I stopped playing pokies in pubs, RSL's and aussie casino years ago. They really are one armed bandits.
It's just a BIG F'ing joke and Australian Governments are the court jesters.
Cheers
Dave
mattsgame (7th December 2009)
Experienced Member
I suspect this new "law in waiting" will be subject to numerous delays and amendments before it gets through.
The more contentious of the new proposals in the "fingerprinting" of players to identify and try and enforce the preset limit proposals.
The problem in NSW at least is the sheer scale and volume of the pokies- not just casinos but clubs and most pubs-In my inercity district there is star city casino, 8 clubs and 7 local pubs- not to mention all the pubs in the city itself- some of the pubs and clubs are open 24hrs with the laughable shut down rule for the pokies (4hrs per day) timing at the venues discretion. Usually 4.30am
It will be intersting to see how the fed gov't will be able to enforce the law in the states-(NT as ACT as territories are different}given that the state and fed govt have separate areas of power and control under the constitution.
Someone will correct me if I am wrong but I think they managed to legislate no australian players at aust online sites as the fed gvt does have juristiction over wireless and telecomunnications. As the state issue gaming licences it will be interesting.
I do think the country needs to bring the pokermachine numbers down but i don't think the proposals will be effective.
cheers
colly
cheers
colly
"Education is what you get when you read the fine print- experience is what you get when you don't"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks