- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
- Location
- UK
Well my fellow UK citizens seems that soon we will be rolling it even more 
.
.
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
UK Gambling Laws
- Thread starter gfkostas
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
let's hope they adjust the settings a bit though, else my bank roll is going to suffer!!!
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
- Location
- UK
I hope they will introduce new rules for BJ like doubling on any 2 cards and hit when splitting aces .
Btw which casino you visit most in london Petunia? I would recommend the Palm beach in Mayfair.
.Btw which casino you visit most in london Petunia? I would recommend the Palm beach in Mayfair.
Last edited:
There is no good and only bad can come of this, which is all about Tony Blair reaping the rewards of huge taxation increases on the back of the obvious increase in problem gambling and general suffering and absolutely NOTHING about increased "regulation". UK gambling is very well regulated in its current state. Casino membership requirement and the 24 hour waiting period is an excellent disincentive to any old hobbledyhoy from walking in and losing money - only people who actively want to gamble and are prepared to apply and then wait are the ones who can enter under the current laws. Under the new "deregulated" format, those kids, dropouts and junkies who currently play the fruit machines for reasonably low stakes and "relatively" limited losses are going to be exposed to unlimited stakes and the obvious disaster that'll lead to in the casinos. Bookies are pretty unregulated free-for-alls, but at least casinos are not immediately accessable to the masses under the current rules.
This is a recipe for increased misery, increased crime and increased state-dependency. There is nothing remotely positive in it. Tessa Jowell is totally full of shit in every word she says, she's clueless and dangerous and I hope she gets her come-uppence in hell sooner rather than later. The corruption potential in these otherwise ordinary-looking human beings like you and me leaves me flabbergasted. They KNOW the awful consequences to this, and yet they'll go ahead because of the Mighty Pound.
FWIW - not much, I know - this should be opposed at all costs.
This is a recipe for increased misery, increased crime and increased state-dependency. There is nothing remotely positive in it. Tessa Jowell is totally full of shit in every word she says, she's clueless and dangerous and I hope she gets her come-uppence in hell sooner rather than later. The corruption potential in these otherwise ordinary-looking human beings like you and me leaves me flabbergasted. They KNOW the awful consequences to this, and yet they'll go ahead because of the Mighty Pound.
FWIW - not much, I know - this should be opposed at all costs.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
- Location
- UK
Nice post.
I believe that if someone wants to gamble it doesnt matter if there are casinos or not and how regulated are they.He will find something like dogs,football etc. to lose his money.The thing is that with casinos i believe is more heartfull when you lose than with dogs or so I say.I feel worse when i lose on roulette compare to losing on dogs.I believe that its a society problem more than casinos problem.If you know what you doing and you are matture enough in your brain it doesnt matter how many casinos your city has.
I believe that if someone wants to gamble it doesnt matter if there are casinos or not and how regulated are they.He will find something like dogs,football etc. to lose his money.The thing is that with casinos i believe is more heartfull when you lose than with dogs or so I say.I feel worse when i lose on roulette compare to losing on dogs.I believe that its a society problem more than casinos problem.If you know what you doing and you are matture enough in your brain it doesnt matter how many casinos your city has.
Last edited:
Knowledge of the facts doesn't shield you from the indirect effects of the problem. I am not personally going to become a crackhead roulette junkie as a result of this. I MIGHT nonetheless fall victim to an assault / burglary from someone who DOES. Gambling and social problems (crime, drugs etc) are inseperable - the government cannot have their cake and eat it, hard as they will no doubt try. They will get their tax pennies, but the burden on the national budget / welfare system will also increase. In those areas which are already stretched in those departments the pressure will become excessively severe. You will be either directly or indirectly affected, one way or the other. If not you, your mother / brother / cousin / nephew. Do you want that?
That people should be "free to please themselves" in an old, irrelevant argument. If this were so, hard drugs would be legalized - I can sniff / inject what I want, correct? Firearms would be legalized. I'm allowed to choose my own means of self-defence, correct? Euthanasia would be legalized - I can choose the time of my own death and make decisions, in dire circumstances, for those of my loved ones, correct? I'm a mature, intelligent adult, correct? The reason none of this is legal is that it's all either socially irresponsible, politically incorrect or both. It is absolutely nothing to do with the utopian "individual's freedom of choice".
If they wanted to "regulate" gambling more efficiently they would give the sports betting industry a makeover, provide gambling INFORMATION for the public and MAINTAIN the controls on casinos. As it is, the SB industry will be practically untouched (get those video roulette machines, eh?) and there will be an EXPLOSION in casino development. This is about "protection" and "regulation" in gambling? Gimmeafuckinbreak.
This starts and ends with tax revenue. Labour has seen a vast, untapped market and they want a slice of it.
Be under no illusion about the motivation for this.
That people should be "free to please themselves" in an old, irrelevant argument. If this were so, hard drugs would be legalized - I can sniff / inject what I want, correct? Firearms would be legalized. I'm allowed to choose my own means of self-defence, correct? Euthanasia would be legalized - I can choose the time of my own death and make decisions, in dire circumstances, for those of my loved ones, correct? I'm a mature, intelligent adult, correct? The reason none of this is legal is that it's all either socially irresponsible, politically incorrect or both. It is absolutely nothing to do with the utopian "individual's freedom of choice".
If they wanted to "regulate" gambling more efficiently they would give the sports betting industry a makeover, provide gambling INFORMATION for the public and MAINTAIN the controls on casinos. As it is, the SB industry will be practically untouched (get those video roulette machines, eh?) and there will be an EXPLOSION in casino development. This is about "protection" and "regulation" in gambling? Gimmeafuckinbreak.
This starts and ends with tax revenue. Labour has seen a vast, untapped market and they want a slice of it.
Be under no illusion about the motivation for this.
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
Blair: Gambling Bill is about better regulation, protection for children
Yesterday Blair has backed plans to deregulate gambling laws, as reports had arisen on ministerial misgivings over proposals. Also he said, that Ninety percent of the Gambling Bill is about better regulation, better protection for children. Also he stated: Whether we like it or not, we have gambling in this country, but with a series of rules and restrictions which are completely out of date. How objective, isnt it?!! And expansion of the US gambling giants will settle the problem.
Fortunately, Conservatives are against the Gambling Bill
Just consider the statistics:
Research conducted by NetValue, an Internet usage monitoring company, shows that UK Internet users are primarily interested in porn and gambling websites.
Over a third of Internet users in the U.K. 3.6 million people visit adult websites and 40 percent of the top 6, 000 sites are X-rated, according to The Register.
Elsewhere, the research showed there are ten million home Internet users in Britain an increase of 15 percent over the previous six month.
Whats more, theyre spending even more time on online up from nine minutes a day in December 1999 to 12 minutes a day in May
Otherwise, as was stated in some article, satisfaction of gamble and sex cravings will be taking less time than heating up a meal.
Yesterday Blair has backed plans to deregulate gambling laws, as reports had arisen on ministerial misgivings over proposals. Also he said, that Ninety percent of the Gambling Bill is about better regulation, better protection for children. Also he stated: Whether we like it or not, we have gambling in this country, but with a series of rules and restrictions which are completely out of date. How objective, isnt it?!! And expansion of the US gambling giants will settle the problem.
Fortunately, Conservatives are against the Gambling Bill
Just consider the statistics:
Research conducted by NetValue, an Internet usage monitoring company, shows that UK Internet users are primarily interested in porn and gambling websites.
Over a third of Internet users in the U.K. 3.6 million people visit adult websites and 40 percent of the top 6, 000 sites are X-rated, according to The Register.
Elsewhere, the research showed there are ten million home Internet users in Britain an increase of 15 percent over the previous six month.
Whats more, theyre spending even more time on online up from nine minutes a day in December 1999 to 12 minutes a day in May
Otherwise, as was stated in some article, satisfaction of gamble and sex cravings will be taking less time than heating up a meal.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
Public rejects Blair's casino plans
"A majority of voters, especially women, are opposed to the governments plans to allow new generation of mega casinos to open in Britain, according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today" - From this morning's paper.
Now let me put in my 2c here.
I get my knickers in a COMPLETE twist when these pple all have something to say about this bill. The ONLY reason, in MY OPINION, for them screaming "NO" is because the government might just make rules they don't like.
BUT, now let Mr. Blair say. "Fine, have it your way, NO MORE CASINOS" then it would be these VERY SAME concerned MOTHERS who are screaming "HOW dare you put my husband/father/me/ out of work!!!"
Casuso said: "Gambling and social problems (crime, drugs etc) are inseparable - the government cannot have their cake and eat it, hard as they will no doubt try."
Yeah? And I MIGHT die because of someone else's smoke. And yeah, for SURE, drugs are illegal, but hey, IT STILL HAPPENS.
I get infuriated when suddenly what was a good idea, became a bad idea when pple realise that a) YOU are now forced to take responsibility
b) Regulating means that the casinos will be FORCED
to take responsibility!
c) As much as we don't like the bloody watchdog, it is like big brother, just knowing he is there, makes you feel a little better.
Common, be realistic. I have worked in a casino, I have had woman screaming at me that I stole her money (btw, the casino was right next to the supermarket). It is about choice. You have the choice to pay up, play fair and put up OR NOT. If you don't like it, YOU teach your child. YOU lead by example and YOU don't support the industry.
I have a problem with fence straddlers too. You are IN or OUT. Because you don't get everything, you cannot want the good for yourself only and blame everyone else !!
Common. This is a catch 22. Be responsible. I am a mother too. My child is EDUCATED, but in the end, she still has to make that CHOICE. It is NOT up to the GOVERMENT to baby-sit her!
JUST my opinion.
*blowing off steam. *
"A majority of voters, especially women, are opposed to the governments plans to allow new generation of mega casinos to open in Britain, according to a Guardian/ICM poll published today" - From this morning's paper.
Now let me put in my 2c here.
I get my knickers in a COMPLETE twist when these pple all have something to say about this bill. The ONLY reason, in MY OPINION, for them screaming "NO" is because the government might just make rules they don't like.
BUT, now let Mr. Blair say. "Fine, have it your way, NO MORE CASINOS" then it would be these VERY SAME concerned MOTHERS who are screaming "HOW dare you put my husband/father/me/ out of work!!!"
Casuso said: "Gambling and social problems (crime, drugs etc) are inseparable - the government cannot have their cake and eat it, hard as they will no doubt try."
Yeah? And I MIGHT die because of someone else's smoke. And yeah, for SURE, drugs are illegal, but hey, IT STILL HAPPENS.
I get infuriated when suddenly what was a good idea, became a bad idea when pple realise that a) YOU are now forced to take responsibility
b) Regulating means that the casinos will be FORCED
to take responsibility!
c) As much as we don't like the bloody watchdog, it is like big brother, just knowing he is there, makes you feel a little better.
Common, be realistic. I have worked in a casino, I have had woman screaming at me that I stole her money (btw, the casino was right next to the supermarket). It is about choice. You have the choice to pay up, play fair and put up OR NOT. If you don't like it, YOU teach your child. YOU lead by example and YOU don't support the industry.
I have a problem with fence straddlers too. You are IN or OUT. Because you don't get everything, you cannot want the good for yourself only and blame everyone else !!
Common. This is a catch 22. Be responsible. I am a mother too. My child is EDUCATED, but in the end, she still has to make that CHOICE. It is NOT up to the GOVERMENT to baby-sit her!
JUST my opinion.
*blowing off steam. *
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
What kind of gambler Blair would be ?
Oct 26 : British Prime Minister Tony Blair has revealed that although he is not against gambling per se and also has plans to make the London gambling scene similar to Las Vegas, he never gambles with his money.
Instead to him it is politics, which is a big gamble because he is forced to take risks all the time, reports The Sun.
"Gambling goes on, people gamble. I am not a gambler myself, actually. Politics, maybe. You have to have risks in this job, but there it is," the report quoted him as saying. (ANI)
At least he admitted that politics and gambling walk close. I wonder what kind of gambler he would be? lucky one? or loser?
P.S.
And what do you think about a secret deal that had been done to cut the tax paid by casinos in return for major investments in the UK ? is that information reliable?
Oct 26 : British Prime Minister Tony Blair has revealed that although he is not against gambling per se and also has plans to make the London gambling scene similar to Las Vegas, he never gambles with his money.
Instead to him it is politics, which is a big gamble because he is forced to take risks all the time, reports The Sun.
"Gambling goes on, people gamble. I am not a gambler myself, actually. Politics, maybe. You have to have risks in this job, but there it is," the report quoted him as saying. (ANI)
At least he admitted that politics and gambling walk close.
I wonder what kind of gambler he would be? lucky one? or loser?P.S.
And what do you think about a secret deal that had been done to cut the tax paid by casinos in return for major investments in the UK ? is that information reliable?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
Blair- Bonus hunter!
-- Old man, I think mister Blair might just be a bonus hunter! Besides, what is wrong with that?! hehehe
-- Old man, I think mister Blair might just be a bonus hunter! Besides, what is wrong with that?! hehehe
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
- Location
- UK
Personally i wouldn't mind having a Ceasars Palace in London
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
Well, I think such a person can't be a gambler at all. He said that he never gambles with his money...
And don't you think that being a "political" gambler he would not love to gamble with your money...?
Sorry, have no time to eleborate, but feel really interesting to dispute with you on this issue... Let's continue tomorrow
And don't you think that being a "political" gambler he would not love to gamble with your money...?
Sorry, have no time to eleborate, but feel really interesting to dispute with you on this issue... Let's continue tomorrow
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
--- Oldman: Is that not what gambling is about? A political, clever way to wangle your money out of you? THeoretically, he gambles already... with lives, so effectively, I would much rather him gamble with money. WHich, btw, he is doing too. I do however think he would be a bonus hugger/hunter. He would do what he can to get as much as he can and then scream and point if he did not get ALL he COULD GET. Yeah, I am too tired too. It's a date. We speak on the morrow!
I'm sick of hearing the old "freedom of choice" chestnut dragged up EVERY time these matters arise - it is NOT relevant. A utopian world in which all people may be subjected to all possible temptations - drugs, gambling, prostitution, alcohol, firearms, etc etc - and never indulge to excess may be desirable, but the evidence catagorically refutes the scenario a hundred percent. Look at Australia. If you expose the unbalanced masses to these mediums you will create problems. You CANNOT shelve responsibility by saying "we're all adults"; we are not. If you deregulate gambling - and that's what this is, be under no illusion about that, this is nothing whatever to do with regulation - you can only accept that you are directly adding to the social problem.
Does anybody seriously claim that this is anything other than fistfuls of tax revenue? Gimme a break. Blair needs money badly to balance the books and there is nothing he won't stoop to to achieve that end. That is all this is about - tax, tax and more tax. If there was anything remotely edifying on the other side, such as social BENEFIT, it would be worth considering, but de-regulation of gambling is only socially destructive.
This should be opposed at all costs.
Does anybody seriously claim that this is anything other than fistfuls of tax revenue? Gimme a break. Blair needs money badly to balance the books and there is nothing he won't stoop to to achieve that end. That is all this is about - tax, tax and more tax. If there was anything remotely edifying on the other side, such as social BENEFIT, it would be worth considering, but de-regulation of gambling is only socially destructive.
This should be opposed at all costs.
- Joined
- May 29, 2004
- Location
- England
Nothing like a good debate...
I kind of agree with Caruso in principle. I also agree that the government here just loves to tax people so i can see why they like it. However, its the business, not the gambler they are taxing as winnings from gambling in the UK is tax free.
Anyway - my main point is: anyone can go online and gamble at an online casino - in fact, its far more convenient for many than a land casino and probably worse in that its there 24hours a day with no need to make an effort where your time in a land based casino is usually limited.
So on that point, a land casino creates no more of an issue than an online casino.
I also agree with the statement earlier that someone pointed out: if someone has a gambling problem, they'll find a way and there are plenty of opportunities whichever way you turn.
I kind of agree with Caruso in principle. I also agree that the government here just loves to tax people so i can see why they like it. However, its the business, not the gambler they are taxing as winnings from gambling in the UK is tax free.
Anyway - my main point is: anyone can go online and gamble at an online casino - in fact, its far more convenient for many than a land casino and probably worse in that its there 24hours a day with no need to make an effort where your time in a land based casino is usually limited.
So on that point, a land casino creates no more of an issue than an online casino.
I also agree with the statement earlier that someone pointed out: if someone has a gambling problem, they'll find a way and there are plenty of opportunities whichever way you turn.
GrandMaster
Dormant account
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2004
- Location
- UK
Yes. It is claimed that it will be tax neutral, the tax rates on casinos will be cut.caruso said:
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
Winners and losers
The proposals include the relaxation of rules on the construction of casinos and sweeping away player restrictions. Players would no longer have to join casinos 24 hours before gambling and would be allowed to drink alcohol at the gaming table. New rules on fruit machine prizes could also result in million-pound jackpots being offered.
Some newspapers, opposition MPs and prominent members of the Labour Party, including former deputy leader Lord Hattersley, have condemned the plans.
The Salvation Army said the reforms could lead to problems for gambling addicts.
"There are only two real winners that will benefit from the liberalisation of gambling laws: the gaming industry through massively increased profits, and the government through increased taxation," a spokesman said.
"The big losers will be the vulnerable people whose lives are ruined by gambling addiction."
The proposals include the relaxation of rules on the construction of casinos and sweeping away player restrictions. Players would no longer have to join casinos 24 hours before gambling and would be allowed to drink alcohol at the gaming table. New rules on fruit machine prizes could also result in million-pound jackpots being offered.
Some newspapers, opposition MPs and prominent members of the Labour Party, including former deputy leader Lord Hattersley, have condemned the plans.
The Salvation Army said the reforms could lead to problems for gambling addicts.
"There are only two real winners that will benefit from the liberalisation of gambling laws: the gaming industry through massively increased profits, and the government through increased taxation," a spokesman said.
"The big losers will be the vulnerable people whose lives are ruined by gambling addiction."
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2004
- Location
- Location, Location!
Does anyone have any statistics for the levels of gambling addiction in Nevada and Atlantic City, in comparison to the UK currently?
As a recreational gambler who enjoys the occasional trip to Las Vegas, I think I'm in favour of the plans. I mean, if someone decides to slit their wrists, do you blame the manufacturer of the kitchen knife? Adults should be allowed to make their own choices and decisions. I don't think we can expect a third party to legislate what adults should and shouldn't be allowed to do.
It's easy enough to become addicted to gambling in the uk with internet casinos, bookmakers, fruit machines etc anyway. I don't think bigger jackpots and more exciting gaming will make an enormous difference.
More importantly though - we just haven't got the weather!!!! There's nothing like sliding out of Ballys on a balmy summer evening, and wandering over to Ceasars Palace.... before taking a stroll up the strip.
Blackpool just doesn't seem to compare somehow
EDIT: On an entirely unrelated note, just read the Tomb Raider announcement up there, and just to let you know that 32RED are launching it on the 28th too!
As a recreational gambler who enjoys the occasional trip to Las Vegas, I think I'm in favour of the plans. I mean, if someone decides to slit their wrists, do you blame the manufacturer of the kitchen knife? Adults should be allowed to make their own choices and decisions. I don't think we can expect a third party to legislate what adults should and shouldn't be allowed to do.
It's easy enough to become addicted to gambling in the uk with internet casinos, bookmakers, fruit machines etc anyway. I don't think bigger jackpots and more exciting gaming will make an enormous difference.
More importantly though - we just haven't got the weather!!!! There's nothing like sliding out of Ballys on a balmy summer evening, and wandering over to Ceasars Palace.... before taking a stroll up the strip.
Blackpool just doesn't seem to compare somehow
EDIT: On an entirely unrelated note, just read the Tomb Raider announcement up there, and just to let you know that 32RED are launching it on the 28th too!
Last edited:
"Adults should be allowed to make their own choices and decisions."
***SNOOOORE***
Change the record PLEASE. That point was made about 200 years ago. Repeating it ad nauseum doesn't make it any less irrelevant.
GM - are you saying you've read a claim that tax levels will be maintained unchanged, notwithstanding an INDETERMINATE increase of casinos? This is impossible to achieve. For each new casino they'd need to slice the overall tax rate to maintain the balance. Then, for those that may fold they'd have to UP the percentage again.
If you have a link, please post it.
***SNOOOORE***
Change the record PLEASE. That point was made about 200 years ago. Repeating it ad nauseum doesn't make it any less irrelevant.
GM - are you saying you've read a claim that tax levels will be maintained unchanged, notwithstanding an INDETERMINATE increase of casinos? This is impossible to achieve. For each new casino they'd need to slice the overall tax rate to maintain the balance. Then, for those that may fold they'd have to UP the percentage again.
If you have a link, please post it.
GrandMaster
Dormant account
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2004
- Location
- UK
caruso said:
I read somewhere (sorry, I can't remember where) that tax rates on casinos will be cut from 40% to 15%-20%, so that the total amount of tax raised from the casinos will stay roughly the same. Obviously, the tax rates won't be adjusted every time a casino opens or closes.
The cynical in me thinks that the Labour Party's finances must benefit from it somehow.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2004
- Location
- London, England
Just typed out a long post with my humble opinions on the subject then it vanished when I hit to "back" key accidently GRRRR
Summary of my long post is:
1. Labour WILL DEFINATELY benefit from it
2. The reform WILL go through
3. I tend to agree with Caruso re promblem gambling getting much worse
4. Hope they have single deck 21 and 10x odds on craps at the Wembley casino
Summary of my long post is:
1. Labour WILL DEFINATELY benefit from it
2. The reform WILL go through
3. I tend to agree with Caruso re promblem gambling getting much worse
4. Hope they have single deck 21 and 10x odds on craps at the Wembley casino
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2004
- Location
- Bexhill on sea, England
My 1c worth!
I totally 100% agree with everything caruso said.
Even though I am a daily gambler myself, and personally would love it if they finally opened a casino in Hastings, I can only see a lot of misery for a lot of people.
When I started gambling, I did crazy, foolish things - and I was addicted. I could very easily have got into serious debt problems. I don't want to make it sound like I'm better than anyone else, but I think I have much better self control than a lot of other people I have seen in betting shops, casinos and anywhere else where gambling machines are sited. (Almost everywhere these days!)
In the UK, people almost get credit cards & bank loans rammed down their throats! Getting into debt is just far too simple, and millions of Britons have done just that. I don't know the current figure, but I remember hearing on the news a while back that the average brit owes something like 14K on just credit cards & bank loans alone!
I am just an office 'pleb' on less than 25K/an - I owe 200 to one credit card, and have no bank loans. But getting here was bloody hard work!
Saying people are adults and can use their own brain is easy to say - and may well apply to Americans and others!
But far too many Brits seem incapable of controlling their actions, or being sensible. Just look at the trouble we have with football hooligans, and mass binge drinking leading to all sorts of crime & violence in every large town centre up and down the entire county each and every weekend of the year!
As for parental education of their youngsters - paah! I'm not a parent myself, but the vast majority of others I've seen have as much control and authority over their offspring as I do over the rising of the sun each morning!
OK, that's enough soap-boxing for today - back to my lowly job!
PS: I don't like generalising and knocking Britains - I am very proud to be British myself. But you can't ignore the facts.
I totally 100% agree with everything caruso said.
Even though I am a daily gambler myself, and personally would love it if they finally opened a casino in Hastings, I can only see a lot of misery for a lot of people.
When I started gambling, I did crazy, foolish things - and I was addicted. I could very easily have got into serious debt problems. I don't want to make it sound like I'm better than anyone else, but I think I have much better self control than a lot of other people I have seen in betting shops, casinos and anywhere else where gambling machines are sited. (Almost everywhere these days!)
In the UK, people almost get credit cards & bank loans rammed down their throats! Getting into debt is just far too simple, and millions of Britons have done just that. I don't know the current figure, but I remember hearing on the news a while back that the average brit owes something like 14K on just credit cards & bank loans alone!
I am just an office 'pleb' on less than 25K/an - I owe 200 to one credit card, and have no bank loans. But getting here was bloody hard work!
Saying people are adults and can use their own brain is easy to say - and may well apply to Americans and others!
But far too many Brits seem incapable of controlling their actions, or being sensible. Just look at the trouble we have with football hooligans, and mass binge drinking leading to all sorts of crime & violence in every large town centre up and down the entire county each and every weekend of the year!
As for parental education of their youngsters - paah! I'm not a parent myself, but the vast majority of others I've seen have as much control and authority over their offspring as I do over the rising of the sun each morning!
OK, that's enough soap-boxing for today - back to my lowly job!
PS: I don't like generalising and knocking Britains - I am very proud to be British myself. But you can't ignore the facts.
Last edited:
GrandMaster said:
You're possibly thinking of the following comment which received quite a lot of attention, GM:
QUOTE: A memo written by Nick Bent, Ms Jowell's special adviser, says the Gambling Bill "will be revenue neutral for HM Treasury". Leading tax analysts say for this to happen the tax rate would have to drop from the current level of 40 per cent to between 15 and 20 per cent.UNQUOTE
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
caruso said:
Let's agree to disagree. Freedom of choice is relevant to every and any situation. Being sick of it does not change the matter. So you would have Gambling outlawed then, like in America, have publishers threatened for taking even Advertising money?!
Either way. Let's agree, you and I, to disagree. This can become petty pretty fast, and frankly I am not the petty kind. Call me a hippy, I believe in freedom of choice. I have only ONE thing that I don't have a choice about. Dieing. The rest. THERE IS ALWAYS choice.
I would like to CHOOSE for myself if I will or will not spend my money with an establishment of MY CHOICE. --- Is my point and I am not about to change it. So, Let's agree to disagree. The 'right thing' to do. IMHO.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
- Location
- UK
nafanny29 said:4. Hope they have single deck 21 and 10x odds on craps at the Wembley casino
Oh yeah!! nafanny
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
--- PS: And while I am here, let me say something else too. I am not a Brit. Maybe it is a good thing then. I believe the majority of British children (and again this is IMO and based on personal experience) are spoiled, undisciplined and pampered to the degree where they KNOW they don't have to take responsibility for their actions (just switch on the "The bank of Mom&Dad")
because they will be bailed out. Again. It is up to the PARANTS to TEACH their children how to behave, react and act. THESE are our Adults of the future. I have noticed that the British kids are 'angels' to their parents, BUT sometimes not relatively so. IE: Child came to mother, with a stab wound. Child scream blue murder, and name the person to blamed.
Mother fly out of the door, and start raising hell....
What mother did NOT know?
a) Child hit the blamed over the head with a baseball bat
b) Because said blamed took the drugs of child!
It is all relative; in the END, but not before.
Take this principle and apply it to the gambling industry.
because they will be bailed out. Again. It is up to the PARANTS to TEACH their children how to behave, react and act. THESE are our Adults of the future. I have noticed that the British kids are 'angels' to their parents, BUT sometimes not relatively so. IE: Child came to mother, with a stab wound. Child scream blue murder, and name the person to blamed.
Mother fly out of the door, and start raising hell....
What mother did NOT know?
a) Child hit the blamed over the head with a baseball bat
b) Because said blamed took the drugs of child!
It is all relative; in the END, but not before.
Take this principle and apply it to the gambling industry.
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2004
- Location
- UK
Basically, the US casino operators are allegedly threatenting that if the taxes aren't cut, they won't invest - so there is a possibility of a tax cut.
However, there's still the issue for online casinos - even if taxation is cut to 15-20% there's little to no incentive for them to move onshore from their current offshore jurisdiction where tax rates are much lower - and there's nothing in the gambling bill that stops offshore casinos (european ones) from advertising online.
As for the 24 hour cooling off period - who does this affect? For the UK gambler, its simply a matter of emailing a membership form 24 hours before - or faxing. You don't have to visit the casino to become a member - so no hardship there. However, if you're an overseas visitor staying in the UK for one night - and you want to go to a casino - You can't because of the 24 hour membership - pretty stupid and making the casinos lose out on potential players..I can't see how losing the 24 hour membership laws is really that big a deal..
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
Petunia: Considering your words regarding spoilt kids, - well I absolutely agree with you. And it happens not only in Britain, and I think you know it. And it happens with adults as well. I think this is the fate of civilization. First we fight for our rights, then we build highly developed civilization and democracy, - and then we are getting spoilt by well-being. And that's our destiny. How sad.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
-- Old man, you are right. It happens all over the world. I think too that this is a generation thing to. I think the 30+ now are/were the LAST generation that knew what 'hard times' meant, and not to trivialise the fact that there are still areas of poverty etc. We are to blame, at times, for the insolance of our youth. THESE are the leaders of tomorrow. God save the queen, but keep a keen eye on her children!! ----
oldman said:Petunia: Considering your words regarding spoilt kids, - well I absolutely agree with you. And it happens not only in Britain, and I think you know it. And it happens with adults as well. I think this is the fate of civilization. First we fight for our rights, then we build highly developed civilization and democracy, - and then we are getting spoilt by well-being. And that's our destiny. How sad.
We're going off at something of a tangent here, but speaking personally I gotta say ain't it the truth, oldman!
And as our lives become easier in these civilisations we have developed we become "softer" and more prepared to appease than defend ourselves and the values that made our civilisations great imo.
Of course, it may also be that as individuals, as we grow older we tend to become critical of the following generations and the current state of society. Remember when you were younger and the old farts used to tell you how great and honourable things were "in the old days"? !! It's a thought.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
jetset said:
Jetset- FOR SURE I remember, but you know what.... I still had to listen to my teacher, my mother thought nothing of following up a threat with a tight smack about the tjops (no, she never did beat me into that coma she promised - and I so dearly wished for)
In the end it is all relevant. Regulating the industry really has no benefit to anyone but the government regulating it... yet, having said that... Some keep their jobs, others GET jobs and even more can be fed from this very same governments money-bags through "benefits" such as the DOLE etc.
South Africa is going the same route, and I am saying "Go for it." If I don't like it, I will teach against it. C-H-O-I-C-E. Point.
ps: And we need to practice what we preach. If we don't like it, DONT do it,and DONT take money from the industry IN ANY FORM what-so-ever!
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
Jetset: do not agree that we have went off a tangent here. I was just generalizing the tendencies. Sometimes it's really useful, don't you think? 
Petunia: Action lady, do you believe that humanity can resolve all its problems? I mean do you think we just need time? several generations?
Petunia: Action lady, do you believe that humanity can resolve all its problems? I mean do you think we just need time? several generations?
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
And getting back to the "tangent" :
One minister said that the government has started sounding out Labour MPs to count the number of rebels. Some MPs are calling for an upper limit on the number of new casinos across the country to be written into the Bill. The minister also said that they wont lose the Bill, but there will have to be concessions. The rebels are demanding that the Government drops from the Gambling Bill the proposal to allow a new breed of mega-casinos to be created. And most members of the Labour left-wing Campaign Group of MPs are threatening to vote against the Bills second reading on Monday.
A former cabinet minister has also indicated he will vote against the measure along with the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.
The MPs are concerned that casinos could encourage poorer punters to get deeper into debt.
Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell, blamed the opponents of the legislation of being snobbish
:One minister said that the government has started sounding out Labour MPs to count the number of rebels. Some MPs are calling for an upper limit on the number of new casinos across the country to be written into the Bill. The minister also said that they wont lose the Bill, but there will have to be concessions. The rebels are demanding that the Government drops from the Gambling Bill the proposal to allow a new breed of mega-casinos to be created. And most members of the Labour left-wing Campaign Group of MPs are threatening to vote against the Bills second reading on Monday.
A former cabinet minister has also indicated he will vote against the measure along with the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.
The MPs are concerned that casinos could encourage poorer punters to get deeper into debt.
Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell, blamed the opponents of the legislation of being snobbish
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
-- Old man: Sadly, my answer to your question is "No." We will not as a race, solve our problems no matter how much time we have! However, that does not mean that we should all turn a blind eye, or yell 'wolf' when we feel like it. I think, with time, we will mess things up to a point beyond return! Maybe that is just it. Maybe we should not try to fix is, but actually start 'over'.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2004
- Location
- Bexhill on sea, England
The subject matter of this thread reminds me a lot of a conversation from the film K-PAX!
(For those who haven't seen it, Kevin Spacey is 'Prot' who looks human, but claims to be from K-PAX - a planet 1,000 light years away. Jeff Bridges plays 'Mark' the psychiatrist trying to 'cure' him, but is also struggling to not believe him!)
They are talking about the utopian societal structure on K-PAX, and get round to the subject of government. It goes something like this:-
Prot: We have no government - there is no need for one.
Mark: But what if someone does something wrong - who makes up your laws?
Prot: We have no laws, no lawyers! (Smiles)
Mark: No laws?... Then how do people know right from wrong?
Prot: All beings know right from wrong.
Those last 6 words sum it all up really. End of point.
(For those who haven't seen it, Kevin Spacey is 'Prot' who looks human, but claims to be from K-PAX - a planet 1,000 light years away. Jeff Bridges plays 'Mark' the psychiatrist trying to 'cure' him, but is also struggling to not believe him!)
They are talking about the utopian societal structure on K-PAX, and get round to the subject of government. It goes something like this:-
Prot: We have no government - there is no need for one.
Mark: But what if someone does something wrong - who makes up your laws?
Prot: We have no laws, no lawyers! (Smiles)
Mark: No laws?... Then how do people know right from wrong?
Prot: All beings know right from wrong.
Those last 6 words sum it all up really. End of point.
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
KasinoKing: interesting approach to the issue...
Petunia: are you religious?
Petunia: are you religious?
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
Scary "gambler"
Petunia: there's another good example of political "gambler" (who gambles joyfully both with lives and money).
President George W. Bush has been named Movie Villain of the Year as he topped a poll of a British magazine readers ahead of next week's US Presidential elections (but, perhaps, you already know it ).
Bush won the dubious accolade, announced on Wednesday, for his unintentional and very un-actorish part in Michael Moore's documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, beating a shortlist of fictional film bad guys.
The president was voted scarier than characters such as Doctor Octopus, played by Alfred Molina, in Spider-Man2; the cannibalistic Leatherface in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre; Gollum from The Lord Of The Rings trilogy; and Elle Driver, the assassin played by Daryl Hannah in Kill Bill.
Almost 10,000 people voted in the survey, carried out by Total Film Magazine.
I just wonder how long the world will be ruled by such "scary gamblers"? and it has been happening for centures and centures... We do not change, Petunia...
Petunia: there's another good example of political "gambler" (who gambles joyfully both with lives and money).
President George W. Bush has been named Movie Villain of the Year as he topped a poll of a British magazine readers ahead of next week's US Presidential elections (but, perhaps, you already know it
). Bush won the dubious accolade, announced on Wednesday, for his unintentional and very un-actorish part in Michael Moore's documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, beating a shortlist of fictional film bad guys.
The president was voted scarier than characters such as Doctor Octopus, played by Alfred Molina, in Spider-Man2; the cannibalistic Leatherface in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre; Gollum from The Lord Of The Rings trilogy; and Elle Driver, the assassin played by Daryl Hannah in Kill Bill.
Almost 10,000 people voted in the survey, carried out by Total Film Magazine.
I just wonder how long the world will be ruled by such "scary gamblers"? and it has been happening for centures and centures... We do not change, Petunia...
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
Old man-- Just like I said, no amount of time wil have this 'human race'.
Am I religious. I am spiritual. Religion has nothing to do with it. (IMO)
And yeah. Mr. Bush.
There had been many before him, but somehow I don't think there will be that many after him. Hey. Do they have gambling on alien ships? I would much rather go through a probe if I can 'play' in piece! Hehehe... with player advantage of course.
Am I religious. I am spiritual. Religion has nothing to do with it. (IMO)
And yeah. Mr. Bush.
There had been many before him, but somehow I don't think there will be that many after him. Hey. Do they have gambling on alien ships? I would much rather go through a probe if I can 'play' in piece! Hehehe... with player advantage of course.
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2004
- Location
- New York, man :)
Religion matters
You see, religion does matter... being not too religious myself, am still intrigued with that mistical belief that only god (Christ) can save and release the humanity... I believe my self, truly speaking. Even cold logic is getting pissed off with the all bullshit that is "hurricanning" around...
but I just think.. what if really there's no god and we are just left alone with all our supposed villainies and virtues..?
(but yeah, it mostly deals with being "spiritual" than "religious" (in your case))
P.S.
Spiritual action lady, what if Bryan and the rest will consider "this" to be SPAM and just throw us out for that philosophy?
You see, religion does matter... being not too religious myself, am still intrigued with that mistical belief that only god (Christ) can save and release the humanity... I believe my self, truly speaking. Even cold logic is getting pissed off with the all bullshit that is "hurricanning" around...
but I just think.. what if really there's no god and we are just left alone with all our supposed villainies and virtues..?
(but yeah, it mostly deals with being "spiritual" than "religious" (in your case))
P.S.
Spiritual action lady, what if Bryan and the rest will consider "this" to be SPAM and just throw us out for that philosophy?
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
-- Old man: I have been thrown out on my ear for many of my opinions, stances and believes. I do not think that the crew here, nor Bryan would chuck us out if we bring our points across in a civil, ordered and of couse, topical manner.
Now with regards to good and evil. It is all about the person, and their intention. IMO, it is the same with everything. Were the salom witches evil? Maybe, but not because they were witches!! Is gambling evil? Nope, it is a game, a test of skill and knowladge... could it have 'evil' influences on a person? Maybe, but by itself, it is nothing. A table, a few games, a toy. Seriously! One cannot blame a doll, gambling, a song, tv, etc etc for the 'evil' of the world, but the pple who USE IT as an instrument.... hmmmm.... I can debate for a long time on this. But I will not, and I will make my final point to be this:
"Take heed, gambling is but a game, as is pokemon, and cabbage patch kids and santa. By itself, it is nothing. It has no power over anyone, nor does it 'drive' you to do certain things. Your own choice, will intent, action and reactions is what is 'evil' or 'good'. How you apply those to the above mentioned is your CHOICE, and you are the only one in control of it. I do not think the goverment should raise our children, or protect them. Us as parents, adults, friends, kids, should own our ways and TAKE RESPONSIBILITY!"
Is all I have to say.............. for now.
Now with regards to good and evil. It is all about the person, and their intention. IMO, it is the same with everything. Were the salom witches evil? Maybe, but not because they were witches!! Is gambling evil? Nope, it is a game, a test of skill and knowladge... could it have 'evil' influences on a person? Maybe, but by itself, it is nothing. A table, a few games, a toy. Seriously! One cannot blame a doll, gambling, a song, tv, etc etc for the 'evil' of the world, but the pple who USE IT as an instrument.... hmmmm.... I can debate for a long time on this. But I will not, and I will make my final point to be this:
"Take heed, gambling is but a game, as is pokemon, and cabbage patch kids and santa. By itself, it is nothing. It has no power over anyone, nor does it 'drive' you to do certain things. Your own choice, will intent, action and reactions is what is 'evil' or 'good'. How you apply those to the above mentioned is your CHOICE, and you are the only one in control of it. I do not think the goverment should raise our children, or protect them. Us as parents, adults, friends, kids, should own our ways and TAKE RESPONSIBILITY!"
Is all I have to say.............. for now.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2004
- Location
- Bexhill on sea, England
Excellent post, Petunia, very well put!
If I may just refer back to my previous post about K-PAX, this was saying the exact same thing as you. Its all about CHOICE.
Prot said All beings know right from wrong;
The Burglar KNOWS its wrong to burgle,
The Rapist KNOWS its wrong to rape,
The Murderer KNOWS its wrong to murder,
The Drug Addict KNOWS its wrong to do drugs,
The Gambling Addict KNOWS its wrong to gamble with money he cant afford to lose money he needs to run his car, clothe & feed his children, pay his mortgage, reduce his credit card bill.
The vast majority of us make the right choice. We CHOSE not to burgle, rape, murder, do drugs, or gamble beyond our means.
But however unfortunate, annoying and down right frustrating it is, we MUST have laws to protect the innocent victims of, and the individuals themselves, who make a different choice to us.
The law (in England at least) is a complete ass! But it is a necessary ass.
PS. I wonder if they have casinos on K-PAX..?
If I may just refer back to my previous post about K-PAX, this was saying the exact same thing as you. Its all about CHOICE.
Prot said All beings know right from wrong;
The Burglar KNOWS its wrong to burgle,
The Rapist KNOWS its wrong to rape,
The Murderer KNOWS its wrong to murder,
The Drug Addict KNOWS its wrong to do drugs,
The Gambling Addict KNOWS its wrong to gamble with money he cant afford to lose money he needs to run his car, clothe & feed his children, pay his mortgage, reduce his credit card bill.
The vast majority of us make the right choice. We CHOSE not to burgle, rape, murder, do drugs, or gamble beyond our means.
But however unfortunate, annoying and down right frustrating it is, we MUST have laws to protect the innocent victims of, and the individuals themselves, who make a different choice to us.
The law (in England at least) is a complete ass! But it is a necessary ass.
PS. I wonder if they have casinos on K-PAX..?
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
King,
Precisely! So if you don't like that ass, move somewhere else and see how much you like theirs!!
---And thank you for the fish and everything!! (Douglas Adams)
Or in our beloved Garfield/Rodriques' words: And thanks for your time, and you can thank me for mine, and now that that's said, forget it!---
Precisely! So if you don't like that ass, move somewhere else and see how much you like theirs!!
---And thank you for the fish and everything!! (Douglas Adams)
Or in our beloved Garfield/Rodriques' words: And thanks for your time, and you can thank me for mine, and now that that's said, forget it!---
My apologies for going back to the actual topic.
Seems that evil cow Jowell took a pasting in the chamber last night. I forgot all about it, wish I'd watched it. Apparently they've backed down from infinite mega-casinos to a few "pilot projects". Even this is too much, since it represents the thin end of the wedge. The pilots will obviously "work"...and we're back to where we started. However, there seems to be something about local decisions taken on whether a particular project is to be implemented or not. Given the extent of the opposition, that may be a good thing. "Pilot" projects remain undesirable, however.
Someone suggested the membership and 24-hour period "makes no difference". Of course it does. Someone drunk, angry or otherwise unbalanced and lacking control could walk into a casino and behave in an otherwise irresponsible manner with his money. Under the CURRENT system, this cannot happen: unbalanced individual walks in, wants to gamble, gets told he needs to 1) apply and 2) wait 24 hours; unbalnced individual walks out and forgets all about it. I would imagine that's why that enlightend rule was originaly put in place, and it's excellent.
The suggestion that pokemon and gambling are "comparable" because they're both games is ludicrous. Gambling involves wagering money. Hello??
Good developments all round. At the very least, a spanner has been put in the works. At most, the American casino industry has just pissed hundreds of millions of lobbying dollars down the drain. Oh, how unhappy would that make me.
Seems that evil cow Jowell took a pasting in the chamber last night. I forgot all about it, wish I'd watched it. Apparently they've backed down from infinite mega-casinos to a few "pilot projects". Even this is too much, since it represents the thin end of the wedge. The pilots will obviously "work"...and we're back to where we started. However, there seems to be something about local decisions taken on whether a particular project is to be implemented or not. Given the extent of the opposition, that may be a good thing. "Pilot" projects remain undesirable, however.
Someone suggested the membership and 24-hour period "makes no difference". Of course it does. Someone drunk, angry or otherwise unbalanced and lacking control could walk into a casino and behave in an otherwise irresponsible manner with his money. Under the CURRENT system, this cannot happen: unbalanced individual walks in, wants to gamble, gets told he needs to 1) apply and 2) wait 24 hours; unbalnced individual walks out and forgets all about it. I would imagine that's why that enlightend rule was originaly put in place, and it's excellent.
The suggestion that pokemon and gambling are "comparable" because they're both games is ludicrous. Gambling involves wagering money. Hello??
Good developments all round. At the very least, a spanner has been put in the works. At most, the American casino industry has just pissed hundreds of millions of lobbying dollars down the drain. Oh, how unhappy would that make me.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Location
- Woman lives in London
--- Caruso, my child had 'won' an art-set off a poke Mn game. She has also 'lost' a Barbie in a Gameboy yogioh (i think) game (Same day!). She is SEVEN. Nope, they don't gamble for money, but it is a gamble none the less. She had to take back the art-set, and of course, the child's mother would not have her kid give back the Barbie, as she put it "It was won fair and square". Fair enough. My dear one had to learn RIGHT THERE AND THEN, that if you make a decision (a.k.a. choice!) you are going to have to stick to it, and if you mess up, you will pay the price. Her price was a Barbie. The child's mother thought it was okay. I did not. Now YOU tell me.
No they dont use money HALLOOOOOOO but they find other means. AND THAT IS OKAY by you? Its not by me. THIS is what I have been trying to say. Do not straddle the fence. You either do or you dont. There is no grey area as far as I am concerned.
No they dont use money HALLOOOOOOO but they find other means. AND THAT IS OKAY by you? Its not by me. THIS is what I have been trying to say. Do not straddle the fence. You either do or you dont. There is no grey area as far as I am concerned.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2004
- Location
- London, England
caruso said:At most, the American casino industry has just pissed hundreds of millions of lobbying dollars down the drain. Oh, how unhappy would that make me.
Like it!!!
But if there is $$$ in it for Screw Labour it will happen wheather the people want it or not IMHO
LOL, it's nothing about what the people want, it's about electoral damage. That's the bottom line. However much money the American casino industry throws at them they won't jeopardise the next election, or even the decent handful of votes that would swing it for Michael & Co. who apparently aren't too far behind in the polls and for obviously political reasons are opposing the bill. The danger is ANY opening of the door. Labour or Tory, post-election we'll see a surprisingly coincidental softening of the "moral" stance. If the bill has been well and truly scuppered at that point, or at least if there is legislation in place for councils to scupper those "pilot projects" based on their constituents' opposition, it looks good.
Those tax dollars won't do any of them any good if the're not in power.
Those tax dollars won't do any of them any good if the're not in power.
I read in one of the Sunday papers that plans are afoot on the part of the American casino industry to sue the UK government for leading them up the garden path and so pissing all their lobbying cash away.
Wonder if Tony feels like refunding them their $100,000,000?
Wonder if Tony feels like refunding them their $100,000,000?
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2004
- Location
- London, England
Interesting news!! Can the govenment actually be sued 
Im still of the opinion that we will get these mega casinos eventually but like anything it this wonderful country it just might take a few years
Im still of the opinion that we will get these mega casinos eventually but like anything it this wonderful country it just might take a few years
