WTO Wants USA to Gamble Online 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?"
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Gambling? (Score:2, Informative)
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.)
Article 20 of the GATT protects morals but... (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:1, Informative)
Do you have any idea how much you sound like a 3rd century Roman? Or 18th century Englishman, 19th century Frenchman or 20th century German? etc. etc.
I think what I'm trying to say is that you sound an awful lot like a proud citizen of a blindly arrogant and soon-to-collapse-from-the-inside empire.
this is big for Online Poker (Score:3, Informative)
The Online Poker community (which is usually treated differently then the gambling community) has been very curious as to how this works, esp. since there are probably a higher percentage of poker players who are profitable as opposed to games where the house has the advantage -
but then, we only care about the WTO when it is profitable for us to...so I doubt anything will come of this -
RB
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:4, Informative)
The protocol has a trigger clause in it for it to come into force - countries accounting for at least 55% of 1990 carbon dioxide emissions must be signed up. Right now there are 44%, Russia being seen as the critical guy to enlist as it would be sufficient to reach the target.
Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (Score:4, Informative)
Such as the Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League [godlessprolifers.org], for example.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:5, Informative)
But as far as Machiavelli goes, that particular quote is one of the most commonly taken out of context. If you do ever bother to read the rest of the text, you'll find that Machiavelli goes on to say that, on balance, it is still good to try and be loved, and to not go out of your way to do things that make you feared, as it is much easier to rule and get what you want if people at least generally like you. There's a lot more complexity to a lot of what Machiavelli wrote, including that one, than can be gleened from a simple one line quote.
-Tom
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:2, Informative)
Re:"Imposing Views"? (Score:3, Informative)
the randomizer chips and other control circuitry in a slot machine must be certified by the gambling commission, if tampered with the casino has a very good chance of being shut down on the spot and fined massive amounts of dollars, as well as possibly being liable to being sued for every dollar ever lost to their slot machines
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:5, Informative)
The case is actually pretty straightforward, I guess - in the course of GATS negotiations, the U.S. has voluntarily opened its entertainment services sector to foreign competition (check the U.S. schedule of commitments, page 71 [wto.org]) and forgot to schedule an exemption for gambling services.
This is somewhat understandable, I guess - after all, the 1994 Uruguay Round negotiations have not been called "the most complex negotiations in all history" for nothing. But now the U.S. will have to stand by its word.
A hint to the incensed U.S. Congressman: The WTO Agreements have caused significant changes in public policy all over the world, often in furtherance of U.S. interests (for example, the EU can't prohibit [wto.org], according to a Panel ruling, the import of U.S. meat treated with growth hormones). Don't cry foul when you're forced to open up your economy under the same rules you promoted and signed.
Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Interesting quote -- huh? (Score:5, Informative)
Clinton, Repubs traded positions (Score:2, Informative)
Here [cnn.com] is an old article on the subject: the more-left and more-right Republicans and Democrats were mostly pushing for human rights, and the centrist Democrats and Republicans were mostly pushing for free trade. Kind of strange, huh? Clinton, in fact, flip-flopped on this one; he was in favor of granting MFN here [mit.edu] and here, [tibet.ca] and finally pushed for and got permanent trade status for China. [peopledaily.com.cn] That last article also mentions that it happened on GW's watch when they finally entered the WTO.
What the complaint is actually about (Score:3, Informative)
Complaint [wto.org]
You can see the other documents relating to this in the row labeled Antigua and Barbuda on this page [wto.org].
To summarize, this is not a moralistic thing, or about the US making a national religion or any of that. The complaint (best as I can understand) is that the US does allow gambling, but does not allow foreign companies to compete, and that it's laws are inconsistent in forbidding it and some of them conflict with GTO laws.
Admiration rather than Fear (Score:1, Informative)
17. Rulers
The best rulers are scarcely known by their subjects;
The next best are loved and praised;
The next are feared;
The next despised:
They have no faith in their people,
And their people become unfaithful to them.
When the best rulers achieve their purpose
Their subjects claim the achievement as their own.
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:3, Informative)
Ah, you're one of those. The guys that failed reading comprehension when studying Darwin.
You see, it's not the strongest that survive, but the most adaptable. That's why the American car industry almost went under because they thought it was sufficient to be a U.S. brand to sell cars, but the buyers suddenly wanted quality and economy instead, and the Japanese manufacturers provided.
Recall a little war of independence back in the 18th century? You know, when a certain British colony dared to oppose the "alpha male of the world tribe"? And got away with it simply because the French said "non" when asked to help the British against the "terrorists"?
If more authority-loving people like you were around back then, the War of Independence would have been called "The damp squib" instead, and your current head of state would have been Queen Elizabeth II. And that probably would have been a good thing.
Re:make us pay for relgious value! thanks! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:2, Informative)
Case in point: Pakistan. If Pakistan were to become a democracy today, we would have an Islamist radical nuclear power on our hands. So what is your transition plan to go from the current military dictatorship to a moderate democratic state that doesn't pose much of a threat to us (or India, for that matter)?
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:1, Informative)
Switzerland has the highest GDP in the world, much higher than the USA
Not bad going I would think
No, the US did not know what it was getting into (Score:3, Informative)
Because of the extreme pro-GATT press bias, there was little public awareness at the time of passage of the consequences. GATT basically establishes an unaccountable world government that hands down edicts, ordering nations to overturn their laws or face billions of dollars a year in sanctions. If they could only do this when a country tried to impose a discriminatory tariff, it would be one thing. But anything that inconveniences the flow of money or goods across borders can be overridden, except for specific exceptions written into the GATT (these mainly allow for continued agricultural tariffs and intellectual property protection).
Re:don't even know your own politics (Score:2, Informative)
Um, no. Revolutions are rarely started by the poor, usually they're started by the middle classes. See the French Revolution, the American Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution as examples.
my pussy hurts (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Nothing New Here (Score:2, Informative)
When people refer to France's ML, they are really referring to the false hope of a static defense, which fails utterly if the enemy finds a new route/method/strategy to attack you with/from. While the ML didn't fail technically, it did fail in the larger sense that France believed it was safe from Germany because of the ML, when it obviously wasn't. Worse, the French were so confident in the ML, that they allowed their conventional military to degrade relative to the Germans. Also, although not well known, the Germans did penetrate the ML in a few places to the north. It took time of course, it wasn't like the blitzkrieg through the Low countries, but once they got behind the ML, no matter how, the ML was doomed. The lesson learned from this is that in modern times (post-gunpowder), almost any enemy, given enough time, can defeat any static line defense, i.e., the *best* defense is *always* a good *offense*.