Sen. Kyl and Rep. Bachus write to Geithner to oppose delay of UIGEA reg implementation - Page 2 - Poker Legislation

Two Plus Two Forums Poker News & Discussion General Poker Discussion

Sen. Kyl and Rep. Bachus write to Geithner to oppose delay of UIGEA reg implementation

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 2

1 2

Page 2 of 2

1 2

11-06-2009 , 01:46 PM

#26

proogs1

grinder

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 412

Quote:

Originally Posted by PokerXanadu

Edit: It's too bad the sites so quickly reimbursed the players for the player cashouts that were seized from Account Services. With many thousands of outraged players, there would have been a lot more political backlash to the DOJ actions.

Are you serious? This would have caused a panic. Think of how many players would have closed their accounts and never deposited another dime.

I think it's great how fast the sites credited everyones account. This shows me they are serious about sticking around.

Quote

11-06-2009 , 02:43 PM

#27

Cpaz

grinder

Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 674

Quote:

Originally Posted by proogs1

Quote

11-06-2009 , 03:04 PM

#28

LetsGambool

banned

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 26,568

Quote:

Originally Posted by proogs1

Yeah, I completely agree with this statement, it may have helped a little bit politically but it would have been a complete death knell for online poker in the US in its current form and the money would still be tied up while we wait for the DOJ to try a criminal case that's never coming. Im a reasonably serious player and Id have been done with any site that didnt reimburse me.

Quote

11-06-2009 , 03:13 PM

#29

PokerXanadu

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 10,583

I said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by PokerXanadu

It's too bad the sites so quickly reimbursed the players for the player cashouts that were seized from Account Services. With many thousands of outraged players, there would have been a lot more political backlash to the DOJ actions.

I didn't advocate that sites not making reimbursements. Just making a point that too many players are complacent about the "status quo", which gives government entities a green light to run over us. Same sort of thing that brought about the passage of the UIGEA in the first place. Of course, I'm not talking about any of you regular posters and browser in this here forum.

Quote

11-06-2009 , 03:15 PM

#30

LetsGambool

banned

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 26,568

Yeah, OK, I see your point but I think the same logic still applies somewhat. Customer inconvenience cant be good for the current games and, while the status quo is undoubtedly fragile, its all we've got for the time being.

Quote

11-06-2009 , 03:53 PM

#31

twoto2too

stranger

Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 11

Hmmm, I sitting here wondering way the Poker Players Alliance is wanting the US government to get involved in online poker. (wanting it to be regulated). I like it the way it is now. If the government gets involved and say, ok it's legal, the poker sites will not last a year. Just think of all the taxes they will put on it. They will also insist ( and get ) everyone that plays online, names addresses ect ect. I don't want the government involved period. I think, if they have any say in online poker ( in this country ), it's doomed.

Quote

11-06-2009 , 04:03 PM

#32

BigAlK

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3,703

Quote:

Originally Posted by twoto2too

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not a troll for the moment. The short answer is that the government is already involved The way it is now is worse than what it was a year ago and a lot worse than it was 3-4 years ago. There is no reason to think it is going to get better by leaving things alone. Since this is your first post possibly you just aren't aware of why this is. Start by reading the posts in the 'poker legislations' forum on the UIGEA to possibly clue yourself in.

Quote

11-06-2009 , 05:12 PM

#33

tk1133

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 2,221

Quote:

Originally Posted by twoto2too

I'm sitting here wondering how somebody could be that stupid. You like it the way it is now? You like not being able to play on Party Poker, Titan Poker...ect...You also must like sending home a poker check from the few sites that you are allowed to play on, and have the US Dept. of Justice consfinscate your money while violating your personal freedoms.

Quote

11-06-2009 , 05:32 PM

#34

PokerXanadu

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 10,583

Quote:

Originally Posted by twoto2too

Start here:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15...lation-567829/

And here:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/57...pinion-617879/

And here:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/57...t-ugly-625901/

If those don't set you straight, come back here with some intelligent questions.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 02:46 AM

#35

Yanksman2009

adept

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 902

So even though after dec 1 the gov deadline is in effect. we all know that worst comes to worst it leads to delays. so my question is, is getting geithner to sign this more of a political statement? Most banks follow the UIGEA now anyways so its not like dec 1st is gunna be the end of the world

thanks

Quote

11-07-2009 , 05:31 AM

#36

PokerXanadu

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 10,583

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yanksman2009

Worts comes to worst the sites are forced to pull out of the U.S. because the DOJ goes after them tooth-and-nail with account seizures and indictments, and cuts off the money supply through severe enforcement of the UIGEA against financial service providers. If Geithner signs an implementation delay order, the actions of the DOJ will be largely forestalled, giving extra time for the passage of a federal licensing program.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 10:19 AM

#37

Uglyowl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 6,384

Quote:

Originally Posted by twoto2too

People who ask this did not play online poker from 2000-2006. Things were much easier back then, bigger bonuses due to more competition, easier moving money around, and easier games. I made the down payment I made on my house from blackjack bonuses.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 12:25 PM

#38

novahunterpa

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 5,244

Quote:

Originally Posted by PokerXanadu

I don't think a delay in UIGEA in of it self will stop the DOJ. UIGEA is only one tool the DOJ can use but as we have seen they have been going after online gaming without UIGEA, so I expect that to continue.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 05:11 PM

#39

proogs1

grinder

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 412

Quote:

Originally Posted by PokerXanadu

This is your opinion. You do not know what the DOJ is going to do after Dec. 1st. They might fall back like they did on the medical marijuana seizures, even though O'bama has yet to mention online poker.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 05:42 PM

#40

PokerXanadu

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 10,583

Quote:

Originally Posted by proogs1

I was just stating the worst case scenario, not making a prediction. This was in response to Yanksman statement that seemed to say that the worst that could happen after December 1st is "delays" so therefore a delay of the UIGEA implementation by Geithner is just political, not a practical solution to anything. I wanted to make a point that the results of the UIGEA could be (not will be) much worse than that, so a delay of the UIGEA implementation could be very important.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yanksman2009

So even though after dec 1 the gov deadline is in effect. we all know that worst comes to worst it leads to delays...