There is a strategy the PPA might consider. First a recap:
1) Giant foreign gambling machines are “rake” traps that suck economic value from nations it in which they do not reside or spend profits in.
2) Bitcoin does not mean anonymous transactions. Transactions on the block creates an opportunity for a superior law enforcement tool that does not encroach on citizens’ rights. A. Antonopoulos
States must recognize that foreign online casinos will take value from their economy unless they themselves capture that loss in the form of their own counter casinos. Even states in which online gambling is illegal will certainly lose money out of their economy this way by the natural force of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand”.
Depending on the size of the loss (or not) this could be considered a topic of national economic security.
The proposal is that any state wishing to stop or suppress this economic waste should set up a gambling network of their own to channel the previously fleeting economic value back into their own social welfare programs.
Those that continue to rely on laws to achieve this result, not only suppress the rights of those that believe mankind should have the right to freely game as they choose, but also run the risk of double “taxing” their own economy: not only will there be inevitable loss through “criminals” bypassing anti-gambling laws, but we must also add to this the wasted value of creating and housing more non-violent criminals that might otherwise have been contributing to the economy.
What has become obviously true with today’s advancing technology, is that any government officials that do not at least call for the addition of bitcoin’s block chain technology to online gambling regulations do NOT in fact support law enforcement’s efforts to combat underage gambling.
From here on out, it is those who have read this letter and do not support the addition of this new technology to online gaming legislation, that have aided the criminals and hindered the law enforcement agencies in their fight against criminal activity related to online gaming’s financial networks.
“On April 15, 2011, the Department of Justice unsealed an indictment, dated March 10, 2011, against two of the owners / employees (Raymond Bitar and Nelson Burtnick) of Full Tilt Poker, along with some of the owners / employees of PokerStars and Absolute Poker. The defendants were charged with fraud, money laundering, and violation of United States federal gambling laws, and certain domain names for the sites were seized by the FBI. The Full Tilt Poker homepage was reinstated six days later on April 20, 2011. “
“On September 20, 2011, the U.S. Justice Department accused certain Full Tilt principals of defrauding poker players out of more than $300 million. The U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York filed a motion to amend an earlier civil complaint to allege that company directors Chris Ferguson, Howard Lederer, Rafe Furst, and Ray Bitar operated what the Justice Department claims was a Ponzi scheme that allowed the company to pay out $444 million to themselves and other owners, which included other famous poker players.”
These crimes would have been impossible had the company been operating on a fully transparent block chain. What is noteworthy is this transparency does NOT come at the cost of the player/citizen’s privacy-such is the power and much of the purpose of this technology.
The players then have a perfect opportunity to align with each state as well as the land casinos, their lobbyist groups and financial interests. All parties (including the FBI and the DOJ) do NOT want a giant foreign online casino taking economic value from the country, especially without the transparency of block chain technology.
Furthermore governments and citizens alike have a vested interest in keeping the few existing SKILL based games (specifically such as poker) competitive and international as outlined in the article “moral poker”.
This allows us to arrive at an interesting and mutually beneficial strategy that seems quite rational given the history of the subject and the present day circumstances.
Land casinos, states, government officials, law enforcement agencies, and players of the skilled game should set up a network of gaming in which the skilled games are played freely for the interest of international competition while online casino games would remain within each state (if it is legal at all in that particular state). Provided that profits from IN-state casino gaming goes to the general social welfare or public rather than a 3rd party private interest, it cannot be said or thought by any rational individual that this type of gambling might effect the land casino industry in any negative way.
Furthermore this allows land based casinos to cross promote with both IN-state online gaming as well as the international skilled based gaming in such a way that would add value to gaming’s entire financial network while simultaneously adding to the value of national and interstate tourism from the skilled and non-skilled gaming industry.