Australian Politics Forum - The Funding Cuts

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: The Funding Cuts - Are Just Not Cricket.
Reply #15 - Jul 10^th, 2012 at 3:36pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 2:03pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 1:40pm:

Quote:

"Because of restrictions in online gambling placed on Ladbrokes by the Australian Government, we cannot accept any bets from an Australian IP Address. We apologise for the inconvenience which is beyond Ladbrokes control"

I wasn't AWARE of that

EXCELLENT !

( ... so you STILL have to leave your house - in order to LOSE it)

im with you. like we need MORE gambling - especially the kind where you can lose your house while not even leaving it. Gambling is for mugs.

AUSTRALIA - NANNY STATE

Back to top

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26594
Australia

Re: The Funding Cuts - Are Just Not Cricket.
Reply #16 - Jul 10^th, 2012 at 3:42pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 11:53am:

Australia can be such a nanny state sometimes.

Gambling is a prime example of this.

In the UK, we have William Hill and Ladbrokes to do online, in-game betting.
This is available world-wide - I have an account with both.

In a recent visit to Australia I tried to log in -
"Because of restrictions in online gambling placed on Ladbrokes by the Australian Government, we cannot accept any bets from an Australian IP Address. We apologise for the inconvenience which is beyond Ladbrokes control"

I called up and they said Australia (along with the Arab world) is on the list of heavily restricted gambling countries where it is illegal to offer online ability to gamble.

Anywhere else in the world is fine.

And to top it off, you've got idiots like Xenophon who want to restrict you even further from being able to bet on sports.

All because a couple of cretins can't handle their addiction.

Punish the 99% for the 1% of idiots.

So to put my bet on the Euro 2012, I had to get my dad to go into my account in the UK, place the bet using my passwords.

Way to go Australia. The Nanny State country.

I dont think this is a punishment. I think its to keep the profits in australia so they can tax them.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

buzzanddidj

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 14248
Eganstown, via Daylesford, VIC
Gender: male

Re: The Funding Cuts - Are Just Not Cricket.
Reply #17 - Jul 10^th, 2012 at 4:08pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 3:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 2:03pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 1:40pm:

Quote:

"Because of restrictions in online gambling placed on Ladbrokes by the Australian Government, we cannot accept any bets from an Australian IP Address. We apologise for the inconvenience which is beyond Ladbrokes control"

I wasn't AWARE of that

EXCELLENT !

( ... so you STILL have to leave your house - in order to LOSE it)

im with you. like we need MORE gambling - especially the kind where you can lose your house while not even leaving it. Gambling is for mugs.

AUSTRALIA - NANNY STATE

SEVENTY per cent of Australians support tackling problem gambling with mandatory precommitment technology or $1 maximum bets, according to a new survey.

Independent research firm AMR conducted a survey of 1212 people about their views of proposals to stem gambling addictions, on behalf of the anti-gambling campaigners Stop the Loss Coalition.

The survey found 70 per cent of participants supported the roll-out of mandatory precommitment technology

.

It also found 67 per cent support for the measures among participants intending to vote Labor.

Key independent MP Andrew Wilkie ripped up his agreement to support the Labor government in January after Prime Minister Julia Gillard reneged on a promise to introduce the measures by 2014 and instead proposed a trial of the technology in the ACT.

The survey found 70 per cent of respondents supported Mr Wilkie's decision to withdraw support to the minority government after Ms Gillard's policy U-turn.

The technology requires gamblers to use an electronic card to set a limit on how much they are prepared to lose on high-loss machines that can chew through $1200 an hour.

Mr Wilkie's original position was to have $1 maximum bet limits that would cut losses to $120 an hour but Ms Gillard was not in favour.

Most states currently have poker machines with $10 maximum bets.

The survey found 83 per cent of people supported $1 bet limits

, with 90 per cent support among those intending to vote Labor.

Both mandatory precommitment technology and $1 bets limits were recommendations by the Productivity Commission.

The Reverend Tim Costello, the face of the Stop the Loss Coalition, says the survey's results show that the electorate's appetite for serious reform remains strong, and that the government's current watered-down proposal doesn't go far enough.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/solid-support-for-pokies-reform-s...

Back to top

'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.
Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.'

- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: The Funding Cuts - Are Just Not Cricket.
Reply #18 - Jul 10^th, 2012 at 4:38pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 4:08pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 3:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 2:03pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 1:40pm:

Quote:

"Because of restrictions in online gambling placed on Ladbrokes by the Australian Government, we cannot accept any bets from an Australian IP Address. We apologise for the inconvenience which is beyond Ladbrokes control"

I wasn't AWARE of that

EXCELLENT !

( ... so you STILL have to leave your house - in order to LOSE it)

im with you. like we need MORE gambling - especially the kind where you can lose your house while not even leaving it. Gambling is for mugs.

AUSTRALIA - NANNY STATE

SEVENTY per cent of Australians support tackling problem gambling with mandatory precommitment technology or $1 maximum bets, according to a new survey.

Independent research firm AMR conducted a survey of 1212 people about their views of proposals to stem gambling addictions, on behalf of the anti-gambling campaigners Stop the Loss Coalition.

The survey found 70 per cent of participants supported the roll-out of mandatory precommitment technology

.

It also found 67 per cent support for the measures among participants intending to vote Labor.

Key independent MP Andrew Wilkie ripped up his agreement to support the Labor government in January after Prime Minister Julia Gillard reneged on a promise to introduce the measures by 2014 and instead proposed a trial of the technology in the ACT.

The survey found 70 per cent of respondents supported Mr Wilkie's decision to withdraw support to the minority government after Ms Gillard's policy U-turn.

The technology requires gamblers to use an electronic card to set a limit on how much they are prepared to lose on high-loss machines that can chew through $1200 an hour.

Mr Wilkie's original position was to have $1 maximum bet limits that would cut losses to $120 an hour but Ms Gillard was not in favour.

Most states currently have poker machines with $10 maximum bets.

The survey found 83 per cent of people supported $1 bet limits

, with 90 per cent support among those intending to vote Labor.

Both mandatory precommitment technology and $1 bets limits were recommendations by the Productivity Commission.

The Reverend Tim Costello, the face of the Stop the Loss Coalition, says the survey's results show that the electorate's appetite for serious reform remains strong, and that the government's current watered-down proposal doesn't go far enough.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/solid-support-for-pokies-reform-s...

if it is a nanny state to prevent people destroying their lives easily then im fine with it. Traffic lights and collision-proof fencing is also 'nanny'.

But it is typical for you that YOU liek gambling online, therefore you should be allowed to. You dont have a lot of beliefs that arent intrinsically tied up with YOU.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 62381
Here
Gender: male

Re: The Funding Cuts - Are Just Not Cricket.
Reply #19 - Jul 10^th, 2012 at 4:47pm

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 3:42pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 11:53am:

Australia can be such a nanny state sometimes.

Gambling is a prime example of this.

In the UK, we have William Hill and Ladbrokes to do online, in-game betting.
This is available world-wide - I have an account with both.

In a recent visit to Australia I tried to log in -
"Because of restrictions in online gambling placed on Ladbrokes by the Australian Government, we cannot accept any bets from an Australian IP Address. We apologise for the inconvenience which is beyond Ladbrokes control"

I called up and they said Australia (along with the Arab world) is on the list of heavily restricted gambling countries where it is illegal to offer online ability to gamble.

Anywhere else in the world is fine.

And to top it off, you've got idiots like Xenophon who want to restrict you even further from being able to bet on sports.

All because a couple of cretins can't handle their addiction.

Punish the 99% for the 1% of idiots.

So to put my bet on the Euro 2012, I had to get my dad to go into my account in the UK, place the bet using my passwords.

Way to go Australia. The Nanny State country.

I dont think this is a punishment. I think its to keep the profits in australia so they can tax them.

SOB

Yes that is what it is about but in Australia the club industry is lobbying for exclusive rights to internet gambling and most gambling institutions have plans in place and acton happening including an off shore presence and interaction with other markets. A lot is going to happen in this area and much of it is not good.

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: The Funding Cuts - Are Just Not Cricket.
Reply #20 - Jul 10^th, 2012 at 5:14pm

Dnarever wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 4:47pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 3:42pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 11:53am:

Australia can be such a nanny state sometimes.

Gambling is a prime example of this.

In the UK, we have William Hill and Ladbrokes to do online, in-game betting.
This is available world-wide - I have an account with both.

In a recent visit to Australia I tried to log in -
"Because of restrictions in online gambling placed on Ladbrokes by the Australian Government, we cannot accept any bets from an Australian IP Address. We apologise for the inconvenience which is beyond Ladbrokes control"

I called up and they said Australia (along with the Arab world) is on the list of heavily restricted gambling countries where it is illegal to offer online ability to gamble.

Anywhere else in the world is fine.

And to top it off, you've got idiots like Xenophon who want to restrict you even further from being able to bet on sports.

All because a couple of cretins can't handle their addiction.

Punish the 99% for the 1% of idiots.

So to put my bet on the Euro 2012, I had to get my dad to go into my account in the UK, place the bet using my passwords.

Way to go Australia. The Nanny State country.

I dont think this is a punishment. I think its to keep the profits in australia so they can tax them.

SOB

Yes that is what it is about but in Australia the club industry is lobbying for exclusive rights to internet gambling and most gambling institutions have plans in place and acton happening including an off shore presence and interaction with other markets. A lot is going to happen in this area and much of it is not good.

online gambling is one of the most dangerous forms of gambling around since it is OFFSHORE and out of control.and if you think it is all run by upstanding citizens..... Sad

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26594
Australia

Re: The Funding Cuts - Are Just Not Cricket.
Reply #21 - Jul 11^th, 2012 at 6:19am

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 5:14pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 4:47pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 3:42pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 10^th, 2012 at 11:53am:

Australia can be such a nanny state sometimes.

Gambling is a prime example of this.

In the UK, we have William Hill and Ladbrokes to do online, in-game betting.
This is available world-wide - I have an account with both.

In a recent visit to Australia I tried to log in -
"Because of restrictions in online gambling placed on Ladbrokes by the Australian Government, we cannot accept any bets from an Australian IP Address. We apologise for the inconvenience which is beyond Ladbrokes control"

I called up and they said Australia (along with the Arab world) is on the list of heavily restricted gambling countries where it is illegal to offer online ability to gamble.

Anywhere else in the world is fine.

And to top it off, you've got idiots like Xenophon who want to restrict you even further from being able to bet on sports.

All because a couple of cretins can't handle their addiction.

Punish the 99% for the 1% of idiots.

So to put my bet on the Euro 2012, I had to get my dad to go into my account in the UK, place the bet using my passwords.

Way to go Australia. The Nanny State country.

I dont think this is a punishment. I think its to keep the profits in australia so they can tax them.

SOB

Yes that is what it is about but in Australia the club industry is lobbying for exclusive rights to internet gambling and most gambling institutions have plans in place and acton happening including an off shore presence and interaction with other markets. A lot is going to happen in this area and much of it is not good.

online gambling is one of the most dangerous forms of gambling around since it is OFFSHORE and out of control.and if you think it is all run by upstanding citizens..... Sad

What does that mean? the gambling facility that is blocked is british apparently. Not one of the saudi ones. No gambling facility is above board - not onshore or offshore. the government wants their cut though so they want onshore.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg Gold Member Offline WE ARE BORG Posts: 26594 Australia	Re: The Funding Cuts - Are Just Not Cricket. Reply #22 - Jul 11^th, 2012 at 6:20am you know what though? That is online censorship. I never heard about it on the news. When was this policy brought in? And what other policies have been brought in to censor us that we dont know about? SOB
Back to top	Whaaaaaah! I'm a Moron! - edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope IP Logged