[BBC News] Island gets gaming business boost

[Newsbot]

The Isle of Man's e-gaming economy is given the green light to market its services in the UK.

 

Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/6938599.stm

[Moghrey Mie]

The Isle of Man's e-gaming economy is given the green light to market its services in the UK.

 

Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/6938599.stm

 

 

Where are the Methodists when you need them?

 

Doesn't anybody object to online betting and its consequences for those who get addicted?

[Frances]

We know it's a fool's game but there are enough people who will target such fools to reduce them to penury - rather like the advertising executives who deliberately target young children to get them addicted to smoking .

[Gladys]

I think the whole point of this is that the IOM has demonstrated to the UK that it has a responsible regulatory environment for these businesses which aims to protect the vulnerable from on-line gambling. The IOM could decide that it does not want to be associated with this line of business (I think Jersey has made that decision, or did I dream it?) or it can take a pragmatic approach, recognise the financial value to the Island and allow it with adequate regulation. The latter has been opted for and that, IMHO, is a mature, prudent response.

 

You may object to gambling on moral grounds, but there will always be on-line gambling, no doubt some of which will have very dubious standards. Why shouldn't the IOM position itself as a responsible provider and become a blue-chip in the field? After all, gambling, within parameters, is legal; the key is making sure the parameters are correctly set to maintain reputation.

[bluemonday]

Ethics (via Latin ethica from the Ancient Greek ἠθική [φιλοσοφία] "moral philosophy", from the adjective of ἤθος ēthos "custom, habit"), a major branch of philosophy, is the study of values and customs of a person or group. It covers the analysis and employment of concepts such as right and wrong, good and evil, and responsibility. It is divided into three primary areas: meta-ethics (the study of the concept of ethics), normative ethics (the study of how to determine ethical values), and applied ethics (the study of the use of ethical values).

Still when the mighty buck rears its head.................................

[Gladys]

The mighty buck and ethics cannot live harmoniously; anyone making a profit has 'exploited' someone else; that was the very germ of communism, and look what a good idea that has turned out to be!

 

However, you can create an environment where profits can be made, but the vulnerable protected and does not assist in criminal activity. That is as far as you can go in introducing ethics into business; otherwise we may as well return to spuds and herring and bartering.

[Frances]

making a profit does not mean exploitation - obtaining a fair reward for one's labours has been acceptable for a long time - exploiting the weakness of others is not acceptable - hence the low moral standing of pimps, drug pushers and I would add many involved in the gambling industry.

[Gladys]

Exactly, but who arbitrates on what is fair reward? There is an element of exploitation in any profit-motivated business.

 

You say the low moral standing of many involved in the gambling industry - isn't that the point? The regulation is there to impose standards on an industry which is open to dubious practices, surely? Which is why I welcome this initiative by the IOM; as I said above it is a mature and prudent response to a business opportunity. Much better that than gathering up the metaphorical petticoats and running away as though Satan himself had exposed himself to us!

 

I am not involved in the gambling industry, nor am I a gambler, but there is an argument that if someone is prepared to offer a service and someone else is prepared to pay for it, then providing the vulnerable are protected and it is not a conduit for criminal activity, why not?

 

Pimping (living off immoral earnings) and drugs are illegal, gambling is not.

[Amadeus]

making a profit does not mean exploitation - obtaining a fair reward for one's labours has been acceptable for a long time - exploiting the weakness of others is not acceptable - hence the low moral standing of pimps, drug pushers and I would add many involved in the gambling industry.

Thanks! Can you now please also include everyone working for a bank or credit card issuer? Ta....

 

Gladys: well said...

[Frances]

If you look back in very recent history the Island kept its old usury laws that limited interest rates (a hangover from Christian days - a similar argument holds in Islam), also that drinking and gambling debts were not enforceable in the court as they were usually not entered into whilst one of the parties was fully aware of the consequences.

 

I fail to see your analogy between the gambling industry and the banks other than the bank allows spare capital to be applied elsewhere with interest reflecting the possibility that the loan may fail - banks have been regulated in Britain for some 150years tho that hasn't stopped many crooks from using the industry (the number of Manx examples is quite large especially in the early days of the offshore industry)

[Gladys]

Hence, we have regulation!

 

Gambling debts were unenforceable because gambling was considered contrary to public interest, it is allowed but the 'contracts' could not be enforced. Not so sure about drinking debts; if that was the case it is a very old and now, expired, law. That, again, is a judgement based on morals and the regulation is there to address those moral concerns.

 

The usury laws were such that the number of lenders was restricted (building societies were not permitted here until quite recently if memory serves) and there is an argument that they served only vested interests by excluding competition in lending. My grandmother (now long dead) used to sell houses over here with a mortgage in her favour. I don't know what interest she imposed, I'm sure it wouldn't have been punitive, but she would have expected some interest and that was a completely unregulated activity.

 

Not sure about your comment on the numbers of failed banks in the early days; I think there were only two. One spectacular, yes, but not 'many' failing. That is also the reason effective regulation was introduced.

[Frances]

the usury law restricted the rate of interest - became a dead letter when inflation took off.

 

I'm not decrying the Island's regulation of the various industries - my own view as to the 'morality' of the gambling industry is almost certainly at odd with the 'pragmatic' viewpoint that it is another niche market the Island can exploit (due to the regulations imposed by its neighbours).

[Gladys]

And our 'neighbour' has accepted the quality of our regulation of this industry.

[bluemonday]

Nice bit in todays Daily Wail refering to PokerStar and the IOM

Clicky

Pimping (living off immoral earnings) and drugs are illegal, gambling is not.

But is it ethical given the misery it can produce? A question of personal responsibility? Tricky with an addict.

[Moghrey Mie]

I think the whole point of this is that the IOM has demonstrated to the UK that it has a responsible regulatory environment for these businesses which aims to protect the vulnerable from on-line gambling. The IOM could decide that it does not want to be associated with this line of business (I think Jersey has made that decision, or did I dream it?) or it can take a pragmatic approach, recognise the financial value to the Island and allow it with adequate regulation. The latter has been opted for and that, IMHO, is a mature, prudent response.

 

You may object to gambling on moral grounds, but there will always be on-line gambling, no doubt some of which will have very dubious standards. Why shouldn't the IOM position itself as a responsible provider and become a blue-chip in the field? After all, gambling, within parameters, is legal; the key is making sure the parameters are correctly set to maintain reputation.

 

 

Some people make the same argument about selling arms-"If we don't do it somebody else will.'

 

And so Britain becomes one of the largest sellers of arms in the world.