Should Gambling on the NFL be legalized?

[Boffo97]

Boffo the only problem with your banter.. You've taken away the discussion of the Wheeler show I posted above. Just saying.

And I don't get it.. If you have no dog in this fight as you have said.. Why are you posting? It's the issue of gambling. Not about whether a piece is reporting or an op-ed. Damn.. I wouldn't be hijacking your thread and never have.

I merely pointed out that the article is NOT an impartial news article. And it isn't. This isn't saying that the conclusions of the article are true or false. I'm just saying that if it wants to be an opinion piece, don't write it as a news piece.

I don't see why you're even arguing this or continuing to argue after you said you'd refrain. Is getting the last word that important? After all, you tried to dictate that I had to let you have it. If it is, go for it, I guess.

And it was college actually.

 

[Dagonet]

I merely pointed out that the article is NOT an impartial news article. And it isn't. This isn't saying that the conclusions of the article are true or false. I'm just saying that if it wants to be an opinion piece, don't write it as a news piece.

I don't see why you're even arguing this or continuing to argue after you said you'd refrain. Is getting the last word that important? After all, you tried to dictate that I had to let you have it. If it is, go for it, I guess.

And it was college actually.

Why did you even comment on it? lol

Stay on topic.. On gambling. Damn.

 

[Dagonet]

I merely pointed out that the article is NOT an impartial news article. And it isn't. This isn't saying that the conclusions of the article are true or false. I'm just saying that if it wants to be an opinion piece, don't write it as a news piece.

I don't see why you're even arguing this or continuing to argue after you said you'd refrain. Is getting the last word that important? After all, you tried to dictate that I had to let you have it. If it is, go for it, I guess.

And it was college actually.

Again.. You have taken away from the audio I posted above with your needless bantering. I really don't care what you think of the article.. As I told you before...... I was posting it to show flv that the wire act had been rescinded.. Good God.. Then you come in with all this hog wash that it's slanted. Damn guy.. I was just posting it to show flv that the wire act was no longer and that Congress was debating it. I mean bringing it back. And yes, I don't agree because of the Crony Capitalism. But this wasn't directed at you.. So and

 

[Dagonet]

Well the wire act looks to be rescinded. I watched a show on offshore books today in Costa Rico. After watching it, I googled the wire act. What you spoke of earlier in this thread was true, but it looks like it has changed? I most certainly appreciated your input on this thread though. That was cool seeing that. I mean about the company not taking "plays" from the US. Still not sure what is legal.. Just wish we would make local books legal here and they could tax it. Can you imagine the taxes off wagers going for a new stadium? Sweet. I'd be one of those cats paying for it.

 

[Boffo97]

Why did you even comment on it? lol

Stay on topic.. On gambling. Damn.

Because the article is op-ed masquerading as news. Which makes it crap, regardless of what side you're on or what you think the truth is. Happy now?

YOU were the one who could have left it at me pointing out the article wasn't impartial (which does not mean untrue. It only means the article takes a very obvious side by implying motives not proven to people). That observation went over 9 hours without me making further comment before you decided you had to follow up on it, asking me why and now you're just in a war with me to get in the last word while accusing me of dragging the conversation off topic.

I just lost a LOT of respect for you tonight. No smiley face here either.

But go ahead and grab the last word. I know you have to.

 

[Dagonet]

Because the article is op-ed masquerading as news. Which makes it crap, regardless of what side you're on or what you think the truth is. Happy now?

YOU were the one who could have left it at me pointing out the article wasn't impartial (which does not mean untrue. It only means the article takes a very obvious side by implying motives not proven to people). That observation went over 9 hours without me making further comment before you decided you had to follow up on it, asking me why and now you're just in a war with me to get in the last word while accusing me of dragging the conversation off topic.

I just lost a LOT of respect for you tonight. No smiley face here either.

But go ahead and grab the last word. I know you have to.

Dude leave it alone ok? Please? Damn..

 

[Dagonet]

I can relate.. Just saying.. I mean even if gambling was legalized here, many would still bet underground because they could get credit with underground books. They couldn't get that with a legit local sports book. That said... On taxes...

I'm saying local governments would reap the taxes. Not the Feds. If you had sports books popping up like casinos in this country, then yes, the taxes could be paid on stadiums. The Feds would need to keep their damn noses out of this. For example, in the St. Louis area you could have many sports books. The casinos could even do it, but I would prefer other start ups. That tax revenue would go to the local govt and support a stadium. I could be wrong.

PS.. The US isn't happy with Google, Starbucks and other companies that have located their HQ offshore either..

 

[Dagonet]

Ok, Boffo did take away from this segment.. Here it is again.. Wheeler discusses gambling on Pro Sports. A good listen whether you agree with it or not. It starts in the 12:00 minute mark, so you'll have to Fast Forward.