121–130 of 184 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great example, because Tylenol is more dangerous than nearly every illegal drug.
Now do H20, very harmful at high amounts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not sure a vote of non-confidence would have helped here — there are only two parties.
> I am not sure a vote of non-confidence would have helped here — there are only two parties. But why are there only two parties? The rest of the Anglosphere–Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK–have multiparty systems–some are more multiparty than others, but none of them have the hard two-party system that the US has, in which third parties have a very marginal role (not completely marginal – e.g. in a c…
If I am not mistaken all disruptions to fpp two party systems eventually settle back into them, maybe not the same parties but two nonetheless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> companies need to pay 40-50% of their gross revenue to the government. That's comparable to tobacco. taxing a vice is worth it on paper, but the second-order effects (nonstop alcohol ads, pervasive gambling app dark patterns) aren't worth it imo
When was the last time you saw an ad for cigarettes? Those second-order effects are easy to mitigate with sensible public policy. And it's not like we have to invent the solution from scratch — we've done it before, very effectively.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because Kalshi doesn't want to follow the actual law Correction: because the federal government doesn't want Kalshi to follow the actual law. CFTC ordered Kalshi to continue operating in NY when NY tried to crack down on it. Donald Trump Jr. is a paid advisor for Kalshi. The US Government's conservative leaders are ignoring states' rights in order to personally profit, using Kalshi as a tool. > this will end up at…
We have them because the Founders thought it was a good idea. Then they thought it was a good idea to have two houses with different criteria, giving two chances to quash legislation. Plus the veto. Plus the Supreme Court (whose job they left almost completely undefined, so they made up a job description). So we have them because we can't get rid of them. But they are practically useless. They can usually manage the…
The US Founders also did not have political parties, and the tribal/clan thinking that goes along with them.
Lawyer here - As i explained last time we had a variant of this thread (see comment history if you are interested), this is a very complicated area that people try to make very simple. It doesn't have to be complicated, mind you, but right now the way the law is written is basically: 1. Transmitting sports betting info between states is a federal crime unless it's legal in both states (18 U.S.C. § 1084(a)) 2. The CEA…
> Kalshi is just hoping to be treated like Uber was. This is not a bad strategy for a company in our asymmetric regulatory environment. Fortunes were made in crypto on exactly this one-way bet. Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Every once in a while you'll have change the app a little to sort of comply with…
e.g. make as much money as possible while you have a favorable judge/Congress/President b/c you assume the ability to make money will go away once the next regime is in power.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gambling is a negative externality that needs to be taxed. Gambling takes advantage of the poor, under-educated, and addictive personalities and puts them into financial distress. This places burden on families, the state, and local municipalities. It creates strain on the workforce and deflects legitimate economic activity that would otherwise strengthen the economy. We're a free society. I'm fine with gambling from…
Your argument of course sounds nice and fails under your inability to define "gambling." I view favored house-odds, on arbitrary games or not, as unethical and predatory. This is the classic casino slot machine and related. However, Poker doesn't have house odds, it is a fair game. Move one level up: prediction markets don't have house-odds if implemented plainly. On non-game events, they also have a positive externa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not sure a vote of non-confidence would have helped here — there are only two parties.
> I am not sure a vote of non-confidence would have helped here — there are only two parties. But why are there only two parties? The rest of the Anglosphere–Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK–have multiparty systems–some are more multiparty than others, but none of them have the hard two-party system that the US has, in which third parties have a very marginal role (not completely marginal – e.g. in a c…
Lawyer here - As i explained last time we had a variant of this thread (see comment history if you are interested), this is a very complicated area that people try to make very simple. It doesn't have to be complicated, mind you, but right now the way the law is written is basically: 1. Transmitting sports betting info between states is a federal crime unless it's legal in both states (18 U.S.C. § 1084(a)) 2. The CEA…
When I say "clever" I don't mean"good" I mean "crafty". You acknowledge someone has game without condoning their behavior or extolling it as virtuous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sports betting was, if not prohibited, then highly-proscribed for most of my life. You could do it in a few places like OTB, go to Vegas, or deal with an illegal bookie. People still gambled, but this made the problem orders of magnitude smaller than it is today. We did not need Sharia law or the guillotine, just an existing system of laws that were generally highly workable. It is not helpful to pretend like we need…
I really dont think the problem has gotten worse, its just more visible. The previous status quo didnt work either, you just didnt hear as much about it because there weren't commercials. In all reality, the NASDAQ does the entire yearly turnover Klashi and Polymarket combined in a few minutes. It hasnt become as big of a problem as people make it out, but its still a problem. But there's no going back to the status…
Not everyone who has placed a bet on Kalshi or Polymarket necessarily knows how to use these tools.
> you'd just be pushing people into shady offshore.
Hurdles help. Not everyone will know how to jump every hurdle. Not everyone will be willing to put forth the effort. Will some people? Sure. But hurdles do cut down on the overall participation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Kalshi is just hoping to be treated like Uber was. This is not a bad strategy for a company in our asymmetric regulatory environment. Fortunes were made in crypto on exactly this one-way bet. Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Every once in a while you'll have change the app a little to sort of comply with…
> Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Binance, FTX, BitMex, Silk Road founders all went to jail - it’s a huge coin flip.