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…
Isn't this also more unique since they're trading futures contracts vs whatever a traditional sports bet is? I thought it was kind of a clever end run around the law where taking down their gig would also mean that you have to attack commodities futures contracts as well and that the Congress would be loathe to do that lest they accidentally outlaw the stock market. When I say "clever" I don't mean"good" I mean "craf…
9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
141–150 of 184 posts
Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great example, because Tylenol is more dangerous than nearly every illegal drug.
For those who downvote: it's true. Look it up.
It's not true, as "dangerous" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. Just because Tylenol (acetaminophen) is highly toxic in actually quite small doses doesn't make it as dangerous as vicodin or morphine or heroin or meth or fentanyl.
A drug is dangerous when it is toxic at an easily obtainable dose AND there is a clear incentive for people to consume it in that dose, such as addiction and tolerance. While acetaminophen is unusually toxic at doses only slightly higher than regular treatment doses, there is actually very little that compels people to use those doses, and acetaminophen toxicity is not an epidemic-level health problem the way many other drugs have become.
Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
#143Earlier 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…
Prediction markets very often have house odds, even if the market runner is not the house. When you bet on events, the people who can influence those events and are also betting alongside you are the house. They know or can even decide later what the outcome will be, and yet you are betting against them.
This is often called "insider trading" instead of "house odds", but it is ultimately the same thing, the same moral hazard. And note that this is illegal, both in the stock market and in commodities trading - though enforcement varies, and is not very easy anyway.
I'd also note that there are significant problems with random reward games / gambling even when there is no house advantage. Gambling addiction is a real problem that destroys some people's lives, just like alcoholism. And people can become addicted and lose their houses by playing poker just as much as they can by betting on roulette.
Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
#144(Not American) What does 9th circuit or some circuit court mean? It some name of a specific court, just not the place name? Or is it special kind of court and “9” is some sort of level? Importance or hierarchy related? Escalation level? (Assuming your SC eventually is also at the top like in India)
As I understand it, each state has a certain federal appeals court that it belongs to - and these federal appeals courts are numbered. The 9th circuit is the highest appeals court responsible for all federal suits coming from Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington. They are higher than any other court in those states in matters of federal law (state law is separate), with only the (federal) Supreme Court being above them - but the Supreme Court is not a regular court, they have discretion on what suits to hear (whereas the appeals courts have to hear any suit that gets lawfully appealed in their jurisdiction).
Other appeals courts have jurisdiction over other areas of the country - and there is no question of level between them, as they have completely separate jurisdictions.
It's important also that every circuit court is beholden to its own precedent, and every court below them is beholden to the precedent set by their appeals court. But courts in other areas of the country are not - it's perfectly legal (though not extremely common) for one appeals court to decide one way and another to decide a different way on the same matter of Federal law. Unless the SC intervenes, the appeals court of your particular jurisdiction is the ultimate authority on how that federal law is to be interpreted in your jurisdiction.
So, the fact that the 9th circuit decided that Kalshi is a gambling site and not a commodity futures trading platform means that they have to be treated this way by all federal and state agencies in California, Arizona, etc; but they could still be recognized as falling under CFTC rules in Texas or New York, as the 9th circuit decision is not applicable in those jurisdictions.
Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
For those who downvote: it's true. Look it up.
It's not true, as "dangerous" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. Just because Tylenol (acetaminophen) is highly toxic in actually quite small doses doesn't make it as dangerous as vicodin or morphine or heroin or meth or fentanyl. A drug is dangerous when it is toxic at an easily obtainable dose AND there is a clear incentive for people to consume it in that dose, such as addiction and tolerance. While ace…
This sounds like a rationalisation to me. People take Tylenol for pain. If they're still in pain, they take more of it. Tylenol doesn't mitigate all types of pain so people might think they need more. This happens, and then they die. It happens surprisingly infrequently considering how abnormally dangerous the drug is, but it still happens.
Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you assume the tax is on bets and not on profits
People here have said even crazier ideas on HFT trading tax or wealth tax. People have lots of crazy ideas about taxation that clearly doesn't work. It's hard to tell if they don't get it or don't care because they actually just want it banned outright. Few here would be a good politician or law maker.
Or maybe you're just assuming the stupidest possible versions of those ideas
Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is that US Congress can't make laws. It just can't. It's nonfunctional. When it does that's the rare exception, and it better be perfect the first time because you won't get so lucky twice.
https://legiscan.com/US/legislation?status=passed Seems like they can, or you mean they can't 'make laws' that you personally care about?
Cloudflare block page - I'm a bot. What does it say?
Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
#148(Not American) What does 9th circuit or some circuit court mean? It some name of a specific court, just not the place name? Or is it special kind of court and “9” is some sort of level? Importance or hierarchy related? Escalation level? (Assuming your SC eventually is also at the top like in India)
I see a lot of questions here that can be googled or asked with AI chat. Good question, but I also think, why didn’t that person just find out themselves? It’s so easy..
I think I could have done that. Just like you and I could have received this news on Twitter or on Google News. Maybe Reddit? Or we could have asked an AI chat/agent, "Give me news for today." But here we are, aren't we?
And I learned an interesting tidbit from one of the commenters here.
Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
#149Lawyer 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…
wish more lawyers broke down things simply like you did.
unfortunately - as you pointed out the outcome of the cases being a coin flip at the supreme court is the tragedy in all of this.
Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight
#150Earlier 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…
What kind of society do you get when the positive EV play is to always break the law first, litigate later?
A broken one, evidently.