NationStates

OOC: This may be unpopular but I am going to see what happens. THIS IS VERY ROUGH!

Legalization of Gambling
Category: Gambling
Position: Legalize

The WA:

RECOGNIZES that gambling is a main source of economic revenue to many member nations.

REALIZES that without gambling many nations would have their economies ruined.

NOTES that gambling is an addiction that occurs in various social classes.

EMPHASIZES the importance to find a program that can treat gambling addicts.

HEREBY mandates the following measures:

1) Gambling is legal in all WA nations.
a) Nations may still restrict casino development in any area under their jurisdiction.
b) Nations may also outlaw gambling at their discretion.
c) Nations may set limits on betting amounts and amounts of money that one citizen can spend at one sitting in a casino.

2) Casinos in member nations must contribute toward the World Assembly for Gambling Control Commission (WAGCC) or create their own gambling addiction treatment program.
a) Each nation must Give 5% of all annual profit or more if they feel so inclined.
b) Nations with casinos must create their own gambling addiction treatment program that 1: must be approved by the WAGCC and 2: has substantial government and casino funding. (Casinos may ignore 2a if b is taking place in the nation said casino is in.)

Bergnovinaia wrote:RECOGNIZES that gambling is a main source of economic revenue to many member nations.

REALIZES that without gambling many nations would have their economies ruined.

"There are several who would dispute this. Our own nation does not see much revenue from gambling, for example. But, then, that does not contradict what you actually said," Velnayanis said.

NOTES that gambling is an addiction that occurs in various social classes.

EMPHASIZES the importance to find a program that can treat gambling addicts.

"Why not mandate a treatment program? Gambling being an addiction is not a selling point."

HEREBY proposes the following measures:

"Change the language on this. At current, it suggests actions without actually requiring them."

1) Gambling is legal in all WA nations.
a) Nations may still restrict casino development in any area under their jurisdiction.
b) Nations may also outlaw gambling at their discretion.
c) Nations may set limits on betting amounts and amounts of money that one citizen can spend at one sitting in a casino.

"1b may cause you some trouble, since it makes this proposal optional and, as such, can be argued to make it illegal."

2) Casinos in member nations must contribute toward the World Assembly for Gambling Control Commission (WAGCC) or create their own gambling addiction treatment program.
a) Each nation must Give 5% of all annual profit or more if they feel so inclined.
b) Nations with casinos must create their own gambling addiction treatment program that 1: must be approved by the WAGCC and 2: has substantial government and casino funding. (Casinos may ignore 2a if b is taking place in the nation said casino is in.)

"All funds come from the General Fund. We would suggest not attempting to change that. Also, I'm pretty sure this entire section is problematic because of that, due to a mandatory taxation of nations when the World Assembly itself does not practice that."

Ilharessa wrote:

Bergnovinaia wrote:RECOGNIZES that gambling is a main source of economic revenue to many member nations.

REALIZES that without gambling many nations would have their economies ruined.

"There are several who would dispute this. Our own nation does not see much revenue from gambling, for example. But, then, that does not contradict what you actually said," Velnayanis said.

NOTES that gambling is an addiction that occurs in various social classes.

EMPHASIZES the importance to find a program that can treat gambling addicts.

"Why not mandate a treatment program? Gambling being an addiction is not a selling point."

HEREBY proposes the following measures:

"Change the language on this. At current, it suggests actions without actually requiring them."

1) Gambling is legal in all WA nations.
a) Nations may still restrict casino development in any area under their jurisdiction.
b) Nations may also outlaw gambling at their discretion.
c) Nations may set limits on betting amounts and amounts of money that one citizen can spend at one sitting in a casino.

"1b may cause you some trouble, since it makes this proposal optional and, as such, can be argued to make it illegal."

2) Casinos in member nations must contribute toward the World Assembly for Gambling Control Commission (WAGCC) or create their own gambling addiction treatment program.
a) Each nation must Give 5% of all annual profit or more if they feel so inclined.
b) Nations with casinos must create their own gambling addiction treatment program that 1: must be approved by the WAGCC and 2: has substantial government and casino funding. (Casinos may ignore 2a if b is taking place in the nation said casino is in.)

"All funds come from the General Fund. We would suggest not attempting to change that. Also, I'm pretty sure this entire section is problematic because of that, due to a mandatory taxation of nations when the World Assembly itself does not practice that."

Very good points. I am not sure how to keep section 2 w/o making it taxing the nations. However, I could be wrong, but I think 1b is legal becuase legalization means it can be legal but can be illegal (perhaps). Where as illegal means it's illegal, period. If you have any suggestions in how to revies 2, I would appreciate it.

We are not quite certain, but we believe it is illegal to include a direct tax of WA nations where the money then goes to the WA. Or even just includes a tax, perhaps.

Section one could prove problematic as it's talking out both sides of its mouth. One international law is saying it's legal and the other it's leaving up up to the member states. I'd craft language leaving it up to the member states, and concentrate on regulating the process.

2 is tiptoeing very close to being an optional violation, I would establish the council and I would no let the nations make their own.

Also it seems the commission you are trying to create is better off being named WA Gambling Addiction Council as it really doesn't control anything. I would give it the authority to establish gaming procedures and to investigate practices in WA member nations with casinos.

I would agree with the suggestion to make it a commission which deals with gambling and gambling addiction and ignores whether or not gambling is legal.

"I have no problem with a resolution legalizing gambling, but I'm not very certain that optionality stuff and the taxation issue will fly."

I disagree with most of the preamble.

RECOGNIZES that gambling is a main source of economic revenue to many member nations.

OOC: I understand that many nations roleplay gambling as a revenue stream, but my understanding of gambling as a funding measure is that it generally costs society as a whole to have casinos in place considering the increased crime that tends to occur around them.

(I should mention most of my argument is based upon RL evidence presented in "The Economic Winners and Losers of Legalized Gambling" written in 2005.)

I don't have a problem with you trying to present a justification to legalise gambling, but I find the preamble used to justify this legislation very shaky.

Honoured ambassador to Bergnovinaia, I appreciate the intentions of this draft, but the situation in regards to gambling is so variable such that each member state should be able to determine their own policy.

Yours etc,

"Surely gambling can only be a source of income for a nation if it is attracting foreigners into that country to spend their money there... and the more nations that have legal casinos, the less the extent to which people will be going abroad for this purpose?"


Borrin o Redwood,
Chief Observer at the World Assembly
for
The High Council of Clans,
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed.

I fail to see why an international organization like the WA should deal with an issue that is primarily intranational in nature.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

Flibbleites wrote:I fail to see why an international organization like the WA should deal with an issue that is primarily intranational in nature.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

"Because some of our colleagues are stuck in the 'If its good for me, then a one-size-fits-all resolution must be good for everybody' mindset?" Brikkel opined.

Grays Harbor wrote:

Flibbleites wrote:I fail to see why an international organization like the WA should deal with an issue that is primarily intranational in nature.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

"Because some of our colleagues are stuck in the 'If its good for me, then a one-size-fits-all resolution must be good for everybody' mindset?" Brikkel opined.

"Because there are some things that are universal, basic human rights, such as splitting 10's against a dealer 6 when the count is +5, " countered Ms. Rossi

"Gambling is now a "basic human right? Since when?"

Grays Harbor wrote:"Gambling is now a "basic human right? Since when?"

It was merely sarcasm, my lord.

Bergnovinaia wrote:HEREBY mandates the following measures:

1) Gambling is legal in all WA nations.

Why? How is this an international issue? Why should the World Assembly care if a nation chooses to outlaw gambling? How do the effects of a gambling ban extend beyond the borders of the nation enacting the ban and affect rights or commerce in neighboring states?

New Rockport wrote:

Grays Harbor wrote:"Gambling is now a "basic human right? Since when?"

It was merely sarcasm, my lord.

"Ah, I see. I really must stop doing these crossword puzzles while in the chamber here. It is, however, much more amusing than many of the statements made by our colleagues, Yourself and a very few others excepted, of course."

Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:

Bergnovinaia wrote:HEREBY mandates the following measures:

1) Gambling is legal in all WA nations.

Why? How is this an international issue? Why should the World Assembly care if a nation chooses to outlaw gambling? How do the effects of a gambling ban extend beyond the borders of the nation enacting the ban and affect rights or commerce in neighboring states?

"It really doesn't. Hence, our confusion as to why this is even being considered or seriously debated. There is no need for a sweeping legalization of gambling, this is best left to the nations themselves."

Mad Sheep Railgun wrote:Why? How is this an international issue? Why should the World Assembly care if a nation chooses to outlaw gambling? How do the effects of a gambling ban extend beyond the borders of the nation enacting the ban and affect rights or commerce in neighboring states?

This.

This is not a WA issue.

The argument for gambling should focus more on the freedom of an individual to spend his or her money however they want.

However, we oppose this resolution on the grounds that it would cut into our revenue from tourists coming to gamble, and force us to create a government program we deem unnecessary.

But the loopholes make the resolution pointless:

Bergnovinaia wrote:1) Gambling is legal in all WA nations.
a) Nations may still restrict casino development in any area under their jurisdiction. Restricted everywhere.
b) Nations may also outlaw gambling at their discretion. <-----
c) Nations may set limits on betting amounts and amounts of money that one citizen can spend at one sitting in a casino. $0

Ok... As I said in the OP:

OOC: This may be unpopular but I am going to see what happens.

So, I won't even work on this resolution. Hence, don't post in it anymore unless you are a moron and want to keep squabbling over a dead subject. If this happens, I WILL request a mod lock. Just spare me and the mods the processs of locking this.

b) Nations may also outlaw gambling at their discretion.

Doesn't that provide a loophole so wide that it renders the entire proposed resolution pointless? It seems to the delegation from Serrland that putting such a phrase into the proposed resolution put the onus of determining the legality of gambling on the national government of a given Nation, turning it into a domestic issue best left untouched by the WA.

This makes gambling legal, except for those nations which choose to make it illegal.

This is better left as a daily issue, which it already is.

Bergnovinaia wrote:OOC: This may be unpopular but I am going to see what happens. THIS IS VERY ROUGH!

Legalization of Gambling
Category: Gambling
Position: Legalize

The WA:

RECOGNIZES that gambling is a main source of economic revenue to many member nations.

REALIZES that without gambling many nations would have their economies ruined.

NOTES that gambling is an addiction that occurs in various social classes.

EMPHASIZES the importance to find a program that can treat gambling addicts.

HEREBY mandates the following measures:

1) Gambling is legal in all WA nations.
a) Nations may still restrict casino development in any area under their jurisdiction.
b) Nations may also outlaw gambling at their discretion.
c) Nations may set limits on betting amounts and amounts of money that one citizen can spend at one sitting in a casino.

2) Casinos in member nations must contribute toward the World Assembly for Gambling Control Commission (WAGCC) or create their own gambling addiction treatment program.
a) Each nation must Give 5% of all annual profit or more if they feel so inclined.
b) Nations with casinos must create their own gambling addiction treatment program that 1: must be approved by the WAGCC and 2: has substantial government and casino funding. (Casinos may ignore 2a if b is taking place in the nation said casino is in.)

I like the purpose of the resolution, but I have concerns about sections 1b and 2a. Remove both and you would have my full support.