new online poker developments

In recent weeks, the online poker world has turned into chaos.  The three biggest websites; PokerStars, Full Tilt, and Absolute Poker have all shut down.  An estimated 10 million Americans play online poker and are being affected by this movement that was started by the FBI.  Online gambling within the United States is illegal but the website go to places off-shore, such as places within the Caribbean on Europe.  People play poker and do sports betting online with websites that are off-shore, which is completely legal.  The problem with what the poker sites were doing was that they were laundering the money into bank accounts within the United States.  The money that is deposited into the accounts must also be kept off shore.  By funneling the money into US bank accounts they were deceiving banks or bribing them to allow the accounts to be opened.  By opening these accounts they were never paying taxes on the money that was deposited by the players.  In the United States that is called tax evasion.  In 2006 a law was passed that did not directly outlaw online poker sites, but instead barred businesses from taking payments for "unlawful" online gambling.  This left the definition of what is unlawful to others.  After the law was passed, the largest site used by American players, PartyPoker, was forced to shut down its operations in the United States.  But other companies thought they would be able to navigate the law.  They stated poker is a game of skill and consequently could not be categorized as gambling.  In addition, moving outside the United States allowed them to have a little more free reign.  The biggest issue with this controversy is whether the players from these websites should be allowed to withdraw their money from their accounts.  Now that the government has the online gambling world in hand, they now are trying to figure out how to regulate it.

This is important for all of us to care about for three main reasons.  Starting off with the fact that the legal online gaming age is 18.  By the end of the year the whole class will be 18 years old and legally would be aloud to open up and account.  Another reason that this is an important issue is because gambling addictions are on the rise and are increasing dramatically.  If they set new regulations on who can gamble online, if anyone, it can have an effect on the gambling epidemic.  Lastly, by having the government look at online gambling, it's really putting a spotlight on gambling as a whole.  This means that new laws can be made for casino's and other places that allow gambling.

online poker shut down sources

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2011/0418/A-full-tilt-federal-shutdown-of-online-poker
Summary of why the sites got shut down.  Laundering money through US banks.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-poker-busts-20110416,0,308055.story
In depth information about the issue.  Told a couple stories of people whom either make their living playing poker online and who rely on that money to survive.

http://www.internet-poker.co.uk/Poker-News/Poker-Industry/Online-Poker-Sites-Shut-Down~4106.html
Spoke about the penalties that the officials of the websites could possibly face, which is up to 30 years in prison and a $1 million out of pocket fine (not able to take from the company).

http://www.businessinsider.com/online-poker-players-get-their-money-back-2011-4
Explained the difficulties of how/when/if the players will be getting their money back that are currently in frozen accounts.  The sites should be at fault and not the players, but it will be tough to get the players back their money because they got it through somewhat illegal means.

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110419/business/110419682/
Gave a full summary of the events that were taking place with the online poker.  Also, spoke about the law passed in 2006 that made online gambling within the US illegal.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-04-18/news/ct-met-charity-poker-20110417_1_charity-poker-chris-moneymaker-charitable-games
A charity poker event that takes place nearly everyday in Chicago is being close to getting shut down.  The charities are only receiving about 10% of the profits from the events which is pretty pitiful.  Also, there is side betting going on where the players will tip the dealer instead of a piece of the pot going to charity.  There have been a few incidences similar to that which is making authorities very suspicious of the games.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXWPnuzOco0
This is a video from CNN and does a great job explaining some of the pro's and con's to legalizing online gambling.

Race in America

Both of these sites were really interesting to read.  Starting off with the Tribune article, there were many issues that struck me.  By the middle of this century, it is believed that whites will be the minority in the country.  This is weird to think about because everyone is always referrring to blacks and latinos as minoritys.  There are many ideas that come to mind when thinking about minorities.  Benefits and unfair treatment initially come to mind.  Some say it's easier to get into colleges but others say they are oppressed.  I don't think that being a minority is an issue when it comes to power because there have been many cases in which the minority has equal or same power, take Egypt or South Africa as examples.  It's surprising how many times there are acts of racism going on today.  Recently at UC San Diego a noose was found.  The difference now is there there are always reprecussions for the offender.  This shows that overall there is progress being made with racism because even white people are willing to protest to get the white person (assuming the student was white) in troublefor offending the black community.  One of the issues that both website talked about was the unemployment of black people.  The CNN article study showed that whites were two times as likely to get the same job as a black person.  Even a white felon was equally as likely to get a call back as a black person.  This is clear that racism still exists in the hiring process and work place.  It's pretty eye opening to think that a person who has committed a potentially terrible crime can get an entry level job before a black who is a good citizen.  It's sad to think that the people who are actually doing the hiring are this racist or think that little of blacks.  Unemployment in America is obviously a really big issue, especially with a disproportion of the unemployment coming from the black community.  This connects to the CNN article because most unemployed people are looking to get entry level jobs, not executive positions.  If blacks and whites were truly getting an equal chance of getting a job, the unemployment gap would get closed a little, but not completely.  There are still many problems in the black community that are much more prevelant than in the white community.  The social problems such as education really hurt them because they aren't getting the oppertunity to go to the schools that will enable them to go to college, let alone graduate high school. It's really tough that this is how our society still is today, and like the last assignment we did the country still has a ton of progress that needs to be made.  Like what was said in the Wise articles, blacks feel as if they are second class citizens, and reading some of these Tribune and CNN articles leads me to believe just that.  Whites and blacks alike need to treat each other equally.  Once that happens with  everyone equal opportunities the social and socioeconomic gap we are seeing now will close.

Mock Trials

I actually disagree with the verdict on both of the trials. I think that in the David Jones case he should have been found guilty. And Elise Roberts should have won her case too. I don't think the facts were looked at as they should have been but rather people went with their beliefs over the facts. This means that people in the class are being critical of women who are saying they have been sexually assaulted or raped.  In the David Jones case I think that it was pretty clear that he raped her. People missed the part about the ripped shirt and how hard someone has to pull to rip a shirt. Also, if it was an accident she would have taken the shirt to get it fixed. She couldn't look at the shirt anymore because it would remind her of the rape. The Elise Roberts case was pretty clear of sexual harassment.  The peoples idea of sexual harassment in class is different than the courts idea. I believe that Kevin didn't think he harassed her, but she obviously thought so. After multiple comments and no solution for the problem, this was a clear sexual harassment case. As far as these two cases went, one would think the class is fairly conservative and thinks that women should stick up for themselves.

I don't think that rape is much of a problem at DHS as it may be at other high schools. I think people are smart enough to know that word would get out fast and that it's a crime. Sexual harassment is another thing though. That goes on a lot but a lot of times the girls like the attention so they won't say anything. They know they are being recognized so they will happily take the comment. Also, they will sometimes be asking for attention with how they dress and whatnot. Another reason is that they don't want to seem like a snitch and get a bad name for themselves. I don't think there's any way to eliminate this in the school. People have been talking how they do for years so it's not going to all the sudden change. If a girl doesn't think that a comment is sexual harassment and another girl thinks the same comment is, what should the school do? I think it's an issue that will always be wrestled with and will continue to be a grey area with no definite answer. It's an unsettling conclusion but it's true.

Wisconsin Teacher Union Fight

The Wisconsin Governor is trying to "balance the budget" in the state and bring the deficit back. He plans on doing this by trying to limit the rights of the teachers union. The union, now, is able to negotiate as a group. This is why their benefits are so good. The proposal would strip workers of the right to bargain over anything other than wages. This means besides their pay, they wouldn't be able to protest for anything. The president of the Wisconsin Education Advisory Counsel said, "Without a voice in the schools, without rights to speak up on behalf of students and the education profession, educators are concerned about the future," she said. "Wisconsin's governor and Legislature have denied opportunity for discussion and collaboration. By stripping away the rights of workers, they've left nothing more than one's ability to have a voice and to stand together and say this is wrong for Wisconsin."  This quote shows that she is scared that the teachers will be less motivated to do their job well.  Another issue that can come up from this is people will be less inclined to be a teacher because part of the reason people want to be a teacher is all of the great benefits that come with it.  Another big issue is the tenure that teachers there currently receive.  The governor wants to alter the system to make it easier to fire teachers that aren't performing to where they should be.  I don't think that any of these issues will get completely resolved unless both sides are willing to compromise on the issues they feel most strongly about.

Freakonomics: Final Post

After reading this book I was really fantasized at what kind of an effect a book can have on a person.  Mainly this book taught me to not take everything for face value.  Almost everything has more to it than meets the eye and it just takes time and creativity to find it.  The innovative ideas that the authors present in the book are pretty crazy because hardly anyone would be smart enough or creative enough to figure out what they did.  So what does all of this mean?  It means that what people are consistently taught isn't always true.  Another important idea that this book teaches its readers is that everything that people do is in response to an incentive, no matter how big or small.  Economics is studying how the economy works and functions.  This book, although it may seem like it has nothing to do with the economy, is all about the social science behind the economy.  Learning how people act and react in certain situations determines how the economy will be effected.  So before trying to see why the market is doing something unusual or there is a trend happening, it's almost a guarantee that something different is going on in society or the way people are reacting to something.  

Freakonomics Entry #5: Statistics and Why Kids Turn Out the Way They Are

The book Freakonomics offers some statistics that are really interesting.  With these statistics is offered an explanation of why people percieve them to be different than they are.  Let's start with a situation that a parent may face.  A mom won't let her daughter play at a girls house because she knows that the family keeps a gun in their home.  But this same mom lets her daughter play at her friends house who has a swimming pool.  Which is more dangerous?  Clearly everyones initial reaction is the gun, but in reality it's the swimming pool.  In a given year there is one drowning for every 11,000 residential pools in the US.  That translated to about 550 children under the age of 10 that drown every year.  Meanwhile, there is merely 1 child killed by a gun for every 1 million plus guns.  Since there are about 200 million guns in the US that means that about 175 children under the age of 10 die each year from gun.  The likelyhood of dying from a pool is 1:11,00 as opposed to 1:1 million.  This mothers child is far more likely to die at the friends house with the pool than the gun.  One point that the author made which is very smart is when he says that risks that you control are much less a source of outrage than risks that are out of your control.  Getting randomly killed by a gun, although extremely rare, is something that you cannot control and therefore makes you afraid of it.  There are a ton of people who are afraid of flying, but not scared of driving a car.  Even though there are about 40 times more car accidents, flying a plane is out of your control.  Another concept that he came up with that was innovative was his simple equation; Risk=hazard+outrage.  When hazard is high and outrage is low, people under react.  The opposite is also true; when hazard is low and outrage is high, they overreact.  So how can we accurately access our risk factor?  We can't because we have pre-concieved notions about everything.