<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Poker Hearings Yesterday</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/03/poker-hearings-yesterday/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/03/poker-hearings-yesterday/</link>
	<description>It rankles me when somebody tries to tell somebody what to do.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 07:06:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Quint</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/03/poker-hearings-yesterday/#comment-84245</link>
		<dc:creator>Quint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 18:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/03/poker-hearings-yesterday/#comment-84245</guid>
		<description>Not only does prohibition not work, but I have to question: What is the public good that comes from banning internet poker? The cost/inconvenience to financial institutions is clear, the loss of freedom to players is clear; exactly what benefit results from this law? Is there any more depth to their argument than "Gambling is bad, M'kay?"</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not only does prohibition not work, but I have to question: What is the public good that comes from banning internet poker? The cost/inconvenience to financial institutions is clear, the loss of freedom to players is clear; exactly what benefit results from this law? Is there any more depth to their argument than &#8220;Gambling is bad, M&#8217;kay?&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nando</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/03/poker-hearings-yesterday/#comment-84192</link>
		<dc:creator>Nando</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:29:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/03/poker-hearings-yesterday/#comment-84192</guid>
		<description>Zero,

That's exactly what Barney Frank argues about prohibition: it just doesn't work.  There is always a way around every law and those who want to break it are merely inconvenienced by it, rather than deterred.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Zero,</p>
<p>That&#8217;s exactly what Barney Frank argues about prohibition: it just doesn&#8217;t work.  There is always a way around every law and those who want to break it are merely inconvenienced by it, rather than deterred.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zero</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/03/poker-hearings-yesterday/#comment-84091</link>
		<dc:creator>Zero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 20:36:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/03/poker-hearings-yesterday/#comment-84091</guid>
		<description>Ok.  So you can avoid the bank problem by having an overseas account.  Could you not also avoid the ISP problem by using an overseas proxy?  

It seems to me if someone really wants to gamble on the internet all the government can do is make it inconvenient.  They can no more prevent it than they can prevent illegal drugs, moonshine, and prostitution.  In short a complete waste of time and money.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok.  So you can avoid the bank problem by having an overseas account.  Could you not also avoid the ISP problem by using an overseas proxy?  </p>
<p>It seems to me if someone really wants to gamble on the internet all the government can do is make it inconvenient.  They can no more prevent it than they can prevent illegal drugs, moonshine, and prostitution.  In short a complete waste of time and money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
