注册 登录
四海人民公摄 - 海外华人摄影爱好者论坛 返回首页

UWB的个人空间 https://www.gong-she.net/discuz/?8 [收藏] [复制] [分享] [RSS]

日志

The last Stalinist state

热度 3已有 380 次阅读2010-7-1 19:34 |

No, we are not talking about North Korea. We are talking about the Kingdom of Norway.
The latest shock of how long the government is stretching its arm came in the form of the following incident:

Three Norwegians flew to Cyprus for holiday. They booked a mini-cruise which would take them from the port of Limassol to the Greek island of Rhodes. When they were about to pay for the trip at the travel agency, they found out that NONE of their credit cards were accepted. The reason however, is not what you would generally assume: denied credit cards due to maxed out expenses. It was quite simple. The cruise boat has slot machines and other gambling terminals on board, like many many other cruise boats in Europe. And the government has recently introduced a law of denying the use of Norwegian credit cards (VISA, MASTERCARD) on any foreign facilities involving gambling that is not approved in Norway.

Mind you, my friend, this has nothing to do with that gambling is considered evil and the government wants to make sure you are not involved in it - that's a topic that deserves attention of its own.

In fact, Norsk Tipping, which is the largest gambling/betting state owned lotto company in Norway, has commercial rights and air time on both TV and the radio. The Norwegian Red Cross has thousands of slot machines and gaming terminals across the country to secure billions of kroner from the players, to be used for supposedly good cause, including that for people with gambling addiction.

You see? It's not so backward-ish here. Gambling is allowed in this country. The difference, is that the government wants to make sure you are not gambling abroad. And Good lord, how terrible would THAT be!

Measures in place so far include banning all online games and casinos, and banning the use of credit cards for online games if you live in Norway. The latest fiasco, is the law that came in effect above. So regardless exactly where and how you want to spend your hard earned money, as long as SOMETHING there is connected to gambling, you can forget about using your credit cards.

I'm sorry but I don't buy the "government-is-doing-this-for-your-own-good-so-you-don't get-addict-to-gambling" crap, Or the "of-course-you-can-use-your-credit-cards-as-long-as you-avoid-the-places/establishments/cities/countries that-are-connected-to-gambling" nonsense. People who believe in the latter should move to North Korea or 1984.
This is my money! Whether I want to spend it on Norsk tipping or a casino in Monaco which is totally out of the jurisdiction of the Norwegian government, is MY decision to make! I'm not a gambler myself but I must defend the right of every game player.

So the Swedes are right. Norway IS the last Stalinist state in Europe. You need more proof?

And the Norwegians, please, do yourselves a service. GET RID OF THIS LABOUR GOVERNMENT IN THE NEXT ELECTION!!!
 
 

刚表态过的朋友 (0 人)

发表评论 评论 (9 个评论)

回复 袜贩 2010-7-2 07:13
哈哈,火气不小。 那按照这个法律,有人想买机票从挪威飞到拉斯维加斯,肯定不行!因为那是外国的赌城。 甚至想到美国东北部的康州(老满的旧家),也不行,那里有赌场!

嘿嘿,民主啊。既然你选了他们为你制定法律,他们总要do their job。如果不喜欢这个法律,下次选举就不要给支持这个法律的候选人投票。
回复 UWB 2010-7-2 07:38
It has already been reported that Norwegian credit cards are not accepted in Vegas, gambling or not. I won't be surprised if the credit cards are denied for buying plane tickets to Vegas too!

Don't get me started on the political system of this weird country. They are really too far out sometime, even for a left-wing liberal like me. I'm not sure you can actually call it 'a democracy' anymore.

And no, as a foreigner, I don't have the right to vote in national elections. I have no interest in becoming a Norwegian either.
回复 夏凉 2010-7-8 10:52
上街游行咯
回复 问题多 2010-7-8 21:12
呵呵,你也变成愤青了?

这其实不是道德问题,而是贸易保护的问题。也就是说,你们国家要发展自己的赌博业。世界各国的赌博业是财政的一个大进项。如果你上海外去堵,等于肥水流了外人田。像北欧这样的高福利国家,可能你们的福利中很大的一块就来自赌博收益,所以现在很多英国城市也都兴建赌场。如果你到外面去赌,那就意味着这部分财政收入归外国了。没办法,高福利社会就是以公民自由为代价的,历史上如此,今后也照样是如此。
回复 UWB 2010-7-9 02:03
问题多: 呵呵,你也变成愤青了?

这其实不是道德问题,而是贸易保护的问题。也就是说,你们国家要发展自己的赌博业。世界各国的赌博业是财政的一个大进项。如果你上海外去堵,等于
you're missing the point (and i suspect on purpose.. ). of course it has nothing to do with morality or anything of that sort. It doesn't even have anything to do with gambling. It's all about control - it is no different from the type of control they set up in the UK under the name of 'public safety'. You of all people, should be well aware of it..

I don't think the government has a say in how and where I should spend my money on holiday, whether I'm gambling or not.
回复 问题多 2010-7-9 03:19
我说的就是control的意思,但是那也不是为了control 而control。在control的背后都是有让人看不见的或者见不得人的理由的。对于control,我前些天和剧团在二世的博克里说过,有时候是为了政治原因,有时候是为了经济原因。高福利的国家的发展背后有几个条件,通过社会控制实现社会认同是其中一个重要的条件。没这个,无私的纳税人也会翻脸不认人。不让在海外赌博表面上是控制人的行为或者是你的钱,实际上是为财政截流。因为社会福利来源于财政,财政收入中很大的一部分来源于各种形式的赌博和罚款。特别是在民主的福利社会,提高税收实际上很困难,但是用赌博收入支付福利开支却不受太多的政治约束。如果是境外赌博,钱就归别的国家了。从这个角度看,你才能解释同样是控制,为什么境内赌博它不管,却要管境外。

从你个人角度看,政府表面上没有权力干预你,但是这也有个条件。如果你赌博到破产欠债并心脏病发作呢?如果你因为在海外赌博净收入减少纳税能力下降了呢?如果你们国家没有医疗和救济,那它确实没有权力干预你。但是如果有,你出了问题,它就得养着你。那么它就有理由想方设法不让这种事情发生,以便减少开支。同时,不让你把钱拿出境外,以便保证国内税源。

这就是福利社会和个人自由之间的内在联系。

英国的那些control则是另外一的角度。比如:不让你爬树,除了怕你掉下来要花公家的钱看病之外,还有地方官想方设法地扩大自己的影响。影响扩大了,可以增加经费和人员。有的时候是为了创造就业,有的时候就是为了扩大个人权力。
回复 UWB 2010-7-9 04:41
问题多: 我说的就是control的意思,但是那也不是为了control 而control。在control的背后都是有让人看不见的或者见不得人的理由的。对于control,我前些天和剧团在二世的博
if your argument actually makes sense, then the government might as well ban all Norwegians vacationing abroad. It's better to have money spend at home right? Why don't we let people draw lotteries for going out of the country all together? That way we can make money on both grounds.
Do you know how much money Norwegians spend every year SHOPPING across the border in Sweden? it's COLOSSAL. Casino is not legal in this country. So Norsk Tipping is pretty much the closest thing you have to gambling of any kind. If the government  really wants to increase income, it might as well setup casinos here and tax it directly.

Still, this is not the point.

The point is how far this line of control goes. I have nothing against heavy tax put on tobacco. People choose to smoke have to pay the price of smoking, both in terms of the product and potential heath risks.
However, if I can not use the same vending machine that sells tobacco to buy chewing gum, simply because it is the same machine, then this line has gone too far.

Similarly, you can NOT assume every person who takes photos of a public building has the intention of doing something devious, without a single shred of proof. But apparently it is sufficient to ban (and harass) people taking photos in public places in the UK, even though there has never been any connections made between that and terror acts.
回复 问题多 2010-7-9 06:09
但是,不分清楚控制的目的,你是没有办法说how far的。如果是为了税收,那么对外控制越严越好,对内越放松越好。如果是为了减少赌博,那么内外都控制越严越好。

我说的是从财政和政治角度看这个问题,也就是说,你得稍微cynical一点。你说的那些当然也可以增加财政收入,但是你没有看到我前面说的一个要点中的要点,民主国家不是能随便地征税或者限制人的行动自由的,因为选民不一定干。一般性的消费行为是人人都要做的事情,你禁止或者提高税收肯定要遭到广大选民的反对。但是,赌博和吸烟不光有个所谓的“正面”的影响,而且毕竟在人口中是少数,所以打着限制赌博,禁烟的旗号敛钱,阻力要小得多,而且那钱就跟开着水龙头一样哗哗地流进国库。赌场当然也能带来收益,但是赌场的政治阻力大,地方居民一般反对这个,害怕影响治安。即使如此,很多城市还是要想方设法地办赌场,就是因为来钱快。但是带有公益性的赌博,比如体育彩票,慈善彩票这样的,各国都有,而且是官方垄断的很多。

国家对烟草的兴趣才不是为了你好,吸烟是上瘾的活动,收入弹性小,所以你抽得越多它收入越多。唯一的问题是:吸烟有害健康,你生病了人家要管。所以,政府决定把税收定多高的标准是想办法看如何征税能让你的每根烟的税收扣除平均医疗费以后的效益达到最高,而不是为了禁烟。如果财政不管你的医疗费,政府才不会去关心有人抽烟抽死呢,因为多数不抽烟的选民并不在乎这个。

政策制定者关心的是:1)自己在位期间别让人轰下台;2)尽量把自己的权力范围扩大。你还不能忘了,执法本身就是公共就业。所以在有些国家,经济好的时候高速公路公共厕所免费,经济不好的时候收费。其实收的不多,但是能创造一个岗位。当官的知道:你不会因为上厕所交两毛钱把他选下去,但是你有可能看到失业率太高而把他选下去。

关于英国公共场所摄影的问题,那其实就是公安部门拣软柿子捏。他要的是是制造紧张空气,让公众觉得恐怖活动无处不在,所以就同意给他们多花钱。这样无形中警察局长的权力就大了很多。
回复 UWB 2010-7-9 06:27
民主国家不是能随便地征税或者限制人的行动自由的,因为选民不一定干。
err. isn't this obvious?.. maybe i didn't sound cynical enough in the examples I gave.

I'm NOT discussing whether it is justifiable for the government to control gambling abroad, personally i don't think it is. I'm talking about where the line has been crossed. And believe it or not, there is a bottom line.
It is the same bottom line that has been crossed in Coventry where those crazy microphones are installed in lamp posts.

can all things be compromised as long as there is economic/financial gain? i don't think so. Social benefits come with a price tag. a big one. But I don't think the basic freedom of choice and privacy should be part of that price. Whoever makes you believe that is only messing with your mind.

facelist doodle 涂鸦板

您需要登录后才可以评论 登录 | 注册

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|四海人民公摄 - 海外华人摄影爱好者网站

GMT+8, 2024-5-8 10:19

Powered by Discuz! X3.5

Copyright © 2001-2023 Tencent Cloud.

返回顶部