Floyd, you asked me why I was against the lottery. Here's why:

JohnT · November 5, 2002, 17:01

You asked me in a (now) dead thread, and since it was off-topic to the thread, I didn't want to revive it...

1. Schools should not be funded on gambling. (Yes, this is a personal opinion, but others do follow...)

2. Lotteries are horribly inefficient in funding. Less than 35% of the money spent on lotteries actually go to the programs that they are funding.

3. Most state governments tend to reduce the amount allocated towards school funding by the amount increased by the lottery. I did my econ senior thesis on this quite a while back and it was pretty blatant. For example, say you have a state that allocates $1 billion a year to education. The lottery comes in, giving another $500 mil. to education. The next year, the state will allocate $500 mil. to education and expect the lottery to make up the difference.

4. Lotteries tend to be a wealth transfer from the poor to the rich. Lotto outlets (like liquor stores) are 3 times more common in poor neighborhoods, and the percentage of income spent on lotto tickets decreases as income rises.

5. Tennessee doesn't even have an income tax. While some states don't, that is usually because they have a special industry (like Florida and tourism) that can handle the difference. I'd much rather have an income tax to increase the quality of the states education system than a lottery: it's more honest.

So we won't tax the rich and middle-class, but we will tax the poor, and be remarkably deceitful and inefficient about it at the same time. Such a thing I cannot support.

By the way, I didn't call it "morally objectionable." I called it "morally bankrupt." Big difference!

And I know why you support it - because it's voluntary, and an immoral action made voluntarily (like the lotto) is far better than a moral action done involuntarily (like taxes).

chequita guevara · November 5, 2002, 17:03

It's a tax on inability to understand probablities.

chequita guevara · November 5, 2002, 17:07

Four threads today?

DinoDoc · November 5, 2002, 17:07

Quote:

So we won't tax the rich and middle-class, but we will tax the poor, and be remarkably deceitful and inefficient about it at the same time.

I don't get the objection of it being a tax on the poor. It's a voluntary tax. If they want to waste money on it. More power to them.

PS You must really hate Tunica being so close to the TN border if that's the case.

JohnT · November 5, 2002, 17:11

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Four threads today?

Yeah, I'm off to Palm Springs tomorrow and won't be able to follow a single one. Aren't I smart????

Edit: wrong smilie

ixnay · November 5, 2002, 17:19

If someone wants to spend their money on a lottery, fine; that's not my problem. If they're stupid enough to spend all their money on it, they should have to deal with the consequences.

chequita guevara · November 5, 2002, 17:20

I think the lottery should be used to fund the National Guard, instead of education.

Dauphin · November 5, 2002, 17:23

I agree with JohnT on everything except possibly #1.

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc

Quote:

So we won't tax the rich and middle-class, but we will tax the poor, and be remarkably deceitful and inefficient about it at the same time.

I don't get the objection of it being a tax on the poor. It's a voluntary tax.

You may consider gambling wholly voluntary, I don't. People can get compulsive about it. My mother is, she buys a lottery ticket each week because she knows that "the week I don't buy a ticket my numbers will come up". I tell her she is mad.

I hesitate to say its an addiction, or that it is harmful, but there is more to it than simple voluntary action and it is akin to taxation of the poor (who predominantly spend the most money on it).

OzzyKP · November 5, 2002, 17:46

"And I know why you support it - because it's voluntary, and an immoral action made voluntarily (like the lotto) is far better than a moral action done involuntarily (like taxes). "

Well this thread is pointless the whole debate is summed up in the above statement. Well done. Case closed.

JohnT · November 5, 2002, 17:48

Asked and answered? Yes!

Boris Godunov · November 5, 2002, 17:50

Quote:

Originally posted by JohnT

Yeah, I'm off to Palm Springs tomorrow and won't be able to follow a single one. Aren't I smart????

Edit: wrong smilie

Who wants to break the 2-thread-a-day limit rule to him?

Lefty Scaevola · November 5, 2002, 19:04

The lotto is a tax on stupidity, and I can think of few things better to tax. It is unfortunate that a high proportion of the stupidity tax is paid by the poor.

FrustratedPoet · November 5, 2002, 22:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
The lotto is a tax on stupidity, and I can think of few things better to tax. It is unfortunate that a high proportion of the stupidity tax is paid by the poor.

Agreed. There are plenty of poor people not stupid enough to spend what little they have on the lottery.

However, spending £1 (or whatever they cost in the US) per week on a lottery ticket isn't going to cause anyone any harm. The clever people realise they'll almost certainly never win, don't get carried away with it and enjoy themselves. The misguided people see it as a ticket to a better life and are blinded by their fantasies.

Having said that .... the world would probably be a better place without the lottery IMHO.

Lawrence of Arabia · November 5, 2002, 23:08

I don't believe it is stupid. People believe that they can win. That doesn't make them stupid. Furthermore, poor people dream of becoming rich very quickly. This is a way of getting there. Rich people already are rich, so they don't play. Like gambling, it can become addicting, and it gets the poor people to spend a large amount of their paycheck on it. I think that the lottery is a good thing, because someone will get rich beyond their wildest imagination, but there is also a drawback. It is collecting the money from everyone (especially the poor) and giving it to someone else. THe majority of the people get poorer, and a very small percentage gets rich. Redistribution of wealth.

Ramo · November 5, 2002, 23:55

People voluntarily use cocaine. That doesn't make it morally righteous for the government to deal it.

It is a tax on ignorance and addiction, and just another way of taking money from the poor.

Sava · November 6, 2002, 00:06

I'm against the lottery, but I think that it should still exist. If stupid people want to piss their money away, I say let them. Funding schools is a good idea because at least some good is done with that money.

JohnT · November 6, 2002, 00:08

But, Sava, the lottery doesn't really fund schools. Sure: the money is earmarked for schools, but, as I said, the schools tend to receive less funding from the general budget.

Ramo · November 6, 2002, 00:09

Calling people who buy into lotteries "stupid" is unfair. Probabilities don't come to most people intuitively. They shouldn't be punished for their ignorance.

Sava · November 6, 2002, 00:11

Its' better than nothing I suppose. I'm more of a social liberal. Gambling should be legal, taxed, and used to pay for public programs like health care and education. They should do the same thing with prostitution and marijuana.

Sava · November 6, 2002, 00:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo
Calling people who buy into lotteries "stupid" is unfair. Probabilities don't come to most people intuitively. They shouldn't be punished for their ignorance.

Ignorance should be punished at every opprotunity.

Ramo · November 6, 2002, 00:14

Maybe we should tax people who don't have degrees in physics.

Sava · November 6, 2002, 00:16

What does physics have to do with probabilities?

It's not like innocent people are randomly being punished. They are going out and buying lottery tickets. They are taking an active role in their own ignorance.

I don't cry for the Lemmings that throw themselves off the cliffs.

Tuberski · November 6, 2002, 00:16

I'll buy a lottery ticket if I'm at the gas station and I have a dollar change, why not?

Does this mean I am stupid Sava?

ACK!

Ramo · November 6, 2002, 00:20

Quote:

What does physics have to do with probabilities?

It has to do with ignorance.

As in, "Ignorance should be punished at every opprotunity."

Quote:

It's not like innocent people are randomly being punished. They are going out and buying lottery tickets. They are taking an active role in their own ignorance.

So? Is that supposed to make it ok.

Sava · November 6, 2002, 00:22

You lost me Ramo... people who do stupid things because they are ignorant deserve what they get. I'm not saying we should just shoot all ignorant people or anything like that. I knew the lottery was bullsh1t when I was in 6th grade. If any adult can't see it for what it is, then they deserve to lose their money.

Dauphin · November 6, 2002, 00:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo
Maybe we should tax people who don't have degrees in physics.

If the tax money goes to people with physics degrees then I'm all for it.

Ramo · November 6, 2002, 00:34

Quote:

Ramo... people who do stupid things because they are ignorant deserve what they get.

The government isn't merely letting it happen; it's entirely responsible for it happening.

Quote:

I knew the lottery was bullsh1t when I was in 6th grade.

And how did you realize this? Maybe you were taught the math so you could explain why yourself. Maybe the reason why why lottery was bullshit was explained to you. Maybe somebody who you thought had intellectual authority told you it was bullshit. Maybe you relied upon your intuition.

What if someone didn't have such benefit? What if you didn't have such benefit? Do you really think you would figure it out yourself?

Quote:

If the tax money goes to people with physics degrees then I'm all for it.

Now there's an idea.

Lefty Scaevola · November 6, 2002, 00:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo
Calling people who buy into lotteries "stupid" is unfair. Probabilities don't come to most people intuitively. They shouldn't be punished for their ignorance.

Punished? Maybe, maybe not. Taxed, hell yes. I would like to see a general ignorance tax to replace most most taxes. Every year every adult takes a super SAT like test, with a culturally diverse background, of course, for the questions like history influenced by such. Your tax is $1000 time the number of questions you miss. By god, you will see people voting for education under thoses circumstanses.

Ramo · November 6, 2002, 00:40

David Floyd · November 6, 2002, 01:51

Let's stop calling the lottery a tax and start calling it what it really is - stupid people throwing money away voluntarily.

Yes, stupid people. Not ignorant people. Unless they are retarded, in the literal sense, they have the capacity to understand that the lottery does not have good odds of winning.

Does advertising distort this a bit, or at least attempt to? Absolutely. That's the point of advertising - all advertising. But it doesn't change the basic fact that every normal human has the capability to understand that they do NOT have a good chance to win a lottery.

Once we establish that, if they play anyway, there is nothing morally bankrupt about using lottery revenues for funding. It is, as was mentioned earlier, far better than an involuntary system.