Live data from Hacker News

Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

theatlantic.com

41–50 of 101 posts

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#41

This issue boils down to the proper function of government: ensure people's freedom to act as they wish (barring negative impact on others), or enforce the "healthiest" behavior? Yes, buying lottery tickets for any reason other than entertainment is irrational. But does that mean it shouldn't be allowed? People are choosing to spend their money like this. Personally, I prefer a government that lets people do stupid t…

> "Personally, I prefer a government that lets people do stupid things" What an ignorant statement to make. Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like smoking in public places ? Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like driving drunk ? Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like shooting up a school ? Society works when we look out for each other - and not let people do whatever…

All examples you give have a high likelihood of hurting other people.

How does buying a lottery ticket hurt others?

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#42
My father once won $100,000 from a scratch off ticket. It was a $20.00 scratch off ticket. I gave him crap for years over it because between playing Keno, and buying other scratch offs, he's probably spent close to that trying to recreate the effect.

The thing is, he's very serious about his lottery. He enters every losing ticket into a second chance registration on Maryland's lottery site. (This was how I got him to start using the internet, actually) He won a few times and knows what he's losing. He's not bad at math. He's not rich either, he lives off of a very small military pension and has a job filling vending machines on a route.

I've pressed him again and again about how stupid the lottery is. I've pointed out the math, the bad odds, the addictive design of the games.. you name it. His answer remains the same. A shrug and "It's fun." I have since realized after spending afternoons with him at the places he likes to play, that it's his own odd social network. He knows all the employees, the other regulars. He complains about politics to the other players. He sweet talks the old ladies behind the counter. It's his excuse to leave the house. He keeps making his mortgage payments, keeps making his wife dinner every night, and takes care of his mother. If he wants to blow his fun-money on lottery at this point, I've just quit arguing with him and I go play with him when I visit. Losing 40 bucks to spend the afternoon with my old man is a bargain, in my eyes.

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#43
Really, people should pause before calling behavior that does not conform to their model or their own preferences "irrational".

The typical argument goes like "Expected monetary payoff is negative, therefore buying a lottery ticket an irrational decision" -- but this ignores, for example, the possibility of winning a life-changing prize, that would provide enjoyment far above and beyond what e.g. investing money spent on lottery would, and there is no reason why this possibility cannot compensate for the expected loss. Technically speaking, claims of irrationality implicitly rely on assumption of concavity of preferences, but there are good reasons to think that it's not always correct.

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think his caveat of "barring negative impact on others" pretty much covers these cases.

> "barring negative impact on others" You think taking what little money poor people have from them via allowing them to spend it on lottery does not have social consequences ?

Ummm what happens when you apply your argument to allowing them to spend it on alcohol or cigarettes or a car or a thousand other things? This is a flawed argument my friend. No one group has a right to enforce their social, moral, economic or other ideology on another group based on what the enforcing group thinks is "right". That's a slippery slope with extra grease on it.

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#45

"When you play the lottery, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. But it's better than using drugs or alcohol because when you use drugs or alcohol, you always lose" - "American Movie" People who don't play the lottery are always so quick to dismiss it. They disregard how accessible it is - you don't need a next-gen console or flat-screen tv, just cash - as they disregard how independently fun it is - you could b…

> It's like discussing guns with people who will never use them.

You mean that it also creates a toxic culture which disproportionally hurts poor people and minorities? Agreed!

> lotteries are great sources of revenue (better than state corporate income taxes? Holy cow!)

They're only so because the US has this inmensely powerful anti-tax culture and lobbies. Plus, lotteries take money from the poor, which means they're aggravating the very problems we use taxes to solve.

> they are low-health-risk (someone may need treatment for gambling addiction but it never hurts their lungs or livers)

Mental health issues are health issues. Gambling addiction is not a low health risk.

> Just don't come crying to me when the state comes for your income and property taxes to make up the difference...

They should! They should come for my income and for my property taxes, and even more so for the income and property taxes of those who are richer than me. Taking money from the poor to fund the services that poor people need is obviously counter-productive.

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Personally, I prefer a government that lets people do stupid things" What an ignorant statement to make. Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like smoking in public places ? Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like driving drunk ? Are you okay with people making "stupid decisions" like shooting up a school ? Society works when we look out for each other - and not let people do whatever…

All examples you give have a high likelihood of hurting other people. How does buying a lottery ticket hurt others?

[deleted]

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#48
post #34

"When you play the lottery, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. But it's better than using drugs or alcohol because when you use drugs or alcohol, you always lose" - "American Movie" People who don't play the lottery are always so quick to dismiss it. They disregard how accessible it is - you don't need a next-gen console or flat-screen tv, just cash - as they disregard how independently fun it is - you could b…

Speaking of drugs, and registry, one big problem would be its an extremely expensive small time form of money laundering. The way to destroy money laundering would be to eliminate small returns of $2 on a $1 ticket (at maybe 5% odds). The lottery is a very expensive way to get clean traceable money, but often enough not much clean traceable money is required.

I used to think it'd be weird for criminals to use gambling to launder money - it'd be too expensive. But then I heard about FOB machines.

The UK has something called "fixed odds betting machines". These are sometimes used to launder money.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/08/gambling-mach...

> Earlier this month the Gambling Commission, the industry regulator, fined Coral bookmakers £90,000 in profits it made from one drug dealer who had laundered almost £1m in its shops. Last month the industry regulator also publicly admitted what has long been privately acknowledged: FOBTs present a "high inherent money-laundering risk".

The machines take £200 at a time. This would have been mostly in £10 and £20 notes. It's not clear from the article if the launderer put the whole £1m through the machines, or "just" £90k.

> Dealers feed their drug money through the machines, losing a little and then cashing out with the vast majority of their stake, James says. They can then collect a printed ticket showing they have gambled that day – meaning that if stopped by police, they can answer questions about why an apparently unemployed young man carries hundreds of pounds in rolled-up cash.

Either way, it's a lot of cash.

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think his caveat of "barring negative impact on others" pretty much covers these cases.

> "barring negative impact on others" You think taking what little money poor people have from them via allowing them to spend it on lottery does not have social consequences ?

I guess it's hard for some people to relate to a large portion of any future savings being 'invested' in lottery tickets ("the money just goes towards your college education either way!") and spent on cigarettes -- not that hard at all when it's been your reality.
Post reply on HN