Is that surprising?
State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
111–120 of 205 posts
Re: State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
If playing the lottery becomes worthwhile, arbitrageurs will immediately step in until it isn't. Got a lottery ticket with a 10% chance of being worth $100? I'll give you and each of your friends $8.50 for them, guaranteed, today. Lotteries penalize people who are bad at math. It really is that simple.
You seem to be also missing the point of these lottery retailers being disproportionately clustered in the poor Black neighborhoods. The "math problem" also involves pushing the distribution of the "vice" off on them (where such people are more desperate to escape their circumstances), then negating any overall or possible benefit to those poor Blacks that don't have such a vice (like kids) and need greater education…
> those poor Blacks
This is patronizing and wrong. Math skills are also lacking in many white communities. Maybe it is more about cultural acceptance than math skills.
Re: State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
That seems overly negative, to me. Being 26th makes them average, and they get to use the money that other states use for education on other things, or lower taxes.
They're heavily subsidized by coastal blue states and they're still 50th percentile.
Georgia isn't heavily subsidized (unlike most states in the region), they actually rank 36th in federal dependency[1]. Maine, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island all rank higher on federal dependency.
[1] https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states-most-reliant-federal...
Re: State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
#114It’s honestly shocking how many facets of American culture are predicated on addiction for profit. Alcohol, food, social media, gaming, opioids, cannabis, nicotine, gambling. It is extraordinarily difficult to find a sense of perspective independent of the influence of these industries.
> Alcohol, food, social media, gaming, opioids, cannabis, nicotine, gambling
and wars.
Hmmm, what demographic frequently buys lottery tickets? How much overlap with demographic of enlisted Army recruits?
I suppose lottery and Army is better than prison.
Re: State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Top down means government control - socialism, at best.
Socialism is when workers control the means of production. That's not really the case in this example. Top down also doesn't mean government control. Corporations are driven top down, from a CEO down to the subordinates at each layer. Given a defining goal, they can be very efficient. If each subordinate was supposed to figure out what to do, it's not very efficient or effective.
No no no, socialism is when the government does things! This is basic knowledge here...
Re: State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
#116The argument for the state having a monopoly on lotteries is that if there wasn’t a legal lottery illegal lotteries would proliferate. Thus to protect people, the state should run it as it would then be guaranteed to be fair and free of the criminal element (mobsters, etc.). Ideally, the lotto would just take in enough to pay the winners and administrative expenses. However, most states have abused this monopoly and…
I love this idea that the state is free of illegal elements. Maybe that sort of thinking is part of the problem.
Re: State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Let's make a lottery based economy. That would boost the productivity and make the nation prosperous. This is like fixing a pothole by creating a supermassive black hole.
Okay, just replace our existing failed welfare system with this then. You don't think there's massive suppressed innovation because so few people can try a startup?
We don't have a "failed welfare system". Welfare works. The only "failure" here is our failure to keep adequately funding it.
Re: State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Top down means government control - socialism, at best.
Socialism is when workers control the means of production. That's not really the case in this example. Top down also doesn't mean government control. Corporations are driven top down, from a CEO down to the subordinates at each layer. Given a defining goal, they can be very efficient. If each subordinate was supposed to figure out what to do, it's not very efficient or effective.
Does this fit better with present discussion:
Top down government control of individual's food choices.
Re: State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Came here to say exactly this. People will play numbers games organized by the mob, so it does make sense to give them an honest game and keep the money from crooks. But the state take should be small. And absolutely no advertising.
I'm still not convinced that some lottery winners aren't preselected. I get it, that it is supposed to be auditable and resistant to cheating but wouldn't be the first time a large gambling system has been found to have issues. It also seems like whenever there is some financial crisis happening that Powerball and Mega Millions always go up and it gets talked about in the news.
Why would the state do that? They are making a killing by playing "fair". Unless you are suggesting literal bribery, I don't see it.
For some people winning the lottery (even smaller prices) is literally the only "realistic" way of getting a moderate amount of "wealth"
When there is an economic crisis, more people are stuck in bad situation and are more susceptible to moderate gambling. News and lotto operators are selling are happy to keep selling this dream
Re: State lotteries transfer wealth out of needy communities, investigation finds
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I find it hard to resist a scratch off from time to time myself. As long as you aren't doing it to win but instead to enjoy yourself gambling, and you do it with disposable income, this is fine. Don't beat yourself up for enjoying something mathematically suboptimal. > Even if they think it’s impossible to work themselves out of debt they hope they’ll “win big” one day keeps them going to an extent. It’s really jus…
>As long as you aren't doing it to win but instead to enjoy yourself gambling What exactly is there to enjoy about a scratch ticket beyond the hope of winning?
> What exactly is there to enjoy about a scratch ticket beyond the hope of winning?
There's "buying it for the adrenaline rush of possibly winning, and scratching it hoping to win" and "buying it because you're due/you feel lucky/you really need the money".
As long as you are buying the thrill of the chase and the occasional great feeling of winning, you're fine. It's an experience and comes out of that mental budget. If you're buying it because you really want or believe that $500 from the scratcher is coming to buy your baby new shoes, it's an issue.
I hope that makes some sense. Basically, do you understand your EV is negative/realistic odds of winning are negligible but are buying it anyway?