Lotteries: America's $70B Shame • Hacker News Board

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#21

Post by calebm » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:03 PM UTC

exolymph wrote: post #15

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…

Exactly what I came to say. I'm not a gambler, but the idea of making gambling illegal seems insane to me in "the land of the free".

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#22

Post by spinlock » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:03 PM UTC

walshemj wrote: post #11

ideonexus wrote: post #4

I would never think of playing the lottery or engaging in any other form of gambling because I understand the odds are always in favor of the house. I understand that I'm going to lose money. What a terrible irony that we fund public education with a lottery that relies on participation by those who don't understand basic math? But I see this as part of a larger trend of preying on the poor. Watching far-right media,…

That depends if the prize is large enough then the pot odds are such it does make sense to bet on the lottery.

Not really. The lottery is split up among the winners. When there is a big pot, you get proportionally more people playing the lotto. So, the expected payout to one individual actually drops as the payout rises.

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#23

Post by crazy1van » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:04 PM UTC

wrong_variable wrote: post #17

exolymph wrote: post #15

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…

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

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#24

Post by mikeash » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:05 PM UTC

walshemj wrote: post #11

ideonexus wrote: post #4

I would never think of playing the lottery or engaging in any other form of gambling because I understand the odds are always in favor of the house. I understand that I'm going to lose money. What a terrible irony that we fund public education with a lottery that relies on participation by those who don't understand basic math? But I see this as part of a larger trend of preying on the poor. Watching far-right media,…

That depends if the prize is large enough then the pot odds are such it does make sense to bet on the lottery.

The decreasing marginal utility of money means it doesn't make sense even then.

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#25

Post by nmrm2 » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:06 PM UTC

wrong_variable wrote: post #17

exolymph wrote: post #15

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…

One could make the argument that there's a difference between letting people do stupid things that only indirectly and only in certain contexts hurt others (ex spending the rent money on lottery tickets) and letting people do stupid things that by definition hurt others (shooting up a school, smoking in public and populated places) or have a significant liklihood of harming others (driving drunk).

Of course this is always an awkward line to walk, and the definition of stupid is entirely subjective. Most things that make people happy aren't totally "rational".

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#26

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:06 PM UTC

ideonexus wrote: post #4

I would never think of playing the lottery or engaging in any other form of gambling because I understand the odds are always in favor of the house. I understand that I'm going to lose money. What a terrible irony that we fund public education with a lottery that relies on participation by those who don't understand basic math? But I see this as part of a larger trend of preying on the poor. Watching far-right media,…

[deleted]

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#27

Post by AlgorithmicTime » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:06 PM UTC

wrong_variable wrote: post #17

exolymph wrote: post #15

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…

You completely ignored the bit where they said that the government's there to prevent negative externalities, like shootings, etc.

To say that the government's job is to prevent us from making stupid choices is absurd. At that point, you may as well make cheeseburgers and fries illegal, and tax whole milk. `

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#28

Post by cauterized » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:06 PM UTC

nmrm2 wrote: post #14

walshemj wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends if the prize is large enough then the pot odds are such it does make sense to bet on the lottery.

1. This basically never happens. 2. Don't compare to letting the money sit under a matress. Insteaad, compare with other investments. Buying a lottery ticket doesn't make sense when measured purely in terms of profit, even when the expected profit is non-negative.

Then neither does buying a movie ticket make sense. Of course it doesn't make sense if you frame it as an investment. But people don't necessarily buy lottery tickets expecting to win and more than you or I sit down at a slot machine expecting to walk away with more money than we arrived with. They buy them as entertainment or a reason to hope or dream for a few days.

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#29

Post by Eric_WVGG » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:07 PM UTC

exolymph wrote: post #15

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…

except that I’m not sure that the counter-argument to "act-as-you-wish" is "enforcing healthy behavior."

The nail in the coffin of the tobacco industry wasn’t “cigarettes are unhealthy,” it was that the tobacco industry was actively deceiving the public and obfuscating scientific research over multiple generations.

(When the sugar industry follows step (this seems inevitable), it will because they failed to police themselves with candid acknowledgement that soda should be a treat and not a dietary staple. Perhaps the Bloomberg soda ban was a bad idea and heavy-handed mommy gov't etc, but if the soda companies had an iota of sense they would have pre-empted the whole mess.)

So getting back to lottery… let’s agree that it is okay for people to act as they wish, but is it acceptable for lottery to misrepresent the astronomically low chances of even breaking even? Is it acceptable for lottery to specifically market toward people who can least afford it?

Re: Lotteries: America's $70B Shame

#30

Post by jimrandomh » Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 5:08 PM UTC

maerF0x0 wrote: post #10

A lottery is a better investment than other crap the poor often buy. Crack, TVs, xboxes, alcohol all have a EROI of 0. A lottery at least is >0 . Better would be if we sold partials of VT(I) in the store at lottery ticket prices. $2 for a near 0 chance at 1B, or $2 for a near 100% chance at $4 given enough time.

Ask someone if they would sell their TV to buy lottery tickets. They'll say no, because a TV delivers lots of entertainment value.

Lotteries don't. Calling them entertainment is just an excuse for scamming money out of people. Calling them investment is just trying to confuse things.