Just took a few seconds to find this Fo.... The lottery is a terribly regressive tax

Survey:21%Say Lottery is Most Practical Path to Wealth According to the survey of 1,000 Americans by Opinion Research Corporation for the Consumer Federation of America and the Financial Planning Association,21% of those surveyed believed that the lottery would be their most effective and practical strategy for accumulating several hundred thousand dollars. This percentage in addition,was higher among lower-income individuals,with 38% of those who earn less than $25,000 pointing to the lottery as a solution.

Survey- 21% say lottery is most practical path to wealth

Hope and Hard Luck: Poorest Counties Lead State in Per Capita Lottery Sales This first-rate 2010 report by Sarah Ovaska of North Carolina Policy Watch details how the most impoverished counties in North Carolina spend the most money on the state lottery. The report below also includes a link to a county-by-county map detailing lottery sales.

Hope and Hard Luck –NC Policy Watch

South Carolina Study Shows Households Earning Under $40K Make Up 54% of the Lottery’s Frequent Players A recent review of demographic studies commissioned by the South Carolina Education Lottery showed: African-Americans made up 19% of the state’s adult population but accounted for almost 39% of frequent players; people in households earning under $40,000 accounted for 28% of the state’s population but made up 54% percent of frequent players; people with no high school diploma accounted for 8% of the state’s population and 21% of frequent players; and people whose highest educational achievement is a high school diploma or GED made up 25% of the total population and 34% percent of frequent players.

South Carolina Lottery Demographics 2009

Why Poor People Play the Lottery Even More When Times Are Tough Yale University’s Emily Haisley analyzed why poor people play the lottery even more when times are tough. Read The New York Times story about her report.

Citation: Carnegie Mellon University (2008,July 24). Why Play A Losing Game? Study Uncovers Why Low-income People Buy Lottery Tickets.

Lotteries Hurt the Economic Security and Well-Being of the State’s Families In its recent report,Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families concludes that a lottery hurts the economic security and well-being of the state’s’ families –regardless of how much money it raised. The report lays out the following reasons: 1) Lotteries function as regressive taxes that disproportionately hurt the economic security of low-income families; 2) Lotteries are unstable sources of taxrevenue that can decline from year to year. Overall,any positive effect on state budgets tend to fade over time; 3) Lotteries and other forms of gambling often lead to negative social and economic consequences for children and their Lotteries function as regressive taxes that disproportionately hurt the economic security of low-income families costs which must often be borne by the state; 4) Researchers have found that Georgia’s “Hope Scholarship” lottery,often cited as a model for lotteries in other states,is disproportionately funded by low-income households,while higher-income,more-educated households disproportionately benefit from the scholarships; 5) A lottery would do little to improve access to higher education among the lowest-income citizens and would prey upon those who stand to lose the most from state- sponsored gambling; and 6) If increasing access to higher education is indeed important to Arkansas’s future economic success,then the state should commit to finding a stable,reliable and fair source of funding for it.

Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families 2008 report

Myopic Risk-Seeking: The Impact of NarrowDecision Bracketing on Lottery Play This 2008 study from the Journal of Risk and Uncertainty highlights the fact that the lottery appeals to people earning lower incomes and that these individuals spend a disproportionate amount of money on the lottery when compared to people with higher incomes. Additionally,the results suggest that the combination of myopic decision making and the “peanuts effect” –greater risk seeking for low stakes rather than high stakes gambles –can help explain the popularity of state lotteries.

Myopic Risk-seeking –The Impact of Narrow Decision Bracketing on Lottery Play

Poor People Spend 9% of Income on Lottery Tickets This blog post from WalletPop.com outlines the reasons why people on low-incomes spend so much on lottery tickets: the hype about big jackpots,the ritual of playing and the fact that many people believe that playing the lottery is best way to achieve financial security.

Poor People Spend 9 Percent of Income on Lottery Tickets

Who Pays for the Lottery? In 2007,the California Budget Project reported on the possible privatization of the state lottery. It reported that the poor,non-white,urban and less educated spend a higher portion of their income on the lottery than other demographics. Our government and our citizens would never tolerate a program that was known to disproportionally burden the urban,ethnic,poor and less educated. So,why do states both tolerate and promote state lotteries?

(03-31-2012 07:42 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Just took a few seconds to find this Fo.... The lottery is a terribly regressive tax

Survey:21%Say Lottery is Most Practical Path to Wealth According to the survey of 1,000 Americans by Opinion Research Corporation for the Consumer Federation of America and the Financial Planning Association,21% of those surveyed believed that the lottery would be their most effective and practical strategy for accumulating several hundred thousand dollars. This percentage in addition,was higher among lower-income individuals,with 38% of those who earn less than $25,000 pointing to the lottery as a solution.

Survey- 21% say lottery is most practical path to wealth

Hope and Hard Luck: Poorest Counties Lead State in Per Capita Lottery Sales This first-rate 2010 report by Sarah Ovaska of North Carolina Policy Watch details how the most impoverished counties in North Carolina spend the most money on the state lottery. The report below also includes a link to a county-by-county map detailing lottery sales.

Hope and Hard Luck –NC Policy Watch

South Carolina Study Shows Households Earning Under $40K Make Up 54% of the Lottery’s Frequent Players A recent review of demographic studies commissioned by the South Carolina Education Lottery showed: African-Americans made up 19% of the state’s adult population but accounted for almost 39% of frequent players; people in households earning under $40,000 accounted for 28% of the state’s population but made up 54% percent of frequent players; people with no high school diploma accounted for 8% of the state’s population and 21% of frequent players; and people whose highest educational achievement is a high school diploma or GED made up 25% of the total population and 34% percent of frequent players.

South Carolina Lottery Demographics 2009

Why Poor People Play the Lottery Even More When Times Are Tough Yale University’s Emily Haisley analyzed why poor people play the lottery even more when times are tough. Read The New York Times story about her report.

Citation: Carnegie Mellon University (2008,July 24). Why Play A Losing Game? Study Uncovers Why Low-income People Buy Lottery Tickets.

Lotteries Hurt the Economic Security and Well-Being of the State’s Families In its recent report,Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families concludes that a lottery hurts the economic security and well-being of the state’s’ families –regardless of how much money it raised. The report lays out the following reasons: 1) Lotteries function as regressive taxes that disproportionately hurt the economic security of low-income families; 2) Lotteries are unstable sources of taxrevenue that can decline from year to year. Overall,any positive effect on state budgets tend to fade over time; 3) Lotteries and other forms of gambling often lead to negative social and economic consequences for children and their Lotteries function as regressive taxes that disproportionately hurt the economic security of low-income families costs which must often be borne by the state; 4) Researchers have found that Georgia’s “Hope Scholarship” lottery,often cited as a model for lotteries in other states,is disproportionately funded by low-income households,while higher-income,more-educated households disproportionately benefit from the scholarships; 5) A lottery would do little to improve access to higher education among the lowest-income citizens and would prey upon those who stand to lose the most from state- sponsored gambling; and 6) If increasing access to higher education is indeed important to Arkansas’s future economic success,then the state should commit to finding a stable,reliable and fair source of funding for it.

Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families 2008 report

Myopic Risk-Seeking: The Impact of NarrowDecision Bracketing on Lottery Play This 2008 study from the Journal of Risk and Uncertainty highlights the fact that the lottery appeals to people earning lower incomes and that these individuals spend a disproportionate amount of money on the lottery when compared to people with higher incomes. Additionally,the results suggest that the combination of myopic decision making and the “peanuts effect” –greater risk seeking for low stakes rather than high stakes gambles –can help explain the popularity of state lotteries.

Myopic Risk-seeking –The Impact of Narrow Decision Bracketing on Lottery Play

Poor People Spend 9% of Income on Lottery Tickets This blog post from WalletPop.com outlines the reasons why people on low-incomes spend so much on lottery tickets: the hype about big jackpots,the ritual of playing and the fact that many people believe that playing the lottery is best way to achieve financial security.

Poor People Spend 9 Percent of Income on Lottery Tickets

Who Pays for the Lottery? In 2007,the California Budget Project reported on the possible privatization of the state lottery. It reported that the poor,non-white,urban and less educated spend a higher portion of their income on the lottery than other demographics. Our government and our citizens would never tolerate a program that was known to disproportionally burden the urban,ethnic,poor and less educated. So,why do states both tolerate and promote state lotteries?

I stopped with your first crazy sentence. The lottery is NOT a tax. It is a freely entered into game. NO one comes to your home with a gun and demands money from you. Now...what else do you have?

GD buzzkills that what to limit peoples economic freedoms should be tarred and feathered. F you people.

Just because it's voluntary doesn't make it right. They advertise incredible wealth and make it seem like you have a reasonable chance of winning, when it's 1:170 million, and they hide those odds and even if many people see them they can't comprehend or appreciate just how unrealistic their chances are.

(03-31-2012 07:50 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Just because it's voluntary doesn't make it right. They advertise incredible wealth and make it seem like you have a reasonable chance of winning, when it's 1:170 million, and they hide those odds and even if many people see them they can't comprehend or appreciate just how unrealistic their chances are.

Well...I will NEVER advocate limiting a persons ability to freely live their life as they see fit as long as they are adhering to the principle of non aggression. I can not police ones poor personal choices. People smoke,drink, eat sh!tty food and do a million other things that are poor choices. Just what is it about respecting ones personal freedom you don't understand Max? Are you prepared for the consequences of wide scale prohibitions?

Ban the poor!

How does shutting down a government run lottery = prohibition???

I thought you hated the gubmint BTW.

The consequences of shutting down Mega Millions:

Apparently gas will be cut 2 cents though so it's not all bad

(03-31-2012 08:31 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Ban the poor!

Unfortunately....there will ALWAYS be poor folks. Liberals think some how that they can by FORCE make that disappear. That is were their good intentions go awry. The very policies they FORCE upon society are enabling the poor to STAY poor. The Welfare State is a failure in bringing the poor out of poverty. I would support it if the opposite was true. I oppose it because I actually want better for people.

Just for perspective....The poorest American is still in the top 1% of wealth worldwide. We have it very good even when it is bad.

America STILL is the greatest experiment ever conceived as a societal construct. We are however doing everything in our power to destroy it and bring it down from the inside.

(03-31-2012 09:12 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Just for perspective....The poorest American is still in the top 1% of wealth worldwide.

Source?

That was for Max. Ban the poor from playing the lotto. He doesn't want the poor loosing money and likes a progressive tax, so that should satisfy him.

(03-31-2012 09:04 PM)Max Power Wrote:  How does shutting down a government run lottery = prohibition???

I thought you hated the gubmint BTW.

No....I don't hate government. I hate BIG government that attempts to run our lives by using it's force. Give me a good solid system of justice...good infrastructure and a strong defense(of our soil). That would be a government I could love and would voluntarily be willing to pay for without even being forced to do so. What we have now...

When they shut down the government run lottery...then I suppose you are going after the "illegal" ones also? I have no problem with either of them as long as the principle of non aggression apply. I can not police ones vices. I have my own to combat.

I guess you have no vices Max? What if I decide to come after your vices even though they do not harm others? It is a damn slippery slope you are sliding down my friend.

(03-31-2012 09:20 PM)Paul M Wrote:  That was for Max. Ban the poor from playing the lotto. He doesn't want the poor loosing money and likes a progressive tax, so that should satisfy him.

Gotcha....Yes. That is a very good idea. +1

(03-31-2012 09:17 PM)Max Power Wrote:  

(03-31-2012 09:12 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Just for perspective....The poorest American is still in the top 1% of wealth worldwide.

Source?

Ok...Fair enough. I can't remember the source. However in a NYTimes economix piece in Jan. it was reported....the bottom 5% of US incomes are more prosperous than 68% of world inhabitants. I'm terrible with math but that is pretty good.

(03-31-2012 09:26 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  No....I don't hate government. I hate BIG government that attempts to run our lives by using it's force. Give me a good solid system of justice...good infrastructure and a strong defense(of our soil).

... and state run lotteries?

Quote:When they shut down the government run lottery...then I suppose you are going after the "illegal" ones also? I have no problem with either of them as long as the principle of non aggression apply. I can not police ones vices. I have my own to combat.

I guess you have no vices Max? What if I decide to come after your vices even though they do not harm others? It is a damn slippery slope you are sliding down my friend.

I didn't say anything about outlawing all gambling. I think gambling as a whole is destructive, but the lotteries are the worst because many people don't understand or appreciate the odds they're playing. How many times did you see the figure $400 million or $500 million mentioned in the last few days? Now how many times did you see this figure mentioned: 1:170,000,000? If you did it was in small print somewhere and I'm sure many uneducated people didn't appreciate it if they saw it. I understand your non aggression principle but 1. Shutting down government lotteries isn't aggression, 2. The state should be looking out for everybody's welfare and certainly not making the poor poorer and 3. Capitalism only works if consumers are informed and make informed choices; you can never get perfect information but in this case people are so badly misinformed (and can only make informed choices if they have a good grasp on statistics) it does more harm than good.

(03-31-2012 09:20 PM)Paul M Wrote:  That was for Max. Ban the poor from playing the lotto. He doesn't want the poor loosing money and likes a progressive tax, so that should satisfy him.

Better and less discriminatory to just shut it down. It doesn't just hurt poor people; just those bad at statistics, most of which happen to be poor.

(03-31-2012 09:52 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  How about the Maryland winner that has the option(by state law) to remain anonymous? How cool is this!! Now THAT winner has it made.:ncaabbs: 165 million and your neighbors don't know you won.

That is an incredibly sweet deal.

I thought part of the deal with the lottery is that the lottery could "publicize" the winners. I think that is true in most states. But a confidentiality provision would definitely increase participation, IMHO

(04-01-2012 06:39 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(03-31-2012 09:26 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  No....I don't hate government. I hate BIG government that attempts to run our lives by using it's force. Give me a good solid system of justice...good infrastructure and a strong defense(of our soil).

... and state run lotteries?

Quote:When they shut down the government run lottery...then I suppose you are going after the "illegal" ones also? I have no problem with either of them as long as the principle of non aggression apply. I can not police ones vices. I have my own to combat.

I guess you have no vices Max? What if I decide to come after your vices even though they do not harm others? It is a damn slippery slope you are sliding down my friend.

I didn't say anything about outlawing all gambling. I think gambling as a whole is destructive, but the lotteries are the worst because many people don't understand or appreciate the odds they're playing. How many times did you see the figure $400 million or $500 million mentioned in the last few days? Now how many times did you see this figure mentioned: 1:170,000,000? If you did it was in small print somewhere and I'm sure many uneducated people didn't appreciate it if they saw it. I understand your non aggression principle but 1. Shutting down government lotteries isn't aggression, 2. The state should be looking out for everybody's welfare and certainly not making the poor poorer and 3. Capitalism only works if consumers are informed and make informed choices; you can never get perfect information but in this case people are so badly misinformed (and can only make informed choices if they have a good grasp on statistics) it does more harm than good.

I think you underestimate just how much people really understand about the lottery. The vast majority of players fully know the odds are astronomical.

Are there people that have a gambling problem? Yes. There are fat asses with eating problems. There are cancer victims with a smoking problem. There are alcoholics destroying families. The list is endless. Where are we going to start and stop a crusade to protect people against themselves?

Eventually...someone is going to step into our home and decide to ban something we do that they consider a poor choice. Outside of educating people about the dangers of bad choices, I am not ready to go on a crusade against those choices. If I am going to live free, I must allow my neighbor to do so..caveated with the principle of non aggression. As long as theft, fraud,violence or destruction of property is not involved...it is none of my business what my neighbor does.

The second we allow someone in power to be able to use the FORCE of government to limit peoples personal choices we are allowing tyranny in the most pervasive manner.

I presume that if state run lotteries were banned...then you would also support a ban on all gaming to protect people from wasting their money?

(04-01-2012 07:24 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(03-31-2012 09:52 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  How about the Maryland winner that has the option(by state law) to remain anonymous? How cool is this!! Now THAT winner has it made.:ncaabbs: 165 million and your neighbors don't know you won.

That is an incredibly sweet deal.

I thought part of the deal with the lottery is that the lottery could "publicize" the winners. I think that is true in most states. But a confidentiality provision would definitely increase participation, IMHO

Yes...Evidently Kansas is also a state where you can remain anonymous. So.. two of the winners could remain hidden to the public. Evidently this is becoming a trend because of the problems winners have had with relentless harassment from gold diggers.

The Louisville Courier-Journal ran a piece not too long ago that had some advice from a lawyer about what to do if you won the lottery-he recommended forming a corporation to claim the prize, which would afford many of the same benefits as the states that allow winners to remain anonymous.