Pay for Health Care with a National Lotto!

[obliviously]

This is no worse an idea than any I have heard. They could offer some nice odds on large prizes if it was national!

[WeDidIt]

1. You could require gasoline stations to sell teh tickets

:evilgrin:

[bluestateguy]

2. Perhaps

But the state governors and the state bureaucrats would bitch that it would take away from their own lotteries.

I have always favored a national lottery.

[obliviously]

5. I am sure it would not pay the whole tab

but it could bring in a healthy portion. The states always complain when a neighboring state starts a lottery but they seem to survive. The state lotteries didn't shut down Vegas!

[sandnsea]

3. Pay for Education with a State Lotto!

That didn't work either.

Tax cigarettes, alcohol, fast food, sugar, chips, pop, gasoline, condoms; all the things that contribute to health care costs - and tell people they'll get absolutely free health care in return - they might go for that.

[abumbyanyothername]

6. Condoms?

huh? I would say tax teens that don't buy condoms.

[sandnsea]

13. I would

if I could figure some way to tax people for being sexually irresponsible. Ideas?

[Curtland1015]

9. The way lotto money gets to the states is a bit different than some people think.

It's not that we promise to give "X" amount to Education through lottery earnings.

The DoE has a certain amount promised to it no matter what. Say, just for example, $100 million is promised.

If the lottery has a poor month of sales and can only muster $45 million, then the difference, $55 million, is STILL going to education, just from other sources.

It still works...ish.

But when the economy is doing worse, and lotto sales are down, then that's less money for education coming from the lottery. That's what I fear won't be any different with taxing cigs, booze, etc, etc... it's still dependant on people buying.

[obliviously]

11. I'm not planning on a

perpetually bad economy. We are in control now. Where is your confidence!

[Curtland1015]

12. I'm confident! I'm just saying, any plan that depends on people buying...

...is going to have problems when the economy is doing poorly. That's all.

[sandnsea]

14. Oregon has had lotto money for years

It was initially designated to go to education, 100%. It's not anywhere near enough to fully fund education. It doesn't even come close. They've since redistributed parts of it to business development, which they always do with funds that are supposed to go to public need.

[abumbyanyothername]

4. And then . . .

how do we pay for the States' budget shortfalls?

Virtually everyone in the country has access to Lotto right now, so a national lotto is just taking market share from the state-run games.

Also, I don't care so much but I know some on here do, Lotto is a highly regressive revenue raising scheme. The rake on the pool is like 50% (not all of that is government profit some goes to the companies that run the games), and the poor buy the vast majority of the tickets. As I overheard some accountants joking one day, "The lottery is a tax on people who can't count."

[obliviously]

10. The government

needs to administrate it themselves. We have a lot of bureaucrats sitting behind desks with little to do. We also have a lot of people on unemployment being paid to do nothing!

[Laelth]

7. I prefer progressive taxation.

A lottery is very, very regressive--perhaps worse, even, than the sales tax.

:dem:

-Laelth

[redqueen]

8. No, no more regressive taxes.

We have far more than enough already.

[safeinOhio]

15. I'm all for a national prostitution system.

Make it a single payer one too. Pay as you go. Of course the Republicans will protest, as it would hurt them financially the most.