Reply #92: Count me way out

[FreeJoe]

First "designed to pay out and help people while making money for the government" does't make sense. The odds are either for the players (in which case the lottery loses money for the government) or against them (in which case it doesn't help them).

I won't pile on with all the arguments about how lotteries disproportionately take money from the poor (even if it is voluntary for the ones without gambling addictions). You've already heard enough of those. I have other objections.

My main objection is how it affects the psychology of the poor. It gives them the thought that there is a good chance that they'll be rich someday. I think the hope of winning lotteries has significant negative impacts on them. It causes them to be resistant to taxes on the wealthy because they worry about losing their future lottery winnings. It also twists their view of financial planning. Instead of working on a slow, steady plan to save and invest (including investing in education) their way out of poverty, they set that aside and waste money on "get rich quick" schemes like lotto.

My other objection is that it puts the government in the ugly position of trying to convince people to do things against their interest. We have a lotto here and the commercials for it always make me cringe. I know that they are run by the lotto company contracted by the government, but I still hear it as an official government message trying to tell me to be stupid.

I wouldn't be bothered by lotteries if they were restricted to something like a ticket or two a week. For people that want the occasional escapist fantasy of winning big, there is no harm. What sickens me is seeing what a huge percentage of income some poor families spend on the lottery in a mistaken and desperate way attempt to get out of poverty.