# Would you vote in favor of a national lottery? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 13, 2008, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378 "2008-09-13T01:21:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/1 "2008-09-13T01:21:13Z")
It will never happen- I’ve no delusions- but 1- Would you vote in favor of it if you were a rep/senator or it was a referendum? 2- To what would you dedicate the government’s share of the profits? I would, and I’d dedicate most of the government’s share to health care, with lesser amounts to education (including continuing ed), a much lesser amount to the arts, and a small fraction (but very sizable amount money wise) to the president’s discretionary purse, something akin to a 60%/30%/5%/1% split (with the remaining 4% tbd). ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/2 "2008-09-13T01:25:51Z")
I wouldn’t because lotteries tend to be played more by those least able to afford them. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/3 "2008-09-13T01:39:00Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > It will never happen- I’ve no delusions- but > > 1- Would you vote in favor of it if you were a rep/senator or it was a referendum? > > 2- To what would you dedicate the government’s share of the profits? > > I would, and I’d dedicate most of the government’s share to health care, with lesser amounts to education (including continuing ed), a much lesser amount to the arts, and a small fraction (but very sizable amount money wise) to the president’s discretionary purse, something akin to a 60%/30%/5%/1% split (with the remaining 4% tbd). I’d vote for it. Essentially a voluntary tax. It’s meaningless to “dedicate” a share to a specific cause. If the lottery supplied money in one area it would simply free up funds to be used elsewhere. It’s not as if there would be more money than ever before to spend on healthcare, for instance. The same total pool of real tax receipts and borrowing pays the bills. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/4 "2008-09-13T01:45:49Z")
> [@RyJae](#): > > I wouldn’t because lotteries tend to be played more by those least able to afford them. This. Word. Gambling is a tax on dreams. ---
**Author:** ![madmonk28](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madmonk28/32/20811_2.png) [@madmonk28](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madmonk28)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/5 "2008-09-13T02:37:38Z")
I would not because I think lotteries are a tax on the poor and a way to fund tax cuts for the more well off and shift the burden to the most vulnerable. ---
**Author:** ![Invisible\_Chimp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/f05b48/32.png) [@Invisible\_Chimp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Invisible_Chimp)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/6 "2008-09-13T05:16:19Z")
> [@RyJae](#): > > I wouldn’t because lotteries tend to be played more by those least able to afford them. I would because it’s not my job to protect people from their own foolishness. The US needs to repair its roads and bridges. I say we use it for that. As you can probably tell, I am lottery player. Gambling is one of my few vices. ---
**Author:** ![dangermom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e274bd/32.png) [@dangermom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dangermom)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/7 "2008-09-13T05:33:33Z")
No. As above, lotteries take advantage of poor people and people who can’t count. Lottery profits tend to just move money around (as **Chief Pedant** points out). I live in California. The government said that the lottery profits would go to education and things would be great! Then, of course, they simply didn’t fund education as much, depending on the lottery to make up the difference. Education in California has not improved one bit–rather the opposite. And I have to look at lottery billboards too. Perhaps we could dedicate the profits to math education… ---
**Author:** ![Slacker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6bbea6/32.png) [@Slacker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slacker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/8 "2008-09-13T05:36:50Z")
Kinky Friedman said it best: Q: What has six balls and screws Texas? A: The lottery. ---
**Author:** ![Cyberhwk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7993a0/32.png) [@Cyberhwk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyberhwk)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/9 "2008-09-13T06:44:59Z")
I completley understand the “tax on dreams” thinking. Just not quite as much as my “tax on stupidity” thinking. I’d vote for. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/10 "2008-09-13T06:51:33Z")
Only if it ends with a stoning. ---
**Author:** ![mutantmoose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a87d85/32.png) [@mutantmoose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mutantmoose)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/11 "2008-09-13T07:21:11Z")
Imagine how big the jackpot would be though. A US wide lottery - would be the biggest jackpot in the world. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 10:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/12 "2008-09-13T10:23:51Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > It will never happen- I’ve no delusions- but > > 1- Would you vote in favor of it if you were a rep/senator or it was a referendum? > > 2- To what would you dedicate the government’s share of the profits? > > I would, and I’d dedicate most of the government’s share to health care, with lesser amounts to education (including continuing ed), a much lesser amount to the arts, and a small fraction (but very sizable amount money wise) to the president’s discretionary purse, something akin to a 60%/30%/5%/1% split (with the remaining 4% tbd). By the way, 80% or so of States already have a State Lottery or participation in a multi-state lottery (Alabama being one of the exceptions). A “national” lottery would not be much different from Powerball or Mega Millions or Hot Lotto. More pie to the Federal Government, I suppose, where the money could be used much more efficiently and effectively than the states use it. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 11:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/13 "2008-09-13T11:21:16Z")
> [@Cyberhwk](#): > > I completley understand the “tax on dreams” thinking. Just not quite as much as my “tax on stupidity” thinking. > > I’d vote for. [http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08207/899406-298.stm](http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08207/899406-298.stm) > [@](#): > > Do you believe that playing the lottery can make you rich? > > If you do, there’s a good chance you’re poor. > > At least, that’s according to a Carnegie Mellon University study published in the July issue of the Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. > > “The conclusions [of the study] are that the thoughts, feelings and cognitions related to poverty lead people to purchase lottery tickets,” said Emily Haisley, lead author of the study and a doctoral student in the department of organizational behavior and theory at Carnegie Mellon’s Tepper School of Business. This wasn’t a report based on stupidity, it was based on income. Unless low income means stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/14 "2008-09-13T12:08:16Z")
> [@RyJae](#): > > This wasn’t a report based on stupidity, it was based on income. Unless low income means stupid. Low income may make the lottery seem more appealing, but only to someone who is gullible enough to believe that playing the lottery is worth the price. ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/15 "2008-09-13T12:28:52Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > Low income may make the lottery seem more appealing, but only to someone who is gullible enough to believe that playing the lottery is worth the price. So why make it easier to part a gullible person and money? You know that money you’re taking out of the poor persons pocket will need to be put back in through other means plus interest. You know that working poor family that every week paycheck the mom or dad take the money and blow it gambling? That’s not all myth. Those not participating end up suffering. You think it was coincidence that they placed casinos near Detroit? It wasn’t to lure in out of area people to increase the income, it was to take more money from those least able to afford it, despicable. > [@](#): > > Detroit is now the poorest city in America, with fully one-third of its residents living below the official federal poverty level > **[One-third of Detroit’s population lives below poverty line](https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2005/09/detr-s02.html)** > > According to US Census Bureau figures released August 30, Detroit is now the poorest city in America, with fully one-third of its residents living below the official federal poverty level, a derisory $19,157 in household income for a family of four.... > [@](#): > > The Harvard University’s Center for Addiction Studies has reported that “at risk” groups, e.g. the poor, the elderly, and the young, are more seriously impacted by gambling than are other groups in our society. They found that these groups, especially the poor and the elderly, lose significantly more in gambling as a proportion of their total income than do those in higher income groups. > [@](#): > > 1. Casinos provided the most popular form of gambling for the people of Detroit (78% of gamblers), followed by the lottery (72%), and bingo > > 2. One in every 14 families interviewed (7%) reported that casino gambling had had a detrimental impact on their family life. About three in ten said that casino gambling had a negative effect on the people of Detroit and the community generally. > > 3. One in every 16 respondents (6%), reported that at least one person in their household was a “compulsive gambler.” This figure is nearly doubled for those in low income groups and those receiving public assistance – both “at-risk” groups. Overall, the Detroit percentage of problem gamblers is twice the figure reported in the Western Michigan University survey conducted in 1997. > > 4. Nearly three in 10 respondents (28%) now receiving public assistance or are widowed (27%) patronized a casino in the past year. Those receiving public assistance lost five times more as a proportion of their total household income than did other Detroiters. Lower income groups generally lost 2.4 times more as a proportion of their total household income, than did upper income groups. > > 5. On average, African-Americans lost 2.5 times more at casinos than Whites. [http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PressReleases1998\_2nd/DetroitGamblingEffects\_May98.html](http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PressReleases1998_2nd/DetroitGamblingEffects_May98.html) ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/16 "2008-09-13T14:01:19Z")
Lotteries prey on the poor and desperate, and I consider it unethical of my state to participate in and advertise them, so no. We’d all be opposed to state-run Nigerian bank schemes. I don’t see how a lottery is significantly better. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/17 "2008-09-13T14:06:21Z")
> [@RyJae](#): > > So why make it easier to part a gullible person and money? You know that money you’re taking out of the poor persons pocket will need to be put back in through other means plus interest. > > You know that working poor family that every week paycheck the mom or dad take the money and blow it gambling? That’s not all myth. Those not participating end up suffering. You think it was coincidence that they placed casinos near Detroit? It wasn’t to lure in out of area people to increase the income, it was to take more money from those least able to afford it, despicable. > > [One-third of Detroit’s population lives below poverty line - World Socialist Web Site](http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/sep2005/detr-s02.shtml) > > [http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PressReleases1998\_2nd/DetroitGamblingEffects\_May98.html](http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PressReleases1998_2nd/DetroitGamblingEffects_May98.html) First of all, the whole reason"gullible" has been removed from the dictionary is precisely because it is an insensitive term toward the poor, so let’s not use it. Let’s use “inappropriately hopeful.” Do you have any sort of evidence behind the notion that “they” put casinos near Detroit to take more money from those who could least afford it, or is that just a gratuitous pitch for the general conspiracy theory that “they” (the haves?) want to steal what little the have-nots do have? If the decision of where to place Casinos in Michigan was anything like the decisions I’ve seen everywhere else, it was based on some sort of hope that good things would result from having an actual functioning business in a particular location. That the poor spend their money foolishly–cigarettes; liquor; fast food; lottos…–is a concern in some sort of broad societal parenting sense but it’s hardly a driving force for where to place a casino. If it were placed somewhere else there would be cries of abandoning yet another project that could have been placed in a poor area as part of urban renewal. ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/18 "2008-09-13T14:21:17Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > First of all, the whole reason"gullible" has been removed from the dictionary is precisely because it is an insensitive term toward the poor, so let’s not use it. Let’s use “inappropriately hopeful.” > > Do you have any sort of evidence behind the notion that “they” put casinos near Detroit to take more money from those who could least afford it, or is that just a gratuitous pitch for the general conspiracy theory that “they” (the haves?) want to steal what little the have-nots do have? > > If the decision of where to place Casinos in Michigan was anything like the decisions I’ve seen everywhere else, it was based on some sort of hope that good things would result from having an actual functioning business in a particular location. That the poor spend their money foolishly–cigarettes; liquor; fast food; lottos…–is a concern in some sort of broad societal parenting sense but it’s hardly a driving force for where to place a casino. If it were placed somewhere else there would be cries of abandoning yet another project that could have been placed in a poor area as part of urban renewal. Still in every dictionary I have. And you’re right I have no proof, but I do have common sense. Detroit was a above national average poverty levels, they build casinos. Makes sense to me if you want to make money off those with money you build the casino’s in areas that are above the national income levels. Unless you know that the poor tend to gamble more of there money away that is. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/19 "2008-09-13T14:22:13Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > First of all, the whole reason"gullible" has been removed from the dictionary is precisely because it is an insensitive term toward the poor, so let’s not use it. Let’s use “inappropriately hopeful.” It really doesn’t matter what your opinion is of the people who gamble inappropriately. We can both think they are fools, but being a fool (or even a damned fool) doesn’t mean they can suddenly live on air and inappropriate hopes. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Walking\_Dude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@The\_Walking\_Dude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Walking_Dude)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2008, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378/20 "2008-09-13T15:23:53Z")
So, all of you that say you would vote no because it is a tax on the poor, preys on the poor, takes advantage of the poor, etc. think that it is right(or appropriate, or fair) that you or anyone else should be able to tell someone, poor or not, what they can spend their money on. You have the right to tell someone that they have to buy what you want them to buy. You can tell them how to live their lives. How does that work? I really want to know, if I could tell people what they can spend their money on it really isn’t too far away from me being able to really control them! World watch out, apparently I have the right to have minions! I vote yes. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-you-vote-in-favor-of-a-national-lottery/463378.md?page=2)