5 ms·

A tax is by definition a compulsory contribution. The lottery is optional. Thus it's not a tax.

• jameshart 11y ago
  Consumption taxes are voluntary. You don't have to pay alcohol duty, or tobacco duty, or fuel duty. You can just refrain from consuming alcohol, tobacco or fuel. In fact, a decent accountant will show you most taxes are voluntary...
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • downandout 11y ago
    This is a bit of a ludicrous example. Fuel is certainly more necessary than a lottery ticket, and to at least some portion of the population, alcohol and tobacco are as well.
    • ethanbond 11y ago
      To at least some portion of the population, gambling is a direct parallel to alcohol/tobacco.
  • ucha 11y ago
    There is a compulsory tax on alcohol but its consumption is voluntary. That's like saying an income tax is voluntary because you can choose to not have any income.
    • Osiris 11y ago
      That is true. In fact, some people make this argument that people "mooch" off the government by purposefully restricting their income in order to reduce taxes and qualify for welfare programs.
    • jameshart 11y ago
      Point of this article is that state lottery monopolies impose a tax on gambling. You aren't free to participate in a pooled-cash chance game without paying the lottery 'tax'. It's a consumption tax on gambling. That's probably not a very controversial thing to tax, though.
    • marincounty 11y ago
      For some individuals, especially with certain psychiatric disorders, moderate use of alcohol to control an episode, especially a panic attack(true panic attacks); is not a voluntary consumption. The drug has been vilified, for good reason in many cases, but is used as a sedative to the poor who don't have access to good doctors in too many communities. (I really don't want to debate this. I know when I had panic attacks 2-3 drinks would stop them. I have yet to meet a doctor who won't admit privately that moderate, specific controlled use of alcohol is beneficial to for certain psychiatric disorders. Doctors don't bring it up because it's just not worth worth it. They are afraid of lawsuits because alcohol use carries so many risks, like the real risk of the patient becoming an alcoholic. (Just keeping it real Homies. If you are currently suffering from an anxiety disorder(including some symptoms of PTSD, and the doctor is just offering a heterocyclic drug(like Prozac), or a drug that really does nothing, like Buspirone. Light, specific use of alcohol will help with some symptoms. Don't abuse the drug. Don't start drinking every day, or drinking socially. You only drink to alleviate specific symptomology. You need to save those liver cells because you use alcohol differently from the rest of the population. In other words; don't become a alcoholic? I'll get a lot of heat from this post, but it's meant for individuals who are suffering, and this advice only goes to individuals who have some self-control? If you didn't have self-control before the illness, and life was just a big party, don't follow this advice. Specific use of alcohol to control your symptomology will just result in your disorder getting worse, and yes--you will end up homeless, or worse. I am not a doctor.)
      • Asbostos 11y ago
        While I don't know about panic attacks, I think it's known that small quantities of alcohol are either harmless or beneficial to health. The general public can't see shades of grey though, so they only look at the extremes of alcoholism and binge drinking and decide that all alcohol is bad.
      • jacobolus 11y ago
        Alcohol is a great anti-anxiety drug and sedative, in small doses (like 1-3 drinks). That’s precisely why it has been so popular for thousands of years. The problems with alcohol are (a) it just treats the symptom and doesn’t help fix whatever underlying issue is causing the stress, (b) it’s easy to take a far larger dose than necessary, far more often than necessary leading to abuse, and (c) acute effects of a large dose and chronic effects of frequent use are both highly destructive.
• rajacombinator 11y ago
  Yep no one will come and break down your door and point guns at you if you don't play the lottery. (Unlike actual taxes.) At least not yet ...
  • tedks 11y ago
    Nobody will break down your door if you don't pay other taxes either. You don't need to earn income, buy food, or live in a home. You're free to be homeless, jobless, and starving. If you don't like that, you're welcome to protest and vote for candidates that provide hope for change. That's the system and it's here to protect all of us.
  • emidln 11y ago
    No one will come and break down your door and point guns at you if you don't smoke cigarettes or purchase alcohol.
    • mindslight 11y ago
      Yes, because smoking cigarettes or purchasing alcohol is not mandatory. However if you choose to do either, the separate activity of paying taxes on them is. The only way one can misunderstand this distinction is to believe government is involved in anything by default.
      • leereeves 11y ago
        And if you choose to gamble, playing the state run lottery (and not some other form of gambling) is mandatory.
      • djrogers 11y ago
        The point of the article is: "The lottery is not a tax. The inflated price of lottery tickets is." If you want to play a lottery, you have to play the state's lottery, and the article makes the case that a very high tax is levied for that privilege.
        • 11y ago
• spelunker 11y ago
  You know, if you read the article, you will find the author agrees with you.
• levelist_com 11y ago
  There is a reason the lottery is referred to as a "tax on the stupid".
• inopinatus 11y ago
  This is incorrect. When you buy a ticket, a portion of the price goes to the government. This portion is not optional. Therefore it is compulsory. Hence the author's argument.
  • anindyabd 11y ago
    Then that portion is the tax, not the lottery ticket itself. In the same way that there's a tax on alcohol, but the alcohol itself is not a tax because no one's forcing you to buy it. The author himself states: "The lottery is not a tax. The inflated price of lottery tickets is"... which makes his headline "The lottery is a tax" shameless clickbait.
    • inopinatus 11y ago
      I think this characterisation is excessively persnickety. Much like many other comments on this article, that seem to have been written in a painful rush to demonstrate just how damn rational the comment author is. The headline is neither wrong nor sensationalised, and the article is nuanced and cogent.
      • anindyabd 11y ago
        I am of the opinion that comment authors should, if capable, explain his or her reasons for thinking the way he or she does, without resorting to throwing unqualified insults. Furthermore, I think everyone has a right to his or her own opinion.
• guelo 11y ago
  All taxes are optional. You don't want to pay income tax? Don't earn income. Actually come to think of it, that's the conservative argument against income tax, some people will supposedly earn less because they don't want to pay the tax.