3 ms·

People go to casino's every day and for every winner there is a looser, and in the middle the house takes a cut. The Lottery is no different except that the pot

People go to casino's every day and for every winner there is a looser, and in the middle the house takes a cut. The Lottery is no different except that the pot is a little larger as in the case of Powerball. It is entertainment pure and simple, so if someone spends $200 per year entertaining themselves, I can't see a problem with it. The -odds- are that someone is going to win, and if you don't play at all, it is impossible to win.

vlunkr 11y ago
Right, people spend all sorts of money on silly entertainment, the lottery isn't much different. Now, if you drop your life savings on it, that's a different story.
dsp1234 11y ago
I'm all for people having fun. I'm also all for people really understanding their odds. In my experience, 'pick a dime' works better than 'struck by a meteorite' in the limited time I've used the example. It seems that people around me have a harder time grasping the wide gulf between abstract stuff like "struck by lightning" vs "10 times as likely to be struck by a meteorite", and something they can measure/visualize and break down in to pieces. The driving example is exactly the same as saying "put 250M dimes in a big pot, then pick the exact one randomly". However, restating the problem, in a way that breaks down naturally into individual units that people can grasp, can help prevent it from becoming too abstract.
fennecfoxen 11y ago
> The -odds- are that someone is going to win, and if you don't play at all, it is impossible to win. The odds are that if you play, you're going to lose, and if you don't play at all, it's impossible to lose. And while it doesn't do to be mean and judgmental towards individuals or even populations who do things like play lotteries, we can make normative judgements. For instance: "enterprises which promise riches while delivering poverty are dystopian, wrong, and practically fraudulent", and "entertaining yourself with dreams of unearned riches runs counter to all the values which will help people achieve real, meaningful value in life, and as such ought not be celebrated."

vlunkr 11y ago

Right, people spend all sorts of money on silly entertainment, the lottery isn't much different. Now, if you drop your life savings on it, that's a different story.

dsp1234 11y ago

I'm all for people having fun. I'm also all for people really understanding their odds. In my experience, 'pick a dime' works better than 'struck by a meteorite' in the limited time I've used the example. It seems that people around me have a harder time grasping the wide gulf between abstract stuff like "struck by lightning" vs "10 times as likely to be struck by a meteorite", and something they can measure/visualize and break down in to pieces. The driving example is exactly the same as saying "put 250M dimes in a big pot, then pick the exact one randomly". However, restating the problem, in a way that breaks down naturally into individual units that people can grasp, can help prevent it from becoming too abstract.

fennecfoxen 11y ago

> The -odds- are that someone is going to win, and if you don't play at all, it is impossible to win. The odds are that if you play, you're going to lose, and if you don't play at all, it's impossible to lose. And while it doesn't do to be mean and judgmental towards individuals or even populations who do things like play lotteries, we can make normative judgements. For instance: "enterprises which promise riches while delivering poverty are dystopian, wrong, and practically fraudulent", and "entertaining yourself with dreams of unearned riches runs counter to all the values which will help people achieve real, meaningful value in life, and as such ought not be celebrated."