8 ms·

Ehh. A $1/week expense which buys you hope and dreams for a week isn't that bad in the grand scheme of things. It's certainly cheaper than cigarettes, alcohol,

Ehh. A $1/week expense which buys you hope and dreams for a week isn't that bad in the grand scheme of things. It's certainly cheaper than cigarettes, alcohol, or drugs to temporarily take the stress out of the fact that you're in a long-term shitty situation with little way out of it. This concept that the poor should only ever work, eat, and sleep, and any attempt to look after their mental health is wasting money, is outright dangerous.

smeyer 9y ago
> Ehh. A $1/week expense which buys you hope and dreams for a week isn't that bad in the grand scheme of things There's a demographic of lottery players that really only are spending $1 a week (or even $1 every few months or whatever), but there is also a large demographic that is regularly buying multiple $20 scratch tickets on a regular basis, which tends to be more of what people are thinking of when they evoke the stereotype of someone who "can't afford" to play the lottery. I'm not saying that only the rich should be allowed to enjoy myself, but if a friend asked me to get their finances in order and was spending multiple percent of their salary on lottery tickets (which is a real phenomenon), cutting back would be my first suggestion.
- vertex-four 9y ago
  The actual solution for the population which spends significant money on scratch cards, of course, is to invest in social care and support for people who are obviously very vulnerable. They'd be vulnerable whether the scratch cards existed or not.
  - nashashmi 9y ago
    Invest? This is a pitfall that all people are vulnerable to, including the ones who invest. I'm not for humanity dedicating more resource to social service. But we have to get socially vigilant and strict. Otherwise more people will be susceptible to this vulnerability. Part of that vigilance means shaming people for drugs, gambling, & alcohol, etc.
    - vertex-four 9y ago
      I can assure you that people are shamed more than enough for their faults. I volunteer with people who come in with the stories of people shaming them for their faults every week. The issue is that there is fuck-all support for people to overcome their faults - we've become a society in which if you can't get out of your situation on your own, you also can't get help getting out of your situation - because we don't believe that anybody can possibly be in that position. Individualism at its worst. The faults are usually a result of the shitty environment you're in, of course - nobody becomes an alcoholic because they're happy with how their life is going or feel they can do much to change it. I don't think you understood my post. I mean we, as a society, need to help vulnerable people in our society - we need to invest resources into helping them. We can do that ourselves, we can do that through charity, we can do that through mutual aid, and we can do that through Government policy and services. Broadly speaking, as a society, we choose not to.
froindt 9y ago
> Ehh. A $1/week expense which buys you hope and dreams for a week isn't that bad in the grand scheme of things. The problem is that poor people aren't just dropping 1 dollar per week. They're spending much more. Some people have a very poor grasp of how bad the odds are and mention that playing the lottery is their way to retirement. Taking a convenient top link from a Google search (admittedly it references a study from 2008), they mention households earning 13k annually spending 645 (9% of income) on the lottery. www.aol.com/amp/2010/05/31/poor-people-spend-9-of-income-on-lottery-tickets-heres-why/
- jveryreal 9y ago
  I don't think there's anyone out there that has played the lottery that isn't acutely aware of how poor the odds are. As some people above have mentioned, they're not buying a ticket to riches, they're buying daydreams and aspirations to let them forget about their financial situation. They're not bringing up the lottery as their way to retirement as an actual financial plan. It's gallows humor.
- vertex-four 9y ago
  True, there's a population which overspends on lottery tickets. But those people would also be spending their money on other pleasures otherwise - the solution there is increased social care and responsibility for these people, rather than taking the lottery away from the many people who play it responsibly. Also, that article may be very wrong - at least one other news article which would appear to reference the same study received an update to suggest the total is 2-3%, rather than the 9% originally stated, and I can't find the 9% referenced in the study itself, while the 2-3% does show up.
  - SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
    > But those people would also be spending their money on other pleasures otherwise That's a pretty tall claim to make. Do you have any sources to back it up? Especially because if these people were putting money into savings instead with proper education it could make a significant path to getting out of poverty.
patio11 9y ago
Per capita spending on lotteries in Chicago's poorest neighborhoods is about ~$600 per year, of which the state of Illinois pays back about ~$100 to advertising agencies to continue to immiserate its own poor people, because if they don't constantly market the games sales go down.
- JetSpiegel 9y ago
  Since the poor people are unlikely to work on ad companies or own stock in them, this is literally a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
- danieltillett 9y ago
  I have no issue with state run lotteries, what I have a major issue with is their promotion. By all means people should be able to spend their money as they wish, but should the state be involved in promoting them spending their money in such a regressive (tax) way?

smeyer 9y ago

> Ehh. A $1/week expense which buys you hope and dreams for a week isn't that bad in the grand scheme of things There's a demographic of lottery players that really only are spending $1 a week (or even $1 every few months or whatever), but there is also a large demographic that is regularly buying multiple $20 scratch tickets on a regular basis, which tends to be more of what people are thinking of when they evoke the stereotype of someone who "can't afford" to play the lottery. I'm not saying that only the rich should be allowed to enjoy myself, but if a friend asked me to get their finances in order and was spending multiple percent of their salary on lottery tickets (which is a real phenomenon), cutting back would be my first suggestion.

vertex-four 9y ago
The actual solution for the population which spends significant money on scratch cards, of course, is to invest in social care and support for people who are obviously very vulnerable. They'd be vulnerable whether the scratch cards existed or not.
- nashashmi 9y ago
  Invest? This is a pitfall that all people are vulnerable to, including the ones who invest. I'm not for humanity dedicating more resource to social service. But we have to get socially vigilant and strict. Otherwise more people will be susceptible to this vulnerability. Part of that vigilance means shaming people for drugs, gambling, & alcohol, etc.
  - vertex-four 9y ago
    I can assure you that people are shamed more than enough for their faults. I volunteer with people who come in with the stories of people shaming them for their faults every week. The issue is that there is fuck-all support for people to overcome their faults - we've become a society in which if you can't get out of your situation on your own, you also can't get help getting out of your situation - because we don't believe that anybody can possibly be in that position. Individualism at its worst. The faults are usually a result of the shitty environment you're in, of course - nobody becomes an alcoholic because they're happy with how their life is going or feel they can do much to change it. I don't think you understood my post. I mean we, as a society, need to help vulnerable people in our society - we need to invest resources into helping them. We can do that ourselves, we can do that through charity, we can do that through mutual aid, and we can do that through Government policy and services. Broadly speaking, as a society, we choose not to.

froindt 9y ago

> Ehh. A $1/week expense which buys you hope and dreams for a week isn't that bad in the grand scheme of things. The problem is that poor people aren't just dropping 1 dollar per week. They're spending much more. Some people have a very poor grasp of how bad the odds are and mention that playing the lottery is their way to retirement. Taking a convenient top link from a Google search (admittedly it references a study from 2008), they mention households earning 13k annually spending 645 (9% of income) on the lottery. www.aol.com/amp/2010/05/31/poor-people-spend-9-of-income-on-lottery-tickets-heres-why/

jveryreal 9y ago
I don't think there's anyone out there that has played the lottery that isn't acutely aware of how poor the odds are. As some people above have mentioned, they're not buying a ticket to riches, they're buying daydreams and aspirations to let them forget about their financial situation. They're not bringing up the lottery as their way to retirement as an actual financial plan. It's gallows humor.
vertex-four 9y ago
True, there's a population which overspends on lottery tickets. But those people would also be spending their money on other pleasures otherwise - the solution there is increased social care and responsibility for these people, rather than taking the lottery away from the many people who play it responsibly. Also, that article may be very wrong - at least one other news article which would appear to reference the same study received an update to suggest the total is 2-3%, rather than the 9% originally stated, and I can't find the 9% referenced in the study itself, while the 2-3% does show up.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 9y ago
  > But those people would also be spending their money on other pleasures otherwise That's a pretty tall claim to make. Do you have any sources to back it up? Especially because if these people were putting money into savings instead with proper education it could make a significant path to getting out of poverty.

patio11 9y ago

Per capita spending on lotteries in Chicago's poorest neighborhoods is about ~$600 per year, of which the state of Illinois pays back about ~$100 to advertising agencies to continue to immiserate its own poor people, because if they don't constantly market the games sales go down.

JetSpiegel 9y ago
Since the poor people are unlikely to work on ad companies or own stock in them, this is literally a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
danieltillett 9y ago
I have no issue with state run lotteries, what I have a major issue with is their promotion. By all means people should be able to spend their money as they wish, but should the state be involved in promoting them spending their money in such a regressive (tax) way?