5 ms·
I am. Unless it's not-for-profit or single use (e.g. lottery revenue going to schools), then it's a regressive tax on people who don't understand probability.
by ethbro 9y ago
I am.
Unless it's not-for-profit or single use (e.g. lottery revenue going to schools), then it's a regressive tax on people who don't understand probability.
- Larrikin 9y agoAre there any lotteries in the US that don't directly fund public sectors like education or elderly care? I thought that was how lotteries became legal across the states.
- cstejerean 9y agoEven if it’s funding education, it’s doing so through what is essentially a tax on the poor. Why not tax those that can afford it instead?
- Clubber 9y agoWell, that's how they sell it. When they started the lottery in my state, they sold it as a wonderful benefit to society, because all the proceeds would be used to fund education. What they didn't tell us is it wasn't additional funds to existing budgets, but they would pilfer the existing budget and replace it with lottery proceeds. Lying, smarmy politicians. You'd figure we'd learn by now.
- gowld 9y agoMoney is fungible single-use funding doesn't exist in reality.
- mmirate 9y ago> a regressive tax on people who don't understand probability This is precisely why I support lotteries etc.
- chillwaves 9y agoWhat you support is immoral. IF you want to live in a society where people prey on each other in every way possible, do not be surprised to eat a bullet. This shit is destabilizing because you advocate taking food off the tables of the poor. Impressive karma btw.
- mmirate 9y agoI mean, whoever is dumb enough to gamble, deserves to lose everything. And if they want to then shoot people, I'm sure the police will be more than obligated to do their jobs.
- Mithaldu 9y agoDo the minor, elderly, disabled or other types of dependenents deserve to lose everything too because the person charged with their care loses everything?
- mmirate 9y agoWhoever is dumb enough to not be alarmed that their caregiver gambles, also deserves to lose everything.
- Mithaldu 9y agoWhat you're missing is that most of the people on the list i just gave couldn't do anything about it even if they were aware of it. That's what the term dependent strongly implies.
- mmirate 9y ago(a) Tough shit for them, then. (b) If they're that dependent, it is highly questionable that they even own anything in the first place.
- dang 9y agoYou're past flamebait and into trolling. Please don't post like this here; it destroys the site. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
- 9y ago