5 ms·

https://www.thestreet.com/story/14296470/1/americans-spend-big-on-lotto-tickets-and-here-they-spend-4-times-the-average.html https://www.thestreet.com/story/142

https://www.thestreet.com/story/14296470/1/americans-spend-big-on-lotto-tickets-and-here-they-spend-4-times-the-average.html https://www.thestreet.com/story/14296470/1/americans-spend-b... so the average american doesn't have $400 saved up, _and_ spends $206 per year on lotto tickets. if we're in society collapsing danger, maybe we could look at the organizations running the lottos?

dpark 8y ago
The average American spends about twice that on just beer (not all alcohol) every year. I share your concern for poor people dumping money into the lottery, but that’s actually a pretty small vice.
- sigstoat 8y ago
  easier to get rid of lotteries; no constitutional amendment required. some of the beer spending also comes from people more able to tolerate the wasted funds; those with the least are the most likely to play lotteries. https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/personal-finance/research-review-lotteries-demographics https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/personal-f...
  - dpark 8y ago
    I’m not sure that’s true. The Supreme Court just struck down an anti-gambling federal law. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/us/politics/supreme-court-sports-betting-new-jersey.html https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/us/politics/supreme-co... It’s not clear at all that the federal government could ban the lottery without a constitutional change.
    - gizmo686 8y ago
      Here is the opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-476_dbfi.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-476_dbfi.pdf The court found the law unconstitutional on procedural grounds. In particular, the federal government did not ban gambling. It required states to ban gambling. The court ruled that the federal government cannot force states to pass laws.
      - dpark 8y ago
        Interesting. I wasn't aware that was the basis of the ruling. I'm not entirely clear about the legal implications, though. It's unclear if the majority would also overturn a direct ban, but obviously this case would not form precedent.
    - sigstoat 8y ago
      that stricken law just banned states from permitting certain forms of gambling. the states operate the lotteries themselves. they could just stop doing so.
      - dpark 8y ago
        Of course the states themselves could ban the lottery. Many of them already do. But states can also ban alcohol and indeed several continued to after the 21st amendment was ratified.

dpark 8y ago

The average American spends about twice that on just beer (not all alcohol) every year. I share your concern for poor people dumping money into the lottery, but that’s actually a pretty small vice.

sigstoat 8y ago
easier to get rid of lotteries; no constitutional amendment required. some of the beer spending also comes from people more able to tolerate the wasted funds; those with the least are the most likely to play lotteries. https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/personal-finance/research-review-lotteries-demographics https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/personal-f...
- dpark 8y ago
  I’m not sure that’s true. The Supreme Court just struck down an anti-gambling federal law. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/us/politics/supreme-court-sports-betting-new-jersey.html https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/us/politics/supreme-co... It’s not clear at all that the federal government could ban the lottery without a constitutional change.
  - gizmo686 8y ago
    Here is the opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-476_dbfi.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-476_dbfi.pdf The court found the law unconstitutional on procedural grounds. In particular, the federal government did not ban gambling. It required states to ban gambling. The court ruled that the federal government cannot force states to pass laws.
    - dpark 8y ago
      Interesting. I wasn't aware that was the basis of the ruling. I'm not entirely clear about the legal implications, though. It's unclear if the majority would also overturn a direct ban, but obviously this case would not form precedent.
  - sigstoat 8y ago
    that stricken law just banned states from permitting certain forms of gambling. the states operate the lotteries themselves. they could just stop doing so.
    - dpark 8y ago
      Of course the states themselves could ban the lottery. Many of them already do. But states can also ban alcohol and indeed several continued to after the 21st amendment was ratified.