5 ms·

My state government has adjacent billboards telling me to play the lottery (odds of winning, 1 in 7000000) on the basis that I'll be able to do really cool thin

by ken 6y ago

My state government has adjacent billboards telling me to play the lottery (odds of winning, 1 in 7000000) on the basis that I'll be able to do really cool things with all that money, and that I should wear a mask and maintain distance from other people to stay safe from a virus (odds of contracting, 1 in 350, odds of dying, 1 in 7000). Is it any wonder that people make poor choices? We're training them to be bad at math.

clairity 6y ago
> "(odds of contracting, 1 in 350, odds of dying, 1 in 7000)" and 1 in 100 odds of dying from a car accident. it's less about being bad at math, and more about poorly trained intuitions around risk and being consistent in response.
- empath75 6y ago
  All of those odds are nonsensical without a time frame. Are we talking about on a trip to a grocery store, or this year, or in a life time?
  - benburleson 6y ago
    Also important to not ignore the "reward" half of risk vs reward. Sure, I could never get in a car again and be loads safer, statistically. But am I really willing to give up that convenience? The real point is not taking unnecessary risks, not just avoiding all risk in life.
- Buttons840 6y ago
  Now that we've brought up COVID and car accidents. About 36,500 people died in car accidents in the US in 2018 [1], so about 100 people per day die from car accidents in the US. About 1,000 people are dying per day from COVID, currently [2]. Wouldn't this mean that the odds of dying from COVID are much higher than dying from a car accident? Which would contradict the odds I'm seeing in this thread. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in... [2] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
  - clairity 6y ago
    > "Wouldn't this mean that the odds of dying from COVID are much higher than dying from a car accident?" we don't know yet due to the newness of covid, meaning it's steady-state death rate is uncertain, but it seems very unlikely to overtake car accidents. based on what we do know about covid now, its trajectory, and comparing to relatives, covid will probably only kill you the first time (and mostly if you're late in life) or not at all, so lifetime odds might end up between 1 in 10,000 and 1 in 5000. lifetime odds of dying in a car accident is relatively known, at 1 in 100, so probably 50-100X more deadly than covid.
  - rescripting 6y ago
    I believe the "1 in 100 odds of dying in a car crash" is during your lifetime, not per annum. If you look at the likelihood of death from an auto accident in a given year its more like 1 in 8,300. [1] Because COVID will (hopefully) become less threatening over time as the pandemic resolves the lifetime odds of death from it will be lower. [1] https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-mortality-risk#Odds%20Of%20Death%20In%20The%20United%20States%20By%20Selected%20Cause%20Of%20Injury,%202018%20(1) https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-mortalit...
    - empath75 6y ago
      I think the average American probably has close to a 1 in 500 chance of dying of corona virus in the next two years (although that’s not evenly distributed by age to say the least). That’s assuming 20% of people catch it and I think that’s fairly conservative.
FabHK 6y ago
1. Not sure where you see the bad math - your state government encourages you to do something with good (though unlikely) consequences, and encourages you to avoid something with bad (though unlikely) consequences. 2. It’s not only about you. Lottery proceeds are used for all sorts of good things. Being part of an infection chain could infect and kill many people. 3. Note that absent measures, the odds of contracting and dying would rise up enormously. 4. At any rate, that’s not what Levine’s excellent column is about.
- playingchanges 6y ago
  I’m sorry but lotteries are an evil hidden tax on the poor and uneducated. Can’t let that slide.
  - smileysteve 6y ago
    a hidden tax on the direly desperate hope and addictions of people.
  - cafard 6y ago
    I was not happy when the District of Columbia instituted its lottery about 1980. I already knew people who played the numbers, one at least who thought about what objects in her dreams meant for that. The lottery seemed to me a regressive tax, falling mostly on those who can spare the money least. About that time, some journal reported that a certain state lottery offered worse odds than the old-time illegal numbers. Whether that is so, I don't know. The good news for legislators is that people pay that regressive tax willingly. They will beef if you put up the taxes on property or gasoline, but not about lottery tickets.
  - mcguire 6y ago
    They're also an incredibly popular tax. Try comparing them with a proper, progressive income tax.
- airstrike 6y ago
  > you to do something with good (though unlikely) consequences But that's not really honest, is it? It's not "with good consequences" if the expected value is decidedly negative.
skybrian 6y ago
The entertainment value of playing the lottery is thinking about what you would do with all that money, and a billboard can encourage you to think about it that way, both enhancing its entertainment value and encouraging you to buy a ticket. I don't think you can tell from a billboard alone how many people think of the lottery as more than just entertainment.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
IvyMike 6y ago
> odds of contracting, 1 in 350 "Why are we even bothering to fight the stove fire? Only one in 50 of my appliances has burned!"

by ken 6y ago

clairity 6y ago

> "(odds of contracting, 1 in 350, odds of dying, 1 in 7000)" and 1 in 100 odds of dying from a car accident. it's less about being bad at math, and more about poorly trained intuitions around risk and being consistent in response.

empath75 6y ago
All of those odds are nonsensical without a time frame. Are we talking about on a trip to a grocery store, or this year, or in a life time?
- benburleson 6y ago
  Also important to not ignore the "reward" half of risk vs reward. Sure, I could never get in a car again and be loads safer, statistically. But am I really willing to give up that convenience? The real point is not taking unnecessary risks, not just avoiding all risk in life.
Buttons840 6y ago
Now that we've brought up COVID and car accidents. About 36,500 people died in car accidents in the US in 2018 [1], so about 100 people per day die from car accidents in the US. About 1,000 people are dying per day from COVID, currently [2]. Wouldn't this mean that the odds of dying from COVID are much higher than dying from a car accident? Which would contradict the odds I'm seeing in this thread. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in... [2] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
- clairity 6y ago
  > "Wouldn't this mean that the odds of dying from COVID are much higher than dying from a car accident?" we don't know yet due to the newness of covid, meaning it's steady-state death rate is uncertain, but it seems very unlikely to overtake car accidents. based on what we do know about covid now, its trajectory, and comparing to relatives, covid will probably only kill you the first time (and mostly if you're late in life) or not at all, so lifetime odds might end up between 1 in 10,000 and 1 in 5000. lifetime odds of dying in a car accident is relatively known, at 1 in 100, so probably 50-100X more deadly than covid.
- rescripting 6y ago
  I believe the "1 in 100 odds of dying in a car crash" is during your lifetime, not per annum. If you look at the likelihood of death from an auto accident in a given year its more like 1 in 8,300. [1] Because COVID will (hopefully) become less threatening over time as the pandemic resolves the lifetime odds of death from it will be lower. [1] https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-mortality-risk#Odds%20Of%20Death%20In%20The%20United%20States%20By%20Selected%20Cause%20Of%20Injury,%202018%20(1) https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-mortalit...
  - empath75 6y ago
    I think the average American probably has close to a 1 in 500 chance of dying of corona virus in the next two years (although that’s not evenly distributed by age to say the least). That’s assuming 20% of people catch it and I think that’s fairly conservative.

FabHK 6y ago

1. Not sure where you see the bad math - your state government encourages you to do something with good (though unlikely) consequences, and encourages you to avoid something with bad (though unlikely) consequences. 2. It’s not only about you. Lottery proceeds are used for all sorts of good things. Being part of an infection chain could infect and kill many people. 3. Note that absent measures, the odds of contracting and dying would rise up enormously. 4. At any rate, that’s not what Levine’s excellent column is about.

playingchanges 6y ago
I’m sorry but lotteries are an evil hidden tax on the poor and uneducated. Can’t let that slide.
- smileysteve 6y ago
  a hidden tax on the direly desperate hope and addictions of people.
- cafard 6y ago
  I was not happy when the District of Columbia instituted its lottery about 1980. I already knew people who played the numbers, one at least who thought about what objects in her dreams meant for that. The lottery seemed to me a regressive tax, falling mostly on those who can spare the money least. About that time, some journal reported that a certain state lottery offered worse odds than the old-time illegal numbers. Whether that is so, I don't know. The good news for legislators is that people pay that regressive tax willingly. They will beef if you put up the taxes on property or gasoline, but not about lottery tickets.
- mcguire 6y ago
  They're also an incredibly popular tax. Try comparing them with a proper, progressive income tax.
airstrike 6y ago
> you to do something with good (though unlikely) consequences But that's not really honest, is it? It's not "with good consequences" if the expected value is decidedly negative.

skybrian 6y ago

The entertainment value of playing the lottery is thinking about what you would do with all that money, and a billboard can encourage you to think about it that way, both enhancing its entertainment value and encouraging you to buy a ticket. I don't think you can tell from a billboard alone how many people think of the lottery as more than just entertainment.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

IvyMike 6y ago

> odds of contracting, 1 in 350 "Why are we even bothering to fight the stove fire? Only one in 50 of my appliances has burned!"