3 ms·

> For example, I’ve always thought that we could “wind down” the existence of lotteries not by banning them altogether (for surely many people would be upset wi

> For example, I’ve always thought that we could “wind down” the existence of lotteries not by banning them altogether (for surely many people would be upset with such a decision) but rather 1. banning private lotteries; and then 2. having a single state-owned lottery commission, that is regulated by a law that forces it to be this type of “for-profit but we donate all profits” corp, with the profits funneled directly into public statistics education I can't tell whether you're being facetious, but this is almost exactly how it works. (Lotteries are state-run, private gambling is banned almost everywhere, profits go to state schools.)

tome 6y ago
> I can't tell whether you're being facetious, but this is almost exactly how it works. (Lotteries are state-run, private gambling is banned almost everywhere, profits go to state schools.) In the US. Perhaps derefr was not talking about the US.
- derefr 6y ago
  Correct. The US almost has it right already. Though there’s a misalignment in the US system between “funding education” and “numeracy”, because there’s 1. no requirement for the right subjects (statistics, game-theory) to be part of the curriculum that the lottery funds; and 2. there’s no incentive to study either of those subjects as part of getting an education degree, so people don’t, and so schools end up with a dearth of teachers qualified to teach on the subject. (The second thing is a bootstrapping problem — if public schools taught the subject, everyone would learn it, and so everyone would be at least a little qualified to teach it. But as it is now, stats and game-theory are college subjects, so you have to choose to learn them as part of a college degree.) Most other countries are far further from having a MFFAM-like model, though.
  - joshstrange 6y ago
    Also while lottery money might go to schools that just means the state doesn't have to fund the school system as much and can take that money they would have budgeted for the schools and put it elsewhere. In the end it results in a net-neutral for schools in a lot of cases. Money earmarked for specific things really has no bearing if the amount of money earmarked is less than or equal to the funding requirements of the thing it's earmarked for. For example, using 100% made up numbers, let's pretend the school budget is $100M and the lottery brings in $50M. Well that just means we can now take $50M from the school budget and use it for other things and combine $50M from the "state budget" and $50M from the "earmarked lottery revenue" and fund the schools for $100M. Now if the lottery brings in over $100M then the schools could get more but I'm not sure if that's happening anywhere.
    - CobrastanJorji 6y ago
      This is a huge problem. Back in the '90s, Georgia managed to solve it. They said "we will start a state lottery. The funds will be exclusively used to provide an educational benefit that does not currently exist." This prevented other funds from being reallocated away from education. The thing they funded was the HOPE scholarship, which allowed every high schooler in Georgia with a B average to attend a public college in-state for free. It's how I got out of Georgia Tech without loans, and it's also why a certain age range in Georgia considers Governor Miller to be basically a saint.
  - oh_sigh 6y ago
    You also have the situation where the lottery commission desperately wants you to play the lottery, so they put out advertising materials for it which subvert the whole idea of improving numeracy to counteract the lottery. For years you couldn't walk into an NY bodega without seeing a cardboard cutout of a smiling man with lottery tickets saying "It pays to win!"
- V-2 6y ago
  Not just in the US. For one, state-owned lotteries are quite typical of European countries too.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  The UK lottery is owned by a Canadian teachers pension fund, https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3308480/Former-Camelot-boss-Dianne-Thompson-wins-jackpot-1m-bonus.html https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3308480/For.... IIRC, Richard Branson offered to run it with 100% of stakes going to charity. Not sure what his angle was, probably worth it for the advertising?

tome 6y ago

> I can't tell whether you're being facetious, but this is almost exactly how it works. (Lotteries are state-run, private gambling is banned almost everywhere, profits go to state schools.) In the US. Perhaps derefr was not talking about the US.

derefr 6y ago
Correct. The US almost has it right already. Though there’s a misalignment in the US system between “funding education” and “numeracy”, because there’s 1. no requirement for the right subjects (statistics, game-theory) to be part of the curriculum that the lottery funds; and 2. there’s no incentive to study either of those subjects as part of getting an education degree, so people don’t, and so schools end up with a dearth of teachers qualified to teach on the subject. (The second thing is a bootstrapping problem — if public schools taught the subject, everyone would learn it, and so everyone would be at least a little qualified to teach it. But as it is now, stats and game-theory are college subjects, so you have to choose to learn them as part of a college degree.) Most other countries are far further from having a MFFAM-like model, though.
- joshstrange 6y ago
  Also while lottery money might go to schools that just means the state doesn't have to fund the school system as much and can take that money they would have budgeted for the schools and put it elsewhere. In the end it results in a net-neutral for schools in a lot of cases. Money earmarked for specific things really has no bearing if the amount of money earmarked is less than or equal to the funding requirements of the thing it's earmarked for. For example, using 100% made up numbers, let's pretend the school budget is $100M and the lottery brings in $50M. Well that just means we can now take $50M from the school budget and use it for other things and combine $50M from the "state budget" and $50M from the "earmarked lottery revenue" and fund the schools for $100M. Now if the lottery brings in over $100M then the schools could get more but I'm not sure if that's happening anywhere.
  - CobrastanJorji 6y ago
    This is a huge problem. Back in the '90s, Georgia managed to solve it. They said "we will start a state lottery. The funds will be exclusively used to provide an educational benefit that does not currently exist." This prevented other funds from being reallocated away from education. The thing they funded was the HOPE scholarship, which allowed every high schooler in Georgia with a B average to attend a public college in-state for free. It's how I got out of Georgia Tech without loans, and it's also why a certain age range in Georgia considers Governor Miller to be basically a saint.
- oh_sigh 6y ago
  You also have the situation where the lottery commission desperately wants you to play the lottery, so they put out advertising materials for it which subvert the whole idea of improving numeracy to counteract the lottery. For years you couldn't walk into an NY bodega without seeing a cardboard cutout of a smiling man with lottery tickets saying "It pays to win!"
V-2 6y ago
Not just in the US. For one, state-owned lotteries are quite typical of European countries too.
pbhjpbhj 6y ago
The UK lottery is owned by a Canadian teachers pension fund, https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3308480/Former-Camelot-boss-Dianne-Thompson-wins-jackpot-1m-bonus.html https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3308480/For.... IIRC, Richard Branson offered to run it with 100% of stakes going to charity. Not sure what his angle was, probably worth it for the advertising?