5 ms·

This is a weird take, very HN/Reddit. At best it misses the point, and at worst it insults the poor. Its not a "tax" - it's just fun. The odds are terrible, bu

by voz_ 4y ago

This is a weird take, very HN/Reddit. At best it misses the point, and at worst it insults the poor. Its not a "tax" - it's just fun. The odds are terrible, but the dream / "what if?" aspect of it is fun. Theres no downside to playing (Who doesn't have a dollar or two? even when I was broke and lived in my car, I had a spare buck here and there), but the potential upside is limitless.

stingraycharles 4y ago
Eh, I know more than a few people who, over decades, spent small fortunes on these lotteries. $10/month over multiple decades really adds up, especially when you’re already poor. I’m not saying I agree with the “it’s a tax” position, but I definitely don’t agree with the “it’s just fun” position. It’s an industry that preys on poor people’s poor (monetary) decision making skills.
- voz_ 4y ago
  Does it prey? I think scratchers / casinos / sports betting / online poker / more general kinds of gambling is far more addictive and malicious, because the dopamine fueled reward->attempt cycle is a far tighter loop with those.
  - Parmenidea 4y ago
    The counter argument is that a lot of those games reward “skill”. Through study/statistics your odds improve, in the same way that equity research can lead to a good stock pick. The lottery is naked chance.
- Swenrekcah 4y ago
  Would you say the same about a $14/month Netflix subscription? Because that actually has zero upside potential and does not fund local nonprofit activities (like lottery often does, depending on your location).
  - jimkleiber 4y ago
    Netflix is capped at $14/month. One may "lose" time or attention or gain many different emotional experiences they didn't want, yet I think their monetary spending is quite capped with Netflix compared to the lottery and other pay more to get more games.
  - paulpauper 4y ago
    Netflix cost is capped. People spend hundreds/month on lotteries.
    - Swenrekcah 4y ago
      True they don’t, that’s what the lottery does. Netflix and the lottery sell different things at a similar price point. I’ve subscribed to both at various times. Edit: it seems the comment I replied to was changed. It used to say approximately “Netflix doesn’t sell a dream to get rich”
- jimkleiber 4y ago
  I worked at a liquor store and saw people spend easily $10/day, and very often it was the same people every day. I wonder how much lottery is like other (gambling and non-gambling) industries where so much of the revenue is from "whales."
  - missedthecue 4y ago
    Tangentially related: My younger brother works the counter at a gas station and the amount of money people drop on cigarettes and vape pods is mind boggling. He tells me $300 a month is not uncommon. A car payment. Be careful which habits you form.
- gruez 4y ago
  > $10/month over multiple decades really adds up, especially when you’re already poor. >[...] but I definitely don’t agree with the “it’s just fun” position How do you feel about people going to vegas to gamble? Does that also not count as "it's just fun" because they're losing a significant sum of money?
jmcgough 4y ago
And yet the poor are the ones overwhelmingly playing the lottery. When you're making six figures you don't really need to win a lottery to be happy and have your needs met, compared to someone living paycheck-to-paycheck. You're also less likely to play if you have enough education to realize it's a bad use of your money. As with anything, you can look at decisions on an individual level or a systemic level, but the system itself (like the hollowing out of the middle class) encourages certain types of behavior.
namdnay 4y ago
Saying lotteries are regressive or “a tax on stupidity” is hardly new or weird, the quote was originally attributed to Voltaire
- voz_ 4y ago
  No, I am not sure it is attributed to him, at least, not with any proof. Voltaire is often a good target for fake quotes.
  - namdnay 4y ago
    Yes, that’s why I said attributed to, rather than “Voltaire said”. A quick search seems to point to various economists and commentators in the 18th century.
- dredmorbius 4y ago
  Sir William Petty. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/10/21/lottery/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/10/21/lottery/
paulpauper 4y ago
some people put a good % of their income in this. goes beyond just for fun.
- willnonya 4y ago
  What difference does that make? The number of people who put large amounts of their income into it are the exception rather than the rule. Some people drink more than a 'casual' amount. These people also end up paying more in taxes because of it. Does that make you want to take that away too?
rco8786 4y ago
It’s voluntary so obviously not a tax. But two things are true: First, for one reason or another poor people tend to play the lottery significantly more than people get are financially stable. Second, the lottery funds the government. So looking purely at the macro level, the net effect looks a lot like a regressive tax. Which is why people say that even if it’s not 100% true.
- willnonya 4y ago
  Not 100% true? Not even slightly true. People have convinced themselves that only the "poor" play the lottery but that is patently false. Yes it is a tax on a voluntary transaction but those are taxed already. I think the problem is less that people play the lottery than that the lottery is taxed so heavily to begin with.
  - rco8786 4y ago
    Poor people spend more money on the lottery than middle/upper income. That’s not really a debate? Anyway I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with the term. I am just explaining to you why people refer to it as a regressive tax.
- morsch 4y ago
  Buying liquor is voluntary. Alcohol taxes are still taxes.
rvz 4y ago
> Its not a "tax" - it's just fun. The odds are terrible, but the dream / "what if?" aspect of it is fun. Terrible is an understatement. With those odds, you would have better success to throw $10K on DOGE than to buy $10K worth of lottery tickets. The main difference being you can hold your DOGE coins vs wasting all your money on tickets valid for a week and to find out that all of them don't match the jackpot numbers.
ALittleLight 4y ago
By the quoted numbers the lottery is literally 45% tax. You seem to be arguing that it's a fun fantasy, so what's the harm in playing? That misses the point completely. My comment is not that the lottery is bad or should not be played but that it is a regressive tax. We could eliminate or greatly reduce the tax and double the number of winners. I don't think the government should be funded by taking money from the poor. What's the tax on golf resorts or yacht rentals or things that rich people do for fun? Is it 45% of revenue? Maybe it's a very HN/reddit take to be suspicious of regressive taxes, but I think it's basically status quo bias to reason that the 45% revenue tax on poor people's recreation is fine because that's the way it is - or whatever reason you think this is fine.
- willnonya 4y ago
  What you seem to be missing is that it's only a tax on voluntary participation. Like smoking, gambling, purchasing anybotger form of entertainment. It's not a regressive tax in the way you're portraying it but rather a consumption tax. Sure, the poor are more likely to play but I think your argument is on more solid ground if you flip it and suggest the lotteries shouldn't be taxed. At least not like they are. The problem after all is not that people play lotteries but that so much of it is taken in taxes.
dredmorbius 4y ago
Now in the way of Lottery men do also tax themselves in the general, though out of hopes of Advantage in particular: A Lottery therefore is properly a Tax upon unfortunate self-conceited fools; men that have good opinion of their own luckiness, or that have believed some Fortune-teller or Astrologer, who had promised them great success about the time and place of the Lottery, lying Southwest perhaps from the place where the destiny was read. -- Sir William Petty, 1662 https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/10/21/lottery/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/10/21/lottery/ Sir William was apparently a very early Reddit adopter. (Numerous other versions and observations at the QI link, for those with substantive interests in the history of the observation.)

by voz_ 4y ago

stingraycharles 4y ago

Eh, I know more than a few people who, over decades, spent small fortunes on these lotteries. $10/month over multiple decades really adds up, especially when you’re already poor. I’m not saying I agree with the “it’s a tax” position, but I definitely don’t agree with the “it’s just fun” position. It’s an industry that preys on poor people’s poor (monetary) decision making skills.

voz_ 4y ago
Does it prey? I think scratchers / casinos / sports betting / online poker / more general kinds of gambling is far more addictive and malicious, because the dopamine fueled reward->attempt cycle is a far tighter loop with those.
- Parmenidea 4y ago
  The counter argument is that a lot of those games reward “skill”. Through study/statistics your odds improve, in the same way that equity research can lead to a good stock pick. The lottery is naked chance.
Swenrekcah 4y ago
Would you say the same about a $14/month Netflix subscription? Because that actually has zero upside potential and does not fund local nonprofit activities (like lottery often does, depending on your location).
- jimkleiber 4y ago
  Netflix is capped at $14/month. One may "lose" time or attention or gain many different emotional experiences they didn't want, yet I think their monetary spending is quite capped with Netflix compared to the lottery and other pay more to get more games.
- paulpauper 4y ago
  Netflix cost is capped. People spend hundreds/month on lotteries.
  - Swenrekcah 4y ago
    True they don’t, that’s what the lottery does. Netflix and the lottery sell different things at a similar price point. I’ve subscribed to both at various times. Edit: it seems the comment I replied to was changed. It used to say approximately “Netflix doesn’t sell a dream to get rich”
jimkleiber 4y ago
I worked at a liquor store and saw people spend easily $10/day, and very often it was the same people every day. I wonder how much lottery is like other (gambling and non-gambling) industries where so much of the revenue is from "whales."
- missedthecue 4y ago
  Tangentially related: My younger brother works the counter at a gas station and the amount of money people drop on cigarettes and vape pods is mind boggling. He tells me $300 a month is not uncommon. A car payment. Be careful which habits you form.
gruez 4y ago
> $10/month over multiple decades really adds up, especially when you’re already poor. >[...] but I definitely don’t agree with the “it’s just fun” position How do you feel about people going to vegas to gamble? Does that also not count as "it's just fun" because they're losing a significant sum of money?

jmcgough 4y ago

And yet the poor are the ones overwhelmingly playing the lottery. When you're making six figures you don't really need to win a lottery to be happy and have your needs met, compared to someone living paycheck-to-paycheck. You're also less likely to play if you have enough education to realize it's a bad use of your money. As with anything, you can look at decisions on an individual level or a systemic level, but the system itself (like the hollowing out of the middle class) encourages certain types of behavior.

namdnay 4y ago

Saying lotteries are regressive or “a tax on stupidity” is hardly new or weird, the quote was originally attributed to Voltaire

voz_ 4y ago
No, I am not sure it is attributed to him, at least, not with any proof. Voltaire is often a good target for fake quotes.
- namdnay 4y ago
  Yes, that’s why I said attributed to, rather than “Voltaire said”. A quick search seems to point to various economists and commentators in the 18th century.
dredmorbius 4y ago
Sir William Petty. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/10/21/lottery/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/10/21/lottery/

paulpauper 4y ago

some people put a good % of their income in this. goes beyond just for fun.

willnonya 4y ago
What difference does that make? The number of people who put large amounts of their income into it are the exception rather than the rule. Some people drink more than a 'casual' amount. These people also end up paying more in taxes because of it. Does that make you want to take that away too?

rco8786 4y ago

It’s voluntary so obviously not a tax. But two things are true: First, for one reason or another poor people tend to play the lottery significantly more than people get are financially stable. Second, the lottery funds the government. So looking purely at the macro level, the net effect looks a lot like a regressive tax. Which is why people say that even if it’s not 100% true.

willnonya 4y ago
Not 100% true? Not even slightly true. People have convinced themselves that only the "poor" play the lottery but that is patently false. Yes it is a tax on a voluntary transaction but those are taxed already. I think the problem is less that people play the lottery than that the lottery is taxed so heavily to begin with.
- rco8786 4y ago
  Poor people spend more money on the lottery than middle/upper income. That’s not really a debate? Anyway I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with the term. I am just explaining to you why people refer to it as a regressive tax.
morsch 4y ago
Buying liquor is voluntary. Alcohol taxes are still taxes.

rvz 4y ago

> Its not a "tax" - it's just fun. The odds are terrible, but the dream / "what if?" aspect of it is fun. Terrible is an understatement. With those odds, you would have better success to throw $10K on DOGE than to buy $10K worth of lottery tickets. The main difference being you can hold your DOGE coins vs wasting all your money on tickets valid for a week and to find out that all of them don't match the jackpot numbers.

ALittleLight 4y ago

By the quoted numbers the lottery is literally 45% tax. You seem to be arguing that it's a fun fantasy, so what's the harm in playing? That misses the point completely. My comment is not that the lottery is bad or should not be played but that it is a regressive tax. We could eliminate or greatly reduce the tax and double the number of winners. I don't think the government should be funded by taking money from the poor. What's the tax on golf resorts or yacht rentals or things that rich people do for fun? Is it 45% of revenue? Maybe it's a very HN/reddit take to be suspicious of regressive taxes, but I think it's basically status quo bias to reason that the 45% revenue tax on poor people's recreation is fine because that's the way it is - or whatever reason you think this is fine.

willnonya 4y ago
What you seem to be missing is that it's only a tax on voluntary participation. Like smoking, gambling, purchasing anybotger form of entertainment. It's not a regressive tax in the way you're portraying it but rather a consumption tax. Sure, the poor are more likely to play but I think your argument is on more solid ground if you flip it and suggest the lotteries shouldn't be taxed. At least not like they are. The problem after all is not that people play lotteries but that so much of it is taken in taxes.

dredmorbius 4y ago

Now in the way of Lottery men do also tax themselves in the general, though out of hopes of Advantage in particular: A Lottery therefore is properly a Tax upon unfortunate self-conceited fools; men that have good opinion of their own luckiness, or that have believed some Fortune-teller or Astrologer, who had promised them great success about the time and place of the Lottery, lying Southwest perhaps from the place where the destiny was read. -- Sir William Petty, 1662 https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/10/21/lottery/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/10/21/lottery/ Sir William was apparently a very early Reddit adopter. (Numerous other versions and observations at the QI link, for those with substantive interests in the history of the observation.)