4 ms·
Lotteries are rational when you consider the entertainment value. Most lottery players dont expect to win, but as long as theres the possibility it allows them
by HDThoreaun 3y ago
Lotteries are rational when you consider the entertainment value. Most lottery players dont expect to win, but as long as theres the possibility it allows them to daydream about what they would do if they did.
- brlewis 3y agoCitation please. Rational entertainment would predict poorer people playing the lottery less than rich people, which afaik is not how it happens.
- kqr 3y agoLotteries are a comparatively cheap form of entertainment. Rich people can go to tennis matches, get a pilot's licence, and buy stock options. Poor people have much fewer alternatives.
- brlewis 3y ago$412/year doesn't seem that cheep to me. I think the less educated are being fooled into chasing extreme low-probability prizes. https://bigthink.com/the-present/poor-americans-lottery/ https://bigthink.com/the-present/poor-americans-lottery/
- HDThoreaun 3y agoThe prospect of becoming rich isn’t as enticing when you’re already rich. What would a rich person who wins the lottery do? Quit their job I guess but mostly quality of life unchanged. They already have most of what they want. Not the case for poor people.
- kqr 3y agoIndeed. Negative-sum games (like lotteries) are a form of consumption. From the player's perspective they should be compared to other forms of consumption like buying a beer or a rollercoaster ride. You do it for temporary pleasure, not as an investment. Most players are fully aware of this, just as most beer-drinkers drink in moderation. (See Brenner, Brenner & Brown for more data.)