4 ms·

At least the revenue generated from the lottery (in Texas, not sure about other states) go to pay for education.

larrydag 11y ago
Texas resident here. That claim is dubious. http://www.kcbd.com/story/14579932/kcbd-investigates-is-the-tx-lottery-really-funding-education http://www.kcbd.com/story/14579932/kcbd-investigates-is-the-...
harryh 11y ago
Really? Or does it just mean that money from general taxes that would have been spent on education is spent on something else?
- pc86 11y ago
  It's both. Lottery money replaced other tax revenue, which freed that revenue to be either a) returned to the people in the form of lower taxes; or b) spent on other projects. You'd need to look at when the lottery proceeds were first used for education and track the changes since to know which one actually happened.
  - eli 11y ago
    Either way, isn't that exactly the same as saying lottery money goes into a general fund just like other taxes?
    - Karunamon 11y ago
      This sort of frame of reference juggling can be used to say any money is used for any purpose anywhere. Most lottery money is earmarked for education, infrastructure improvement, etc. The effect it has on any other portion of the budget notwithstanding - it's a fact that lotteries bring in substantial amounts of income.
      - eli 11y ago
        Yes, that's my point. Money is fungible, so the lottery is effectively just a general tax and benefits all things that are paid for by taxes, not just school children.
        Karunamon 11y ago
        Not if the money is earmarked - you're making an unstated assumption that, say, if 5M is going into education, and a lottery starts up and brings in 5M more for a total of 10M, that the original 5M must be repurposed elsewhere. That's not necessarily true in the first place, and what's more it depends on the appropriations rules in the jurisdiction.
        eli 11y ago
        I'm making that assumption because I saw exactly that happen in New York. The lottery money is earmarked, sure, but it simply replaces money that otherwise would have been allocated from the general fund. You could just as well earmark the lottery money for sanitation, cut the sanitation budget, and then put the money towards schools or other uses.
        deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
        Karunamon 11y ago
        And the other 49 states and DC/PR? Once again - what you're implying happens in all cases doesn't necessarily happen in all cases. That's literally my whole point :)
        eli 11y ago
        Here in DC it just goes directly into the general fund :) I understand what you're getting at, but a lottery is really not a great way to fund education. I'd much prefer a less regressive form of taxation.
Jtsummers 11y ago
GA and FL as well. The problem, though, is that some states replaced instead of supplemented education funding with lottery revenues. So what could've been a nice boon (normal budget $xx million/year, with lottery add $yy million/year) meant that nothing actually changed (for education). It may, depending on the state, have freed up tax revenue to go to other projects.
- TylerE 11y ago
  Of course that's how it works. That's how it always works. Any political promise of "Raise $xxx million for $y" is easily ignorable because money is fungible.
baldfat 11y ago
It is well documents that lottery income replaces standard taxes and does not increase the money spent of education or senior citizens. So it has switched taxing all tax payers and puts the burden on people who play the lottery, which are vastly made up of the poor population of the states. http://taxvox.taxpolicycenter.org/2014/09/09/nearly-states-play-lottery-none-big-winners/ http://taxvox.taxpolicycenter.org/2014/09/09/nearly-states-p...
- datamingle 11y ago
  You can't remove demand by Government decree. We have tried that with alcohol, drugs, etc. It never works.
  - asddubs 11y ago
    it's a lot harder to run an illegal lottery at any meaningful scale, though
  - baldfat 11y ago
    Government isn't selling drugs and only a few states still sell alcohol. Government shouldn't sell Cigarettes, Alcohol, Drugs or Lottery.

Texas resident here. That claim is dubious. http://www.kcbd.com/story/14579932/kcbd-investigates-is-the-tx-lottery-really-funding-education http://www.kcbd.com/story/14579932/kcbd-investigates-is-the-...

harryh 11y ago

Really? Or does it just mean that money from general taxes that would have been spent on education is spent on something else?

pc86 11y ago
It's both. Lottery money replaced other tax revenue, which freed that revenue to be either a) returned to the people in the form of lower taxes; or b) spent on other projects. You'd need to look at when the lottery proceeds were first used for education and track the changes since to know which one actually happened.
- eli 11y ago
  Either way, isn't that exactly the same as saying lottery money goes into a general fund just like other taxes?
  - Karunamon 11y ago
    This sort of frame of reference juggling can be used to say any money is used for any purpose anywhere. Most lottery money is earmarked for education, infrastructure improvement, etc. The effect it has on any other portion of the budget notwithstanding - it's a fact that lotteries bring in substantial amounts of income.
    - eli 11y ago
      Yes, that's my point. Money is fungible, so the lottery is effectively just a general tax and benefits all things that are paid for by taxes, not just school children.
      - Karunamon 11y ago
        Not if the money is earmarked - you're making an unstated assumption that, say, if 5M is going into education, and a lottery starts up and brings in 5M more for a total of 10M, that the original 5M must be repurposed elsewhere. That's not necessarily true in the first place, and what's more it depends on the appropriations rules in the jurisdiction.
        eli 11y ago
        I'm making that assumption because I saw exactly that happen in New York. The lottery money is earmarked, sure, but it simply replaces money that otherwise would have been allocated from the general fund. You could just as well earmark the lottery money for sanitation, cut the sanitation budget, and then put the money towards schools or other uses.
        deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
        Karunamon 11y ago
        And the other 49 states and DC/PR? Once again - what you're implying happens in all cases doesn't necessarily happen in all cases. That's literally my whole point :)
        eli 11y ago
        Here in DC it just goes directly into the general fund :) I understand what you're getting at, but a lottery is really not a great way to fund education. I'd much prefer a less regressive form of taxation.

Jtsummers 11y ago

GA and FL as well. The problem, though, is that some states replaced instead of supplemented education funding with lottery revenues. So what could've been a nice boon (normal budget $xx million/year, with lottery add $yy million/year) meant that nothing actually changed (for education). It may, depending on the state, have freed up tax revenue to go to other projects.

TylerE 11y ago
Of course that's how it works. That's how it always works. Any political promise of "Raise $xxx million for $y" is easily ignorable because money is fungible.

baldfat 11y ago

It is well documents that lottery income replaces standard taxes and does not increase the money spent of education or senior citizens. So it has switched taxing all tax payers and puts the burden on people who play the lottery, which are vastly made up of the poor population of the states. http://taxvox.taxpolicycenter.org/2014/09/09/nearly-states-play-lottery-none-big-winners/ http://taxvox.taxpolicycenter.org/2014/09/09/nearly-states-p...

datamingle 11y ago
You can't remove demand by Government decree. We have tried that with alcohol, drugs, etc. It never works.
- asddubs 11y ago
  it's a lot harder to run an illegal lottery at any meaningful scale, though
- baldfat 11y ago
  Government isn't selling drugs and only a few states still sell alcohol. Government shouldn't sell Cigarettes, Alcohol, Drugs or Lottery.