The loto

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
In NC we have struggled with the legislation for a long time, should we or should we not, start a state wide lottery.

I am anti-lottery for a lot of reasons, tax on the poor is primary, but ethically as well. Are we teaching the right lessons to our kids, gamble on a secure future, or build one.

Anyway this is an article I happened across.
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,030
PDX
divorced from the (very real) considerations of your post, the Lottery is a big revenue-generator for the State and most of them sure could use the money.

I despise gambling, but if the revenue goes to something like Education, then I can probably live with it.

also here in Oregon we have video-poker machines (referred to as video-crack) which in many cases make more money for the businesses they are located in (bars primarily) than their actual sales. So that kinda helps small businesses.

Gambling is a tricky thing, as it is technically voluntary in nature (for many).
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
Get rid of the Lotto and people will be sticking their money into the tribal casinos, and talk about some mismanaged tribal money. :rolleyes:

It would be one thing if some of the tribes would deal fairly with corporations and states, but they don't always do it.

Heck, I've seen and heard some stuff they've done down the street to the south -- vs. the tribe up north.

And they don't really have any revenue coming in beside the casinos, and heavy industry. If they would deal fairly, people would be willing to lease the land and put up condos, shopping, offices, etc. which provide more than just cash (ie, jobs).

I always liked dealing with them, please come down today, and you go down -- you'll have to leave, you're not allowed on the property.

So let's kill the Lotto, and shift the gambling dollar to the casinos.

---

Edit: of course the Lottery Monkey is a prime example of a reason to kill it, along with the fractured lives, families, and bankruptcies that come with instant wealth.
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
blackfox said:
divorced from the (very real) considerations of your post, the Lottery is a big revenue-generator for the State and most of them sure could use the money.

I despise gambling, but if the revenue goes to something like Education, then I can probably live with it.

also here in Oregon we have video-poker machines (referred to as video-crack) which in many cases make more money for the businesses they are located in (bars primarily) than their actual sales. So that kinda helps small businesses.

Gambling is a tricky thing, as it is technically voluntary in nature (for many).
The problem I find is that the revenue just replaces what the taxes were paying for, and education doesn't seem to get any more money than they were before. And it seems very regressive, the least able seem to pump the most in, even if baby needs new shoes. I would rather pay a tax.
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,030
PDX
stubeeef said:
The problem I find is that the revenue just replaces what the taxes were paying for, and education doesn't seem to get any more money than they were before. And it seems very regressive, the least able seem to pump the most in, even if baby needs new shoes. I would rather pay a tax.
I almost spit out my coffee!! Did you just say you'd rather pay a tax?

It is early, I might still be asleep I guess...

seriously, I applaud (and agree) with the sentiment. My point was that it often succeeds purely on it's strength (or weakness) in amoral economic terms.
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,915
1,466
Palookaville
I agree with stu on this one. I've always been opposed to state-sponsored gambling. Of the things the states ought to be doing, surely this isn't one of them. The best description of lotteries I've ever seen is "a voluntary tax on the naive."
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
blackfox said:
I almost spit out my coffee!! Did you just say you'd rather pay a tax?

It is early, I might still be asleep I guess...

seriously, I applaud (and agree) with the sentiment. My point was that it often succeeds purely on it's strength (or weakness) in amoral economic terms.
Sorry about the spitting thing, but I am not aware of any taxes ever going down or away when lotteries moved in. So I would actually still paying whatever tax already levied anyway. Government is by magnitudes the least effecient means of distributing wealth, that it is my main beef with taxes, along with half the crap/waste programs that get funding. Like the arts funding that gave us a crucifix in a mason jar of urine.

I am guessing that most here are well educated, do you or your friends spend more than 2 or 3 bills a week on a lottery? How many of you-4/5/or 6+. Or is it the occassional just "because" thing.
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
IJ Reilly said:
I agree with stu on this one. I've always been opposed to state-sponsored gambling. Of the things the states ought to be doing, surely this isn't one of them. The best description of lotteries I've ever seen is "a voluntary tax on the naive."
Holy crap, about popped out an eyeball, :p :p :p !
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,030
PDX
stubeeef said:
I am guessing that most here are well educated, do you or your friends spend more than 2 or 3 bills a week on a lottery? How many of you-4/5/or 6+. Or is it the occassional just "because" thing.
Although I am not sure I agree with what you might be implying (as a generalization), I have never played the lottery. I have played scratch-off tickets perhaps 10 times (I once won $50 yay), and occasionally gamble if in Vegas or at the racetrack, but that is merely incidental to the general experience.

No friends gamble (other than what I have described), my youngest brother used to gamble on the video-poker machines, before his wife put a stop to that. My Dad had played the lotto for 10 years, spending however much that costs. He enjoys it, however.
 

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,889
25
Northern Virginia
blackfox said:
I almost spit out my coffee!! Did you just say you'd rather pay a tax?

It is early, I might still be asleep I guess...

seriously, I applaud (and agree) with the sentiment. My point was that it often succeeds purely on it's strength (or weakness) in amoral economic terms.
Some of us are not opposed to paying taxes, in particular when it is labeled a tax - not some damn users fee, or this-or-that fee.

No sure what is worse; tax-and-spend or tax relief-and-spend.
 

blackfox

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2003
1,208
4,030
PDX
Chip NoVaMac said:
Some of us are not opposed to paying taxes, in particular when it is labeled a tax - not some damn users fee, or this-or-that fee.

No sure what is worse; tax-and-spend or tax relief-and-spend.
It was merely a rhetorical statement for Stu...of course I agree in the utility of Taxes when utilized well.
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
A recent breakdown of who pays what by %

I think that we are double and triple and multitaxed! Like you say taxes and fees are out of hand. I pay the US government then my state, then county, then city, then sales, then license fees, dog fees, then 2.50 for a school lunch!

the layers of taxes would be different if I got a credit for state taxes paid vs a deduction. I am all for the common good in the sense of taxes for police, fire, and military. I don't begrudge some gov funded help services. But lets face it, take your gross pay and divide it into the total deductions for SS, MM, St and Fed income tax-that is what your paying. To be more accurate figure in any taxes paid or refunded on April 15th.

April 15th, now is it coincidence that it is almost as far from Nov elections as possible? I think we should hold national elections on April 16th! That would change a lot.

I can give 1,000 in taxes or 1,000 to local and national charities and get 10 times the effect.

The lottery just doesn't seem to really change the equation, it is like kirks son's use of anti-matter, a folly!
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
stubeeef said:
A recent breakdown of who pays what by % ...

The lottery just doesn't seem to really change the equation, it is like kirks son's use of anti-matter, a folly!
I thought that was "proto-matter" used in the Genesis Matrix.

If he had used "anti-matter" he would have been building a Darwin Matrix.

;)
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
Sun Baked said:
I thought that was "proto-matter" used in the Genesis Matrix.

If he had used "anti-matter" he would have been building a Darwin Matrix.

;)
Oviously! How could I have confused those! Silly of me, good of you to correct me. Genesis is folly to duplicate, for we are not supernatural, and darwin matrix takes too long! ;)
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
stubeeef said:
Oviously! How could I have confused those! Silly of me, good of you to correct me. Genesis is folly to duplicate, for we are not supernatural, and darwin matrix takes too long! ;)
Well if you make as many shortcuts with the Darwin Matrix as David Marcus did with the Genesis Matrix in order to shrink the uber long process, your only reward will be the Darwin Award. ;)
 

pseudobrit

macrumors 68040
Jul 23, 2002
3,418
4
Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
I don't like what gambling does to a certain percentage of the population either, but like alcohol, tobacco and someday marijuana, there are some things that you just have to live with. I think it's better if the state controls the business of necessary vice.
 

Roger1

macrumors 65816
Jun 3, 2002
1,152
0
Michigan
blackfox said:
divorced from the (very real) considerations of your post, the Lottery is a big revenue-generator for the State and most of them sure could use the money.

I despise gambling, but if the revenue goes to something like Education, then I can probably live with it.

also here in Oregon we have video-poker machines (referred to as video-crack) which in many cases make more money for the businesses they are located in (bars primarily) than their actual sales. So that kinda helps small businesses.

Gambling is a tricky thing, as it is technically voluntary in nature (for many).
In Michigan, something like 600 million went to school districts(from the lottery). A school discrict of about 3400-3500 students gets about 30 million dollars in funding. Just to help put it in perspective.
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
Roger1 said:
In Michigan, something like 600 million went to school districts(from the lottery). A school discrict of about 3400-3500 students gets about 30 million dollars in funding. Just to help put it in perspective.
Yes, they get that funding, but are they the exception and get more than they would have using tax dollars. It seems as soon as the lotto money rolls in the tax monies are pulled out and the schools net no more than they would have without the lotto.
 

Roger1

macrumors 65816
Jun 3, 2002
1,152
0
Michigan
I'm not sure if it works that way, but I do know recently we've had our budget cut several times in the last couple of years. It's been around 40-50 dollars per kid, but that adds up after a while.
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,915
1,466
Palookaville
stubeeef said:
Yes, they get that funding, but are they the exception and get more than they would have using tax dollars. It seems as soon as the lotto money rolls in the tax monies are pulled out and the schools net no more than they would have without the lotto.
That's exactly right -- it's the old bait and switch routine. General tax dollars are withdrawn as the lotto money comes on line. After a short while, the schools become heavily dependent on how many people are willing to gamble away their incomes. Supporting education with vice just never seemed like a good fit to me.
 

takao

macrumors 68040
Dec 25, 2003
3,825
432
Dornbirn (Austria)
personally i have absolutly nothing against it ..just like anyother thing that doesn'T affect other persons

my father plays from time to time when there is more to win ...

never played myself


for visiting casinos here you have to be 21 ...compared to drinking beer/smoking 16,drinking strong stuff/driving car/voting 18 it's rather high age

and of course you only can get in with a suit including tie (or better) ;)
 

Mechcozmo

macrumors 603
Jul 17, 2004
5,215
2
takao said:
for visiting casinos here you have to be 21 ...compared to drinking beer/smoking 16,drinking strong stuff/driving car/voting 18 it's rather high age
In California, it is 15.5 for a permit, 16 for restricted license, 18 to drive. But that is changing to 17.5 for permit, 18 you drive with some restrictions. I dunno any more than that. And it is 21 to drink.