upvote

points

by SoftTalker5 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby tuvix5 hours ago|
next
[-]
The incentives driving state lotteries are not nearly as strong as those driving private companies like Draft Kings but yeah not great either.

Used to work at 7-Eleven and we would have people come in and out for hours on end pouring money into scratch tickets.

State lotteries are just a regressive tax targeting the poor.

reply
upvoteby autoexec4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> State lotteries are just a regressive tax targeting the poor.

As bad as the odds are, the lottery is still the best chance most players will ever have to be millionaires

reply
upvoteby fragmede4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
To be a millionaire, maybe, but a $300/month scrather habit over 20 years, in a 401k that's just the SP 500 gets you a quarter million dollars, which isn't nothing to retire on, vs approximately $0 from scratchers.
reply
upvoteby gambiting4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Dude no offense but you must be vastly overestimating how many people can save $300 a month. We're talking about people buying couple lottery tickets a month.
reply
upvoteby rootusrootus1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> We're talking about people buying couple lottery tickets a month

Those people do not have a gambling problem, though. They are dropping a few bucks a month to buy a daydream. It could be worse, they could be spending 10x that on Starbucks.

reply
upvoteby fragmede4 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
That's the problem though. I know many people who can't save $300/month, but easily spend that much in consumables, scratchers, alcohol, drugs, etc. On the subject of gambling addiction, $300/month by someone who can't afford it absolutely happens. Go to a GA meeting sometime. They get their paycheck, gamble it away, and then don't have money for rent. Unrestricted gambling is the devil and will be the downfall of America. I'm not one for "shoulds", but there should be something like an accredited gambler law, where you're not allowed to gamble more than 1/3rd your paycheck except in certain circumstances.
reply
upvoteby autoexec4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> there should be something like an accredited gambler law, where you're not allowed to gamble more than 1/3rd your paycheck except in certain circumstances.

What would that look like? Would gamblers have to send copies of their pay stubs or bank statements to every casino or gas station they visit and every gambling app they use? I'd be happy if we focused on restricting the most harmful actions of the companies who profit from the people they turned into addicts. No more online sports betting. No more adverting for gambling. No more targeting children with gambling in video games that accept real money for anything. No more using AI or surveillance to detect and target addicts.

reply
upvoteby fragmede3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Payday loan places usually look at paystubs before extending a loan, so all I'm suggesting is places where you can gamble have to implement the same technology. The restrictions you mention seem harder to pass under a banner of "but muh freedom".
reply
upvoteby gambiting4 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
So we're in agreement. Those people didn't have $300 to save on anything to begin with, they just spent it anyway at the expense of other needs.
reply
upvoteby DonaldPShimoda5 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
At least those often fund things like state education so, over time, the pool of victims is maybe lessened by the success of the program? Maybe?

(I am not defending state lotteries, but I do think there's some distinction to be made between "we actively exploit people to maximize our profits for our own sakes" and "we regulate the passive exploitation of people to supplement taxes in a regressive manner." Or something. I dunno, maybe somebody has more elaborate thoughts on this to share.)

reply
upvoteby cwnyth5 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
In many places where gambling is banned, there is still gambling. And in places where it's legalized, it can (in theory) be effectively regulated (if there's political will, which is difficult to muster sometimes). And say what you will about lotteries, but it's far easier to blow your life savings at casinos and with sports betting than buying a bunch of lottery tickets.
reply
upvoteby shipman054 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Permit lotteries. Ban lottery advertising. A moral government shouldn't advertise products known to be harmful to the public.
reply
upvoteby someonebaggy4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Can we just ban all advertising except for word of mouth (but including fake word of mouth)?
reply
upvoteby edoceo2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I'd be happy to stop billboards, other large public displays and those shitty coro-plast ones that jerks put next to the slip road telling me they pay cash for houses or have some magical mosquito treatment. Start there and work our way up?
reply
upvoteby segsgsgseg2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
yes you can enjoy the free speech you want and other people can't tell us more great one
reply
upvoteby edoceo2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Individual humans get free speech, not corporations.
reply
upvoteby Forgeties795 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Sports betting apps are so “gamified” now that many people don’t stand a chance. They’ve made a bleeding edge addiction platform
reply
upvoteby scottLobster5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
See nature preserves that are funded by regulated big game hunting of the preserved nature.

It's a fun moral question. At what point do you give up trying to make someone/a population healthier and say "well if you're going to be this way, we might as well get some use out of you"?

reply
upvoteby gosub1005 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
And the legal option makes it less likely that organized crime will jump in to offer the service.

(To me, it seems) The same people who screamed to legalize weed a few years ago are vehemently against alcohol and gambling.

reply
upvoteby reducesuffering4 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
"we regulate the passive exploitation of people to supplement taxes in a regressive manner."

I was convinced by this for a full 30 seconds before I realized there are millions of advertisements for the state lotteries. They aren't just regulating a market that will exist with or without the state, they are actively promoting and encouraging it

reply
upvoteby bigfishrunning3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Can only speak for Pennsylvania, where I live, but before the lottery there were numbers games run by organized crime. At least with a state-run lottery they're a bit more honest about how you're getting screwed and they can tax the winnings.
reply
upvoteby DANmode5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
> At least those often fund things like state education so, over time, the pool of victims is maybe lessened by the success of the program? Maybe?

You have some numbers to check.

(“Elaborate thoughts” aren’t needed here - are more people spending less on the lottery? where does each state spend the money?)

reply
upvoteby SpicyLemonZest5 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
I've got plenty of negative things to say about state government lotteries, but the ones I'm familiar with are structured in less predatory ways. It's hard to spend thousands of dollars on lottery tickets, and impossible to do so in a way that won't feel obviously stupid, especially since you can't buy them on your phone.
reply
upvoteby daeken2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
You can buy them on your phone in some states, e.g. Georgia. Their "scratch offs" look just like slot machines and give the same lovely dopamine spikes; used to drop $100 in every couple months when I just needed happy brain chemicals.
reply
upvoteby shipman054 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
especially since you can't buy them on your phone

Yet

reply