March 27, 2006
NY Lotto Under Pataki Just Keeps Raking It In
When we were little our parents would often tell us the same terrifying bedtime story: An old woman walks into a lawyers office demanding that they help her sue the criminals who have taken away all of her savings. The concerned lawyer asks the woman who could have done this to her so that he can help. She explains that she spent every one of her pennies on the Lotto because she had to win big sometime, right? But that now she is penniless and pension-less. The lawyer sighs, and sadly informs the poor woman that unfortunately no criminal activity had occurred as the people who took all of her money was her very own Government and that they were allowed by the citizens of New York to start a lottery, for good or bad, way back in 1966.
That story scared the wits out of us when we were tots and, well, actually, it still scares us.
And this story in today's Post certainly doesn't help. Seems that when George Pataki took over as Governor of New York the New York State Lottery was taking in about $2.4 billion dollars in sales annually. Nearly a dozen years later, thanks to lots of new scratch-offs and games like Quick Draw, New York State Lotto is taking in $6.2 billion annually. And that doesn't even include the video-slot machines that are going to pop up soon at New York racetracks.
Now, just to be clear here, we're not against gambling. Like prostitution (stick with us here), in many circumstances gambling is a perfectly reasonable vice that many grown-ups always have and always will partake, and most can do so responsibly. But the Lotto is barely gambling, it certainly isn't reasonable and most of the people who play it aren't often very responsible. It's a crooked scam set up to trick people who don't know any better into wasting away their money. We'd like to buy the States explanation that "New York Lottery continues to increase our revenues and therefore increases our aid to education every year" if only New York City weren't still suing the State to get the education funding we're entitled to. No, we have to agree with E.J. McMahon, of the Manhattan Institute, who points out that all the Lottery is actually funding is "an expansion of government [63%!] by sucking money out of the pockets of those who can't afford it. At the rate we're going, it will be like Nevada around here, with slots at every convenience store." Jeez, we hope not...
Mega Millions photo by triborough via G'ist Contribute.
|
That's a terrifying bedtiime story? The horrible Lotto guy? Maybe if you wanted to be an actuary at age 4, but doesn't measure up to Freddy Krueger or Keyser Soze, imo...
So, why is "expansion of government" inherently bad, again? Is it because government builds roads, educates children, funds beneficial scientific research, provides necessary social services, subsidizes public transportation, fights fires, provides our drinking water and polices our neighborhoods?
thats alot of money. mostly from the lower working classes, desperate for a gift of massive luck. what game could lure the rich? a state owned Masa!
There are also some, like the Kings County DA, who are suggesting that OTB parlors should also take sports bets replacing the criminals with the government (or other criminals depending on how you look at it). Historically, organized crime "ran numbers" which people bet on, then the state basically took it over rather profitably. The "numbers runners" seemed to die out from the legal competion.
Is the lottery good? Debatable.
Are the same people who would blow their money on illegal numbers the same who would play the lottery to excess? Perphaps.
That said I do get a MegaMillions ticket when the jackpot is absurdly high, but I don't go oveboard, just buying one or two tickets.
Oh, original photo here.
Lotto is effectively a tax on the poor and undereducated. Robin Hood in reverse. I agree there's something to be said for self-determination and freedom to choose to play the Lotto or not. But the fact of the matter is you will find more Lotto vendors in low-economic environments and you will find more people using these 'opportunities' as a way of grasping onto the 'hope' that they can change their fortunes. There's no such overriding temptations on every corner in bougie Scarsdale or the Upper East Side, neither is there an overwhelming desperation to be not poor in these areas. It's truly fucked up what the State is doing: preying on poor people.
The lottery is an immoral tax on the poor.
(BTW, does anyone have Saturday's numbers?)
Echoing what somebody else mentioned, "Lottery is tax for the stupid".
No need to only villify the poor; I know many well-to-do individuals who can't get over the latest powerball or whatever it is these days.
I hope for a time when people are held accountable for their own actions, particularly when it comes to spending their own money. If someone is such a moron that he spends his entire paycheck on Scratch & Wins rather than buying food for the family, I feel no sympathy for his lack of basic common sense.
Yes, it's pretty rotten that the lottery stands as a tax on the poor and stupid. And aggressive advertising/marketing of the lottery is outright indefensible... But it's the only form of joy in so many peoples lives. I have a relative who's very livelihood revolves around her silly scratch-offs. Admittedly, it is an extremely freaking sad commentary on her life. But again, it's the only thing she looks forward to in her day...
The poor are grown-ups and they can make grown-up decisions too.
The lottery screws the poor. They are the ones playing the lottery. Why doesn't the state just create higher taxes for everyone and get rid of the lottery.
State to poor: You have low taxes, now play the lottery and give us the money we are saving you.
Why doesn't the state save money on the lottery ads, the employees, etc. and just give that money to the schools.
The whole lottery thing should be banned. The odds in the New York lottery make slots look good. Screw that... they make gambling on sports through a bookie with hitmen look good.
If Pataki were in office another term the state would be pushing heroin.
Take away the lottery and people will just find other ways to gamble. Like most vices, the marketplace satisfies the demand. Some percentage of the population will always have problems with gambling. If it isn't the lottery it will be Atlantic City or Foxwoods or illegal sports books running out of Rich to Riches. The government could in theory shut down Atlantic City and Vegas but it could not now legally shut down Native American casinos. And if they could it would just then benefit the offshore gambling web sites. Think about how well government has done at controlling drugs and prostitution.
And they print the odds on the tickets. If you can't figure that 1:really huge number means you aren't going to win then I'd wager that you probably weren't going to save your way to financial independence anyway.
"So, why is "expansion of government" inherently bad, again?"
they have the monopoly on the legitimate use of force. just for that alone it's worthy of keeping an eye on before it gets to the uncomfortable "killing fields" stage.
a better question is why government should be involved in gambling in any way in the first place.
all of the money from the lotto should be used to fund education like in New Mexico and Georgia.
Then it least the money goes back into the community.
Hey "Whats so bad about big government" guy..
This is what is so bad. The government effectively awards itself a monopoly on gambling, and then when other people try to break in on its turf, they send out a swat team to kill their ass.
Government provision is monopoly provision. You wouldn't like Walmart being the only provider of goods in your neighborhoods would you? Theres not much of a difference.
Three points:
Does anyone here believe that it's moral for the state to be promoting gambling?
The state still claims that the money is "earmarked for education" when it actually just goes into the General Fund. It would be just as honest to say that the money is earmarked for paying George Pataki's salary.
Remember that this yahoo campaigned upstate by repeating that he would make sure that "no more of your hard earned money goes to THOSE PEOPLE in New York City." He also promised that he would never run for a third term.
Why is it that so many of you refuse to acknowledge that these are competent adults who choose to spend their money as they see fit -- be it on food for their children or on a scratch-off ticket. The state should not be the moral arbiter for the people. The sad reality is that a strong demand does exist for gambling, and simply abolishing state-sanctioned gambling will not stem this demand.
I'd rather have the government reap the financial windfall from its citizen's weaknesses and turn it around to fund education and other social programs, than to have that money go into the pockets of some corporation or illegal enterprise.