On Mon, 2003-06-30 at 19:42, Tom Brinkman wrote:
<Big snip - everybody agrees the odds are terrible>
Tom Brinkman:
>    In Texas it use to be about 1:16million. Lately they've changed 
> the lotto from pick 6 out of 50, match all 6 ... to pick 5 out'a 
> 50, match all, plus pick the right bonus ball pic (another 1 of the 
> same 50 possibles). To most (probability math challenged) it 
> appeared they were makin it easier to win, when it fact, the odds 
> against got much worse. Made a good cover for lowerin payout 
> percentages tho. What'a hell, 80% of the proceeds go to school 
> funding statewide. I still buy a ticket, we have no income tax ;)
> 
Ricard Urwin:
> > The only way to win at games of pure chance is to run the game.
> > A strange game; the only winning move is not to play.
> 
Tom:
>     Time is a factor. On a weekly basis, if you don't play you can't 
> win. On a lifetime basis, if you don't play, you do probly come out 
> ahead money wise. Psychology plays a part too, just depends on 
> whether you want to have some fun and spend a buck an take chances, 
> or sit around countin your saved pennies all your life. Hope plays 
> in too, not for winning the jackpot so much, but so many others 
> will play an we won't need an income tax to pay for education ;)
That's the trouble: the lottery is a tax on fools.  We've just about
stopped taxing everything else now: property, inherited wealth, dividend
and capital gains income, so all that's left is to tax the people who
can't calculate the odds.

Lottery gets plenty of free advertising too: when somebody wins the big
pile all the networks are there, watching him grin and promoting sales
for next week. We don't see the millions of others who are a little
short this week because they spent the money on the lottery instead of
something they really need. BC cartoon a couple of weeks ago: Lottery:
when 35 million stupid people make one stupid person look smart.

When we got our lottery the proceeds were dedicated to education: 
sounds good, except that the fungibility of money just meant that they
could cut the contribution to education from the general fund.

> -- 
> N. B. Day 


Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Reply via email to