On Tuesday July 1 2003 10:03 am, N. B. Day wrote:
> 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.
Slow down N.B., as many in this thread have mentioned, there's
really no point in buyin more'n one chance. At that price it has
good entertainment value. The people you're wantin to portray as
victimized, are only done so by themselves, and come from all
stratum of society. Yes, you only see the poorer ones buyin scratch
off tickets $20 at a time over the counter at a convenience stores,
but there's some fat cats makin fools of themselves too. The problem
isn't the lotto. These 'victims', any level, would do it to
themselves anyhow. At least when gambling is state run, some of
it's proceeds can be channeled back to the public good.
>
> 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.
Well, ya learn somethin every day! I would'a bet 'fungibility'
wasn't a word ;) Still from the def's that I got,
interchangeability doesn't fit all that well. Consider the general
funds weren't funding education adequately. .... until the lotto
came along to supplement. Lotto, like anything else is just fine in
moderation. The persons excessively wastin their money, would jus
find somethin else to do it with. For the rest of us it's just a
cheap game with fantasy type rewards.... entertainment.
Anyhow, this is gettin to be proper discussion on the MandrakeOT
list. So forward it there, I'll not continue here.
--
Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
