One thing to be said of lotteries is that it is the only kind of unskilled gambling that makes sense.
Besides any rare possible ability to effect/predict the results there is no reason to gamble. (excluding games of skill such as BlackJack, Poker, sports bets) But playing the lottery does make sense, sure the odds of winning are not too high however the pay out is large enough to make the pittance invested worthwhile. However a law that prohibits how much can be spent on lotteries would make sense, after all do you really gain by buying more tickets, does it really matter if you have a 49% chance of winning or a .000001% chance of winning (over all games) as either way you are probably going to lose. Otherwise the only reason for gambling (other than the minimal entertainment value) would be in the event that you HAD to have an extra 2-5% of your 'bank' for an emergency, and such occasions are relatively rare and the risk of losing money in a martingaling system is still quite high. On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Horace Heffner wrote: > > > > On Dec 31, 2008, at 4:28 AM, R C Macaulay wrote: > > > >> Compulsive gambling is one of the most insidious forms of addiction. > > > > So true. And the addiction is compounded by free drinks and environments > > and games specifically designed for psychological impact. > > And it can be triggered by completely innocent actions on the part of > the "soon-to-be" compulsive gamblers. Anyone with RLS (Restless Leg > Syndrome) may be at risk for becoming a compulsive gambler, at least if > neither they nor their doctor happens to be aware of one of the more > bizarre side effects of the drugs used to treat the condition. See, for > example: > > http://www.mdvu.org/emove/article.asp?ID=920 > > http://www.mayoclinic.org/news2007-rst/3918.html > > http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/08/09/primarysource/entry3152310.shtml > > As some shrinks have observed, compulsive gamblers of any sort tend to > be very reluctant to talk about their problems, and often try to hide > their compulsion from friends, family, and doctors. Consequently the > number of "victims" of this particularly strange side effect may be a > great deal larger than the number of documented cases. > > Addictive behaviours of all sorts seem to be closely tied together from > the point of view of what's going on in the brain, and messing with the > dopamine receptors is never a good idea. > > State lotteries also are funded in part by compulsive gamblers, and in > fact generally "tax" the least well to do the most heavily. This is > highly unfair; the lotteries are among the most regressive of taxes. > Unfortunately, they are politically far more popular than the more > "fair" graduated income tax, and in fact the people lotteries hurt worst > are exactly the ones who want states to continue to offer them. > > > > However, > > according to Wiki [see Strickland reference below], 70% of the gambling > > profits come from people who are not "problem" gamblers. > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slot_machine > > > > "It is estimated that thirty percent or more of the profits from > > gambling machines come from problem gamblers." [Strickland, Eliza > > (2008-06-16). "Gambling with science: Determined to defeat lawsuits over > > addiction, the casino industry is funding research at a > > Harvard-affiliated lab". Salon. See: > > http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/06/16/gambling_science/] > > > > I think there is a serious need to scientifically determine just how > > many problem gamblers would not have been exposed to their problem if > > they knew the full truth about gambling machines, and to determine how > > effective proper training in this regard can be in assisting treatment > > of existing patients. > > > > It is also clearly important to determine what means is effective for > > training the other 70% of people as well. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Horace Heffner > > http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/<http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/> > > > > > > > > > >
