Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ada1981 1399 days ago
The lottery seems like a really dumb thing.
1 comments

Compare it to something like voting. There's a vanishingly small chance that your personal vote is going to sway any issue. The benefits of voting are only felt at a societal level rather than a personal one.

Lotto also has societal benefits, like funding schools and keeping organized crime out of the casual gambling market. Plus it's fun, on the order of, say, eating a mini bag of Doritos while you're stuck for three hours in a train station (but without the calories).

So why does the "I know math" crowd deplore the lottery but not voting? I'm guessing the real answer is that one is looked at as a low-class activity and one a high-class activity.

Edit: Just to be clear, my point isn't that voting is bad, it's that lotto isn't a pure math problem.

My view is that voting can still have a significant impact, even if you lose an election. A district seen as "safe" for one party that suddenly becomes more contested after one election (which happened many times recently) can inspire more attention to the district and its issues by more parties.

A narrow win or loss, in many contexts, can also lead to different decisions by the winners (especially if they seek re-election later) compared to a massive win or massive loss. In addition, voting is free (except for the time spent), whereas the costs from lottery tickets can add up.

I agree with you, though, that the lottery can actually have societal benefits. A notable example is that in Georgia, USA, a scholarship program for university is funded entirely by the state's lottery system (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOPE_Scholarship).

The vast majority of lotto cash comes from poor people. It’s a regressive / intelligence tax.

The government encouraging poor people to make a poor financial decision is really bad social policy IMO.