[bombcar]

> I myself have never understood the thrill payoff that must exist for lottery ticket buyers, but I cannot call it a tax.

The thrill is being able to dream for a week about what you'd do with the winnings.

For the vast majority of "the poor" who buy a ticket, that's what they're buying.

There are also a few who spend all their money they might have on lottery tickets, but those aren't much of the total number of people.

[bluGill]

> The thrill is being able to dream for a week about what you'd do with the winnings.

I get the same thrill because I dream of finding the winning ticket on a sidewalk. Much cheaper, and the walk is good for me.

[lurk2]

> There are also a few who spend all their money they might have on lottery tickets, but those aren't much of the total number of people.

Is there any evidence of that? I can recall reading that alcohol consumption, for example, has a Pareto distribution skewing in favor of so-called "heavy users" (whom most of us would refer to as alcoholics). I'd imagine a lot of vice industries are similar. Is there any evidence to suggest lottery ticket purchases are distributed across a large number of infrequent, low-volume purchasers?

[jamesfinlayson]

I don't have numbers but many years ago I worked for a lotteries company and I know one person had the responsibility (among other things) of phoning up big spenders to check if they were exceeding their means. I remember one huge spender being an off-shore syndicate.

The company (and most lotto companies would be the same I'd guess) had little interest in taking money from problem gamblers too because in most cases their business is a monopoly so they're making good money anyway, and enabling problem gamblers would almost certainly be a breach of their license, so they'd be up for big fines (or in an extremely unlikely scenario, loss of their license). Contrast that with horse and sports betting companies where there's lots of competition and slim margins, so if you want to make money you need to take a bit from the problem gamblers.

That said, it probably is a Pareto distribution, but skewed: maybe 95% low/normal spenders, 4% syndicates/big spenders with means, 1% problem gamblers.

[bombcar]

You see some people now and then scratching tens of tickets, but the "pick the numbers" games are too slow for them.

Most of the people who are addicted want a quick hit, and so end up at a casino.

[autoexec]

> The thrill is being able to dream for a week about what you'd do with the winnings.

Exactly. and as bad as the odds are, it's still the best chance they have to ever be rich.