[fooqux]

People have a tendency to think they're special, that they won't (or will) be the outlier. Gambling, unprotected sex, etc. We're not great at risk evaluation/comparison.

But hey, without this, our public schools wouldn't get funding from lottery tickets! So I'm forced to conclude it's a good thing.

[garg]

The lottery paying for schooling is a clever self-defeating policy because it moves the tax-burden to the same people who would most benefit from a good public school system.

[wslh]

True, people consistently overestimate their chances of being the exception. But in parallel, I think we also lack hype around the opposite direction: learning to live with less, intentionally and intelligently.

I'm not talking about UBI or forced austerity, but about developing smarter ways to live frugally without feeling deprived. That mindset would relieve a lot of the pressure that the "you must win the startup lottery" narrative creates.

[fooqux]

That's antithetical to capitalism and consumerism. Not to mention human nature. While I agree with you in principle, I don't know how one would even start to effect any change here at a societal level. Especially when it's impossible to not be bombarded with marketing from people who are extremely good at using your emotions against you here.

Well, I suppose I do know of one. Mindfulness training I think has been shown to help with this, but that's still at a very personal level.

[wslh]

Capitalism or consumerism don't define human nature. Human behaviour existed long before those systems, and it will exist long after them.

What has changed, and this is where I agree with your point about difficulty, is the scale and precision of behavioural manipulation. We've never had a period where advertising, content, and emotional triggers were personalized with such speed and accuracy. Tobacco harmed the body, today's hyper-personalized content ecosystems can easily harm attention, mood regulation, and overall mental health.

So yes, it's hard to shift things at a societal level when the environment is engineered to keep people reactive.

On mindfulness: in its modern form it's often packaged as another consumer product, but its roots, like those of yoga, Zen, and other contemplative traditions, come from outside capitalist logic. The original practices were tools for resisting impulse and cultivating awareness, not selling calmness subscriptions.

[JKCalhoun]

"Christ's teachings" (well, many religions in general) should also have that effect? (I'm an atheist though, so what do I know. Some of my best takeaways from the Second Testament though are that we should be kind, content…)

[morcus]

It is not your main point, I know - but for everyone I know who buys lottery tickets, they're more thought of as an entertainment purchase than a financial purchase.

[fooqux]

I've heard this argument before about casinos, but never lottery tickets. I'm not sure I personally buy that, but let's go with it.

If they're entertaining, then presumably it's from the thrill of maybe winning. Why would winning be thrilling? Why, because you get money- potentially a life-changing amount of it. If they made a lotto game with a maximum payout of a dollar I'm reasonably certain nobody would play it. Or hell, anyone could write down a series of heads/tails on a paper and then flip a coin to see if they're a winner! Yet, we don't see that, even though it's free and (I would argue) has the same entertainment value.

So yeah, I'm sure entertainment is the facade, but underneath it all, it's financially motivated for the vast majority.

[JKCalhoun]

Might tell us more about the people you know than the typical lottery ticket purchaser?

(Or perhaps they're when they tell you it is "for entertainment" they're entertaining fantasies of winning—which is probably what you can say for a lot of people buying lottery tickets.)