Is Lotto a Tax on the Poor?

A

Adamalia

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
What do you think of the lottery game? Just another tax on the poor, or a decent way of making it big (someday).

It is one of those games where you just have to be in it, to win it. However, over the long term, just like any other form of gambling, the house will always be ahead.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Yes.
All is does is take money from the poor then give it to one person to make them rich. It's pretty much the complete opposite of what most governments try to achieve (taxing rich, benefits to poor). (No responses regarding politics to that please :p)
 
Given the odds it is definitely not a decent way of making it big someday, but it is also definitely not a tax on the poor (or anyone else) either. No one is forced to buy a ticket.

Dave
 
The lottery is a hard one. I've never bought a lottery ticket because the odds are ridiculous and if I want to gamble I'd sooner make an informed bet on the football so it's at least a little more than astronomically long odds.

The reason it's hard for me is because the lottery funds many very worthwhile causes, but it does so typically by taking money off those who can't spare a lot. It also encourages people to play every week because it'd be a hard pill to swallow missing the week your numbers come up - an emotion they play on with their adverts about playing from home.

Ultimately, I think people can spend their money how they see fit. I do think you're daft if you buy a ticket with any expectation. If it's just a bit of fun to watch the draw on Saturday evening or whenever it is then that's fine. If people are seeing it as a lifeline to financial problems then they really are stupid.
 
No, it's not a tax. Tax you have to pay, but you have a choice whether to by a lotto ticket. I look on my lotto ticket fee as one of my donations to charity. :)
 
Tringa said:
Given the odds it is definitely not a decent way of making it big someday, but it is also definitely not a tax on the poor (or anyone else) either. No one is forced to buy a ticket.

Dave
Click to expand...

Correct. Bit of a strange question to ask.
 
It is not a tax on the poor, or anyone else for that matter. Although as with most things the government takes it cut.

Mind you have noticed that there are very few betting shops in affluent areas, now that is something I am more concerned with.
 
I think it is quite ironic that a lot of poor people moan about how awful rich people are and yet buy lottery tickets in order to become one of those very people they hate so much...
 
Adamalia said:
What do you think of the lottery game? Just another tax on the poor, or a decent way of making it big (someday).
Click to expand...

Is being poor a requirement to purchase a lottery ticket then?
 
Neither is it a tax on the poor, comfortable or rich, it's simply a matter of choice
 
It's hardly a tax it's just a choice purchase.
 
I wouldn't call it a tax on the poor, but I would describe it as a potential form of gambling addiction. There are many people buying tickets, purely out of desperation, often spending far more than they can afford.
The following is a good article about online gambling addiction, and I would say for some people, expenditure on the Lotto can be just as serious.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...as-online-gambling-hits-2bn-mark-8468376.html

The government is in a "win win" situation, receiving tax from the sales of tickets, whilst seeing the people funding things - sports, charities - which may otherwise be left to the government.
 
I think the poor pay enough tax as it is, what with the duty on beer, fags etc not to mention the 20% VAT on Xbox and PS3 games:D
 
As it is a choice, a good choice for a select few and a poor one for the rest. It cannot be a TAX.
Until after the next general election THEN IT WILL BECOME ONE....... :lol:
 
Isn't it a bit harshly known for being a tax on the stupid? The odds are astronomical, but someone has to win it and a little flutter once a week isn't too bad.
 
Not on the poor and not a tax - it's a voluntary contribution made by the greedy!

We were very lucky and won just under £100 in the first 2 draws when it first started. We were picking numbers at random and doing a fiver a week and when we were even a few months later (without a single other win!), we stopped doing it.

Nearly joined a syndicate who were doing several sets of numbers every week but the same sets of numbers. One week one of the regular sets came up with 5 numbers but the chap who was supposedly doing the draws hadn't been - he had been chancing it and paying the few £10 wins out of the thievings but when a reasonably big win turned up, he vanished!

Much as I would love to win millions, we would rather have a guaranteed extra £260 each year so we don't do it any more - any gambling I do now is on myself in games of skill rather than chance (and that's not very often and generally for lowish stakes).
 
joesmith said:
It's pretty much the complete opposite of what most governments try to achieve (taxing rich, benefits to poor). (No responses regarding politics to that please :p)
Click to expand...

Which country is this in?

As to lotto, the odds are in the trillions against winning, you've got more chance statistically of winning putting 50p on a horse.

Mentally to people? hope is something we are all capable of thinking, suppose to many out there they hope their personal odds will change.

I also agree with the words of "gambling addictions" which are terrible things to live with as a person or family member, that and knowing an ex gambling addict
if you look at their facebook and emails their details got sold left right and centre to be barraged with various gambling emails. CRAZY!
 
Trillions? Isn't it closer to (about) 16 million to one against of getting all 6 and rather better than that of getting 5 (plus bonus), 4 or 3?
 
Winning the lottery jackpot (the original one - i.e. 6 no's is just shy of 14 million to one.

I don't often buy a ticket, but occasionally will pick up a euromillions etc.... i.e. not fussed if i don't have one.

Odds of wining euromillions are around 75,000,000 to 1. However, there's usually someone who does every now are again. My theory is if i have a ticket my chances of winning are tiny but remain infintessimally greater than had I not got a ticket.

I suppose all things are relative.... you often see for the national, someone sticks down £10k each way, but if they are a multimillionaire or on £250,000 a well hoofing a ball around that's peanuts.
 
Nod said:
Trillions? Isn't it closer to (about) 16 million to one against of getting all 6 and rather better than that of getting 5 (plus bonus), 4 or 3?
Click to expand...

Depends on if you count in the chance of being the sole winner of the jackpot, then the calculator runs out of digits :eek:
 
ecoleman said:
Is buying a 50" flat screen TV a tax on the poor?

You don't have to buy one, but you can guarantee most poor people have one.
Click to expand...

Paid for by your and my taxes half the bloody time!!
 
BarryDawsib said:
Depends on if you count in the chance of being the sole winner of the jackpot, then the calculator runs out of digits :eek:
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. The odds of any given ticket winning the jackpot are the same. Based upon randomness and probability, sometimes 2 people win, sometimes no one wins.

One of the early draws, there was something daft like 133 jackpot winners or something crazy.

This was explained by low numbers (sub 31) coming out and a people "randomly" (it's not random) selecting their numbers by birthdays, the age of the cat etc...
 
BarryDawsib said:
Depends on if you count in the chance of being the sole winner of the jackpot, then the calculator runs out of digits :eek:
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. The odds of any given ticket winning the jackpot are the same. Based upon randomness and probability, sometimes 2 people win, sometimes no one wins.

One of the early draws, there was something daft like 133 jackpot winners or something crazy.

This was explained by low numbers (sub 31) coming out and a people "randomly" (it's not random) selecting their numbers by birthdays, the age of the cat etc...
 
It gives poor people with limited earning ability the only chance they will ever have to get a lot of money legally.

Personally, I've never gambled on anything, but I can see why many people do, it gives them hope, however unrealistic that hope is.

What bothers me is the number of people who are obviously spending money that they can't afford - money that would be better spent on food - but then you can say the same thing about fags and booze.
 
Surely scratchcards are worse? Instant gratification any time of day or night, better odds but much smaller prizes, but the same cost for a shot.... And in the nicest possible way most people I see buying four number sixes and four number threes look like they'd be better off spending the money on fruit n veg, pet food for the poor mutt they've dragged with them, or clothes. Might just be my experience, I've lived in some not great places.

I've occasionally bought a lucky dip for the "proper" lottery, but other than that I'm not really a gambler, other vices take up far too much time and money. I am of course talking about photography :P
 
I've played the lottery on and off for years and never won anything substatial.

A couple of months ago i stuck £1k into premium bonds and won £100 the first draw. Thing is the money is always there, i have 1000 chances of winning something every month (1100 chances now) and if I don't win anything, my capital is still all there.
 
A tax on the poor? Mmm I'm not sure I'll have to ask my butler:D
 
Garry Edwards said:
It gives poor people with limited earning ability the only chance they will ever have to get a lot of money legally.

Personally, I've never gambled on anything, but I can see why many people do, it gives them hope, however unrealistic that hope is.

What bothers me is the number of people who are obviously spending money that they can't afford - money that would be better spent on food - but then you can say the same thing about fags and booze.
Click to expand...

Garry, twelve years ago I worked with a woman in her late fifties, who had been doing the lottery since it started, and she said that she was surprised she hadn't won it yet, because that was going to be her retirement fund:(
She was a lovely person, and I just could not say anything.
 
As others have said, it is no way a tax on anyone. I have played the lottery in syndicates at work since it started paying in just £2 a week each then dividing the winnings at Christmas. Some years we've had £30-£40 each some years we've had just over £10 each. We have had a couple of wins resulting in just over £200 each and the other gave us £2500 each.
We've stopped the syndicate now but I still play a couple of lines on Saturday and Wednesday and also a couple of lines on the two Euro lotteries, which I've played on my own for several years now. I usually get 6-10 small wins a year on the euro.
Had a nice surprise from the Halifax last week though. Got home to find a letter from them that had to be signed for. I'd won a prize in the April draw, there was three £100k, a hundred £1k and a thousand £100 prizes, I just had to take the letter into the bank with some proof of ID to claim my prize. Turned out to be £100, but not bad for nothing.
 
I can't believe people can suggest the Lotto is a tax on the poor while keeping a straight face. You have any idea how patronising that remark is?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top