Are state sponsored lotteries morally correct?

[joeybaggz]

People do not start businesses to make a positive impact.

Anybody ever stop and think that Jesus was a businessman? He ran a business (his step-father started it), I assume charged fair prices for good work, and made a profit.

When are the liberal morons going to stop equating the word profit with something evil? I mean I realize that you all believe in practicing your pity, or charity, or religious beliefs with the contents of someone else’s wallet, but that doesn’t make it right, or you moral in some way. The world is built on the honest efforts of people building businesses to make a profit and better their situation in life.

And as to the OP, lotteries are nothing more than voluntary taxation. As to the poor being bilked, again, when is everyone going to realize that people have the right to make their own choices, even if they are bad ones? Butt out!

 

[peary]

Not that I completely disagree but…
Is hope a bad thing? Do you mean false or irrational hope?
What about two year colleges that promise great jobs if you attend their courses?
If an individual can not make a rational decision about purchasing lottery tickets are they incapable of making competant decisions in other aspects of their life? at what point do you deem such people to incompetent and appoint a guardian for them? If they do not have a guardian then should it be assumed that they are capable for making such decisions for themselves?

**The state lottery offers false and irrational hope to the disadvantaged. It is the poor and disadvantaged in our society that make up most of those who play it.

Many poor and disadvantaged people do not make rational decisions because their emotional and material needs are greater than that of the rest of us.

I used to play the lottery for years in the hopes of striking it ‘big’. Coming to my senses, I now save whatever I would have used for the lottery each week and send it to a charity.**

 

[stbruno]

Going back to the op’s orginal question. As long as the money spent by those who purchase lottery tix does not take food or shelter etc from those who need it the most, it seems to be morally correct. After all, don’t churches have parish sponsored raffles and bingo to help supplement their church activities?

 

[vz71]

The state lottery offers false and irrational hope to the disadvantaged. It is the poor and disadvantaged in our society that make up most of those who play it.

What false hope is this?
That they could strike it rich? Someone does.
Is it an offer of false hope, or is it their own unreasonable expectations?

Many poor and disadvantaged people do not make rational decisions because their emotional and material needs are greater than that of the rest of us.

The answer to that is education, not restriction.

I used to play the lottery for years in the hopes of striking it ‘big’. Coming to my senses, I now save whatever I would have used for the lottery each week and send it to a charity.

Kudos for you. You’ve seen through the allure of easy cash and observed the long odds that are actually in place.
However, shouldn’t everyone have the opportunity to ‘come to their senses’ rather then just label something that is actually morally ambiguous as immoral?

 

[peary]

shouldn’t everyone have the opportunity to ‘come to their senses’ rather then just label something that is actually morally ambiguous as immoral?

The lottery is a form of deceptive gambling. It is institutionalized sin, as far as I am concerned.

 

[Monicathree]

And I truly ask this with a curious heart…
Do you think tobacco companies selling cigarettes are in institutionalized sin, as well. NOTHING truly good comes from cigarette smoking and we know it kills.
Just because that is a strong statement to make about the lotteries.

Thanks

 

[royal_archer]

The state lottery offers false and irrational hope to the disadvantaged. It is the poor and disadvantaged in our society that make up most of those who play it…

Can’t the same be said of fly by night schools who give people false hope that getting a certificate in managemetn will get them a management job at a forutune 500 company? What about all of the high school and college sports teams who give students false hopes they will get a career in sports? Do you think those activities should be shut down also?

Many poor and disadvantaged people do not make rational decisions because their emotional and material needs are greater than that of the rest of us…

Playing along with your assertion. What do you think we should do about these people in other aspects of life? If as you say they do not make rational decisions, should they be able to open a bank account or have credit cards? should they be allowed to opperate dangerous machinery?

I used to play the lottery for years in the hopes of striking it ‘big’. Coming to my senses, I now save whatever I would have used for the lottery each week and send it to a charity.

Cosidering much of the money goes to good causes within the state I consider the lottery to be a charity.

 

[Monicathree]

I have to agree. I see nothing wrong with them. As a matter of fact, I wish our state would have one. As long, as moderation and control are used. If the funds are going towards good things and one is not being a degenerate about it spending money that is needed for other essentials…it is fine.
Anything, can be seen as sinful if it is just a matter of control, right? Food, reading, clothes, coffee, going out to lunch etc…I think my point is clear.
If there is no intrinsic evil in it, and it is benefiting many people…it should be fine.

just my :twocents:

shux if I won the lottery I could have given more

 

[Ted_in_Charlott]

govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc/research/lotteries.html

Quoting: This link is widely recognized, even by those in the industry. In the words of one lottery director: “[G]ambling, including playing the lottery, is … potentially addictive and can be dangerous and destructive for some people, some of the time.” 46 The new games “have created what was once an almost unthinkable link between lotteries and compulsive behavior.”

Are our consciences so seered that we believe our governments can do anything and it is moral? Cigarettes, liquor, abortion, and lotteries are all “legal”.

Lotteries are not a voluntary tax, they are predatory on minorities and the poor, offering hope in the form of the chance to be a millionaire. We as Catholics, people of God, should not put our hope in the things of the world by wasting the money God has made us stewards. We should be beacons of hope not promoters of usury.

Also, the following article outlines the 4 fold test of whether or not gambling is illicit:

Theologians commonly require four conditions so that gaming may not be illicit.

What is staked must belong to the gambler and must be at his free disposal. It is wrong, therefore, for the lawyer to stake the money of his client, or for anyone to gamble with what is necessary for the maintenance of his wife and children.
The gambler must act freely, without unjust compulsion.
There must be no fraud in the transaction, although the usual ruses of the game may be allowed. It is unlawful, accordingly, to mark the cards, but it is permissible to conceal carefully from an opponent the number of trump cards one holds.
Finally, there must be some sort of equality between the parties to make the contract equitable; it would be unfair for a combination of two expert whist players to take the money of a couple of mere novices at the game.
If any of these conditions be wanting, gambling becomes more or less wrong; and, besides, there is generally an element of danger in it which is quite sufficient to account for the bad name which it has.

newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm

 

[royal_archer]

…Lotteries are not a voluntary tax, they are predatory on minorities and the poor, offering hope in the form of the chance to be a millionaire. We as Catholics, people of God, should not put our hope in the things of the world by wasting the money God has made us stewards. We should be beacons of hope not promoters of usury…

While it may be appropriate to address people based on their decisions, this crosses a line. Lotteries do not single out and prey on any genetic group. Nor is any money taken from these people against their will.

Even as Catholics we are allowed to use some of the money we earn for entertainment.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. . . Lotteries do not single out and prey on any genetic group. . . .

While I don’t have quantitative data, it appears to me that lottery advertising and sales locations focus on lower income groups.

 

[peary]

And I truly ask this with a curious heart…
Do you think tobacco companies selling cigarettes are in institutionalized sin, as well. NOTHING truly good comes from cigarette smoking and we know it kills.
Just because that is a strong statement to make about the lotteries.

Thanks

**No. Lotteries give the poor and disadvantaged false hope with the promise of a financial quick fix, and money used for it should be going for the needs of the family. Gambling can become an addiction which means it can turn into a mental illness. Gambling can also turn into crime.

Cigarette addiction is physical. The body craves nicotine. You are introducing a foreign physical substance into your body which will have physical repercussions. Cigarette companies that jack up the nicotine in their product are preying on the physical weakness of one’s body to become nicotine-addicted. Is that a sin? Probably, but in a different sort of way. **

 

[royal_archer]

While I don’t have quantitative data, it appears to me that lottery advertising and sales locations focus on lower income groups.

My experience is that they sell the tickets at convienence stores. I don’t see how that is targeting lower income groups. Also My comment (which you quoted) was on the previous posters assertion that lotteries harmed minorities not on the assertion that it impacted the poor.

 

[peary]

**Our state (Illinois) should not spend millions trying to convince people to gamble on a lottery ticket rather than investing their money for themselves or their families. A lottery is an inefficient way to raise money since two-thirds of the sales goes to administrative costs, marketing, and prizes. Only 34 cents from the sale of a $1 ticket end up in the state coffers.

Much of the money that does end up in the state treasury is revenue the state would have received anyway through sales tax. The money that a lottery generates often comes from a shifting of revenue. Instead of buying clothes, magazines, or other goods, people use their money to purchase lottery tickets. Poor areas, in particular, lose sales revenue that provides money for schools and other local services.

States spend millions of dollars trying to convince people to spend what little money they have on a lottery ticket rather than investing it in an education for themselves or their children – an expenditure that has a much greater probability of financial return and getting them out of their poverty-stricken neighborhoods than the lottery ticket.

False hope inspired by deceptive, state-sponsored advertising combined with desperate economic conditions leads the poor to spend more money on lottery tickets than any other group. Research has shown thatpeople with incomes below $5,000 spent 14 times as much on the lottery as those with incomes above $25,000. In Massachusetts, for example, lower income people spent 15 times as much as those in the higher income group, and in Maryland, they spent 21 times as much.

The State should ensure a steady source of funds for education and other vital programs by eliminating loopholes that allow corporations to avoid millions of dollars each year in taxes. Making corporations and the affluent pay their fair share is a more responsible role for government than encouraging citizens to spend their money on a one-in-13 million chance to get rich. And that’s all I have to say about it.**

 

[Monicathree]

I understand…
but, when you invest isn’t that in a sense hoping that the stock does well? I guess you could just say the odds of winning the lottery are much less, however the logic is still the same. People are spending their money on hope.

 

[royal_archer]

**Our state (Illinois) should not spend millions trying to convince people to gamble on a lottery ticket rather than investing their money for themselves or their families. A lottery is an inefficient way to raise money since two-thirds of the sales goes to administrative costs, marketing, and prizes. Only 34 cents from the sale of a $1 ticket end up in the state coffers.

Much of the money that does end up in the state treasury is revenue the state would have received anyway through sales tax. The money that a lottery generates often comes from a shifting of revenue. Instead of buying clothes, magazines, or other goods, people use their money to purchase lottery tickets. Poor areas, in particular, lose sales revenue that provides money for schools and other local services. .**

If you are getting 34 cents for every dollar spent in the form of sales tax then you have to have about a 51.5% sales tax. (66 cent item plus 34cent tax = 1.00 dolar spent.)

States spend millions of dollars trying to convince people to spend what little money they have on a lottery ticket rather than investing it in an education for themselves or their children – an expenditure that has a much greater probability of financial return and getting them out of their poverty-stricken neighborhoods than the lottery ticket. .

Lotteries are entertainment. Lottery administrators are not trying to convince people to forgo an education to play, they are trying to get people to use their disposable income that would normally go to other entertainment.

Also, what is wrong with living in a poverty stricken neighborhood? As long as someone has a solid roof over their head Why should anyone think less of them because they would rather put their extra money into something other than a nicer home?

False hope inspired by deceptive, state-sponsored advertising combined with desperate economic conditions leads the poor to spend more money on lottery tickets than any other group. Research has shown thatpeople with incomes below $5,000 spent 14 times as much on the lottery as those with incomes above $25,000. In Massachusetts, for example, lower income people spent 15 times as much as those in the higher income group, and in Maryland, they spent 21 times as much…

How many of those earning under $5000 are primary bread winners? How many of them are being supported by another person or the governement? Does the $5000 in reported income represent their true buying power? As such, I believe that just because someone earns less than $5000 that is not evidence that they can not afford a lottery ticket.

Also the perceived value of the payoffs will seem more attractive to those who are at lower income levels. For those in the middle class it may take a 6 or 7 digit pay off to make a significant difference in their lives. Those in lower income levels may feel a 4 or 5 digit payoff will make a significant difference in their lives. To the degree that this applies, this is not a matter of states targeting low income families, it is a matter of low income families finding more perceived value.

The State should ensure a steady source of funds for education and other vital programs by eliminating loopholes that allow corporations to avoid millions of dollars each year in taxes. Making corporations and the affluent pay their fair share is a more responsible role for government than encouraging citizens to spend their money on a one-in-13 million chance to get rich. And that’s all I have to say about it.

States do not have money to give to those programs unless the state takes money through coercion or provides an incentive for people to give the money to the state. Lotteries are among the most fair form of taxation in that they allow people to contribute as they see fit.

 

[royal_archer]

I understand…
but, when you invest isn’t that in a sense hoping that the stock does well? I guess you could just say the odds of winning the lottery are much less, however the logic is still the same. People are spending their money on hope.

You could also say the samething about those comercials for clothes, perfume, nice cars, etc. all of these use imagery of peoples lives being better if they use the advertised product.

 

[peary]

If you are getting 34 cents for every dollar spent in the form of sales tax then you have to have about a 51.5% sales tax. (66 cent item plus 34cent tax = 1.00 dolar spent.)
Lotteries are entertainment. Lottery administrators are not trying to convince people to forgo an education to play, they are trying to get people to use their disposable income that would normally go to other entertainment.
Also, what is wrong with living in a poverty stricken neighborhood? As long as someone has a solid roof over their head Why should anyone think less of them because they would rather put their extra money into something other than a nicer home?
How many of those earning under $5000 are primary bread winners? How many of them are being supported by another person or the governement? Does the $5000 in reported income represent their true buying power? As such, I believe that just because someone earns less than $5000 that is not evidence that they can not afford a lottery ticket.
Also the perceived value of the payoffs will seem more attractive to those who are at lower income levels. For those in the middle class it may take a 6 or 7 digit pay off to make a significant difference in their lives. Those in lower income levels may feel a 4 or 5 digit payoff will make a significant difference in their lives. To the degree that this applies, this is not a matter of states targeting low income families, it is a matter of low income families finding more perceived value.
States do not have money to give to those programs unless the state takes money through coercion or provides an incentive for people to give the money to the state. Lotteries are among the most fair form of taxation in that they allow people to contribute as they see fit.

Nothing you state about the lottery is going to change my mind.
And I can[t believe you actually are serious with the question: “What is wrong with living in a poverty-stricken neighborhood?” WOW!!**

 

[vz71]

No. Lotteries give the poor and disadvantaged false hope with the promise of a financial quick fix, and money used for it should be going for the needs of the family. Gambling can become an addiction which means it can turn into a mental illness. Gambling can also turn into crime.

Again though, is this the fault of the lottery or is this the fault of an unreasonable expectation from those that participate.

I see no false hope here. The odds of winning are posted.
I see individuals expecting a payout when the odds are against it.

So how exactly do you address this?
What exactly is wrong with the lottery?

 

[royal_archer]

Nothing you state about the lottery is going to change my mind.
And I can[t believe you actually are serious with the question: “What is wrong with living in a poverty-stricken neighborhood?” WOW!!**

I’ve lived in nice neighborhoods, I’ve lived in slums, I’ve even lived in my car. I was just as happy in the slum as in the suburbs. A solid roof, safe heater, and running water is sufficient, all else is a luxury.