1. Not sure where you see the bad math - your state government encourages you to do something with good (though unlikely) consequences, and encourages you to avoid something with bad (though unlikely) consequences.
2. It’s not only about you. Lottery proceeds are used for all sorts of good things. Being part of an infection chain could infect and kill many people.
3. Note that absent measures, the odds of contracting and dying would rise up enormously.
4. At any rate, that’s not what Levine’s excellent column is about.
I was not happy when the District of Columbia instituted its lottery about 1980. I already knew people who played the numbers, one at least who thought about what objects in her dreams meant for that. The lottery seemed to me a regressive tax, falling mostly on those who can spare the money least.
About that time, some journal reported that a certain state lottery offered worse odds than the old-time illegal numbers. Whether that is so, I don't know.
The good news for legislators is that people pay that regressive tax willingly. They will beef if you put up the taxes on property or gasoline, but not about lottery tickets.
1. What good consequences? Lottery winners are more likely to declare bankruptcy after their win, and are no happier than they were before. It's blatant false advertising. The ads even show winners utilizing fake (CGI) technology that doesn't exist. I don't see how this is even legal, except that it's produced by the state. Drug companies are required to list every possible side effect, but lotteries can just make up anything, and ignore any possible downsides.
2. Lottery proceeds are used as an excuse for removing other sources of funding for those things. I've never heard of a case where a public good was better funded after the creation of a lottery. And the people buying lottery tickets tend to be those least able to afford it -- it's a regressive tax.
3. Yes, if you ignore the lotto advertising, the public health announcement is a good use of billboard space. It takes on a completely different meaning, though, in the context of "Ignore statistics and just think about having fun!"
4. The column seems to be about people gambling away their money on risky ventures that will not pay off. Do you not agree that this describes the state lottery?
2. It’s not only about you. Lottery proceeds are used for all sorts of good things. Being part of an infection chain could infect and kill many people.
3. Note that absent measures, the odds of contracting and dying would rise up enormously.
4. At any rate, that’s not what Levine’s excellent column is about.