Almost every state I know of with a state lottery passed it under the proviso that the profits would fund “education”. Almost every state then proceeded to gut the education budget and replace it with lottery funds.
The lottery is a choice. No one is forcing anyone to play. People are going to gamble though, so the state might as well take a cut as a way to discourage it.
> The lottery is a choice. No one is forcing anyone to play.
That effectively makes it a tax on the innumerate.
People are going to gamble though, so the state might as well take a cut as a way to discourage it.
It's fairly well established that rather than discouraging gambling, the result of government endorsement and taxation is a net increase in gambling.
I think I've also seen some analysis that after about a decade, the increase in gambling behavior is also correlated with less taxable income from citizens, higher consumption of alcohol, etc., which amplifies the regressive effects.
The state doesn’t discourage it, they promote it. That’s the problem. Gambling is entertainment for people who don’t understand statistics. It’s a tax on the poor.
