Topic: Lotteries and possibility vs. probability - page 47. (Read 6269 times)
Of course you are paying for the “dream” or opportunity. Otherwise people would have to be crazy to play at all. I’ve always said that lotteries are taxes on people who are bad at math, but more honestly they’re for people who have no hope of getting rich through investment knowledge or by building companies, this is their long shot hope at a different life.
It is something I have already been aware of, people who play lotteries, specially those that offer huge amounts of money, are not really aware of the probability of winning but they know there is a minimal chance of it.
On the other hand, I think differently on the national lotteries because I like the idea of those funds being used to improve the living conditions in the country. Here we do not have those, all lotteries as privately held and it would take a change in the government so the people could trust more public money on the administration.
In the end, dreaming is free but playing the lottery is not.
On the other hand, I think differently on the national lotteries because I like the idea of those funds being used to improve the living conditions in the country. Here we do not have those, all lotteries as privately held and it would take a change in the government so the people could trust more public money on the administration.
In the end, dreaming is free but playing the lottery is not.
I have recently read an interesting essay on this topic, but it was already explained it to me a few years ago.
The thesis would consist that, although the probability of winning classical lotteries is near zero (typically between 0.0000007% in the case of Euromillions and 0.000003% in the case of national lotteries), people is willing to pay an excessive overprice because they are buying the right to dream about the possibility of winning.
Although there are extreme cases that get addicted to lotteries, this is quite uncommon if I'm not wrong, because, if you are not paying for the probability but for the possibility, a bet of 1 USD is enough to buy said possibility.
On the other hand, national lotteries are known to be "taxes on ignorance of mathematics", but if these revenues financed public expenses that revert to the common good: would you agree to pay systematically 1 USD more in your annual taxes as something that ensures the right to dream of a dear life of every taxpayer?
The thesis would consist that, although the probability of winning classical lotteries is near zero (typically between 0.0000007% in the case of Euromillions and 0.000003% in the case of national lotteries), people is willing to pay an excessive overprice because they are buying the right to dream about the possibility of winning.
Although there are extreme cases that get addicted to lotteries, this is quite uncommon if I'm not wrong, because, if you are not paying for the probability but for the possibility, a bet of 1 USD is enough to buy said possibility.
On the other hand, national lotteries are known to be "taxes on ignorance of mathematics", but if these revenues financed public expenses that revert to the common good: would you agree to pay systematically 1 USD more in your annual taxes as something that ensures the right to dream of a dear life of every taxpayer?
Jump to: