The Governor of Florida, Charlie Crist, seems to think that it is acceptable to balance the state's budget by taking every possible measure to increase the revenue from the State Lottery.
First, it is well established that the poor and uneducated make up the majority of those who play the Lottery. Second, as in every casino in the world, the math is rigged against the punters.Roulette is bad enough. On any bet that you can imagine, the house has a greater than 5% edge. Even with a house edge of "only" 5%, if you play for a while - which is not all that long, bankruptcy is almost inevitable!
Lotteries only pay out 50% - with rest going to operating expenses and profit. To add to the insult, the big prizes are dribbled out over 20 years - or you can take a really big haircut if you want the money all at once. And, on top of it all, Uncle Sam (and your greedy Governor who already took 50% of the amount bet) wants his share of your winnings. Worse yet, you may not deduct your losses unless you can prove that you are a professional gambler!
State Lotteries were introduced because there was a demand. The old style neighborhood numbers runner paid out 60% on the Daily Number and, because the game was illegal, it generally escaped the attention of the tax man. That is the good news. The bad news is that violence and gang warfare were rife and, although the payout was less bad that current lotteries, losing was still inevitable over any significant period of time.
Can it be moral to tax the poor and the not so bright at these rates? Since I am entirely unable to reach such a conclusion, I don't believe that state sponsored lotteries can be justified under any circumstances.
When the proceeds are used for education, or other allegedly good causes, there are too many instances when the regular appropriation is simply reduced and lawmakers are provided with an excuse not to raise taxes openly or cut pork barrel programs.
Let's put taxing and spending out in the open where we can see it. Lotteries are just another way of concealing the cost of government while simultaneously penalizing those who can least afford it.
No comments:
Post a Comment