LastWeekTonight
6 HN recommenders · recommended in 11 months, 2014–2023
14:36 · 16M views · Nov 10, 2014
John Oliver's Last Week Tonight segment on state lotteries. It argues that the claim that lotteries fund education is misleading, because the money is fungible and often diverted to general funds.
Go-to reference in lottery threads for the point that earmarked lottery revenue does not really add to school funding.
13 comments from Hacker News
This is good news and bad news. The funding for schools will be a boon to education in the state, and that's certainly not bad. However, I expect will almost certainly lead to decreased education funding from other revenue sources, and ultimately place education footing on less solid ground for years to come. It was brilliant PR move to earmark the tax revenue for education, there's no doubt about that. It's very hard to argue with such things, and many other states have opted to dedicate certain "sin taxes" to select public works. For example, earmarking some funds for veterans affairs out of state lottery tickets as my state (Iowa) does, or education as many more states do. On the surface, this seems like a brilliant way to justify revenue collection for what many citizens would consider unseemly or undignified. It is an effective sales pitch to say to a voter, "You may disagree with marijuana legalization, but it will bring in $50 million dollars to state schools." The problem is that budgets will adjust to incorporate this earmark for future years. That is, education budgets are likely to reflect this revenue for future years. That's precisely what has happened in so many states where state lottery revenues have been earmarked for education and other noble causes. John Oliver's Last Week Tonight had an excellent take on a similar topic: the "sin tax" of state lottery tickets. See here: this video It is wonderful that marijuana taxes are going to a good cause. It is dangerous
I was actually thinking outside of slots. A lot of gambling practices are still illegal like sports betting in most of America. Such illegal gambling often leads to some sort of organized crime around providing loans and the actual gambling service itself. But I was also thinking of alcohol prohibition in the 1920's and the current drug prohibition. The black markets that these events created are not that dissimilar from the one around gambling and the core cause is the same. I do think that eliminating the profit incentive is something that could work. The profit from gambling is cited as a redeeming quality, however, as a reason for legalized gambling to exist. The overwhelming idea, at least in the US, is that if people are going to have a vice (or fun, depending on your perspective), their activities should be taxed so that others (corporations and the government mainly) can profit from them. Perhaps if the money actually went to fund schools and other things that benefit society, I could get behind this viewpoint, but regardless of the claims of governments that have legal gambling, it doesn't. This John Oliver segment about it is pretty interesting: this video
The old saying "money is the root of all evil" often does generally apply and lotteries are an excellent example of state-sponsored financial ruin. I especially like the John Oliver pieces[0][1] on that one. I see it everyday - video poker "cafes" and here in Wisconsin the cultural acceptance and actual embrace of weird things like "pull tabs" and "dice games". Las Vegas is an entire city that has been built on financial ruin. But we can simultaneously criticize, express concern, and work towards fixing multiple issues at the same time. [0] - this video [1] - [LINK]
The practices of the Oregon lottery seem wrong to me. Government should be in the business of helping people and providing uncorrupted resources and facts, not marketing dreams and hope to people while taking their money hand over fist. John Oliver just did a good segment about this too this video
>some states they claim to use lottery proceeding to improve math education About that, this video is worth watching. No that is 100% true, but good enough to start a conversation. this video