Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A waste of time and effort by the state house and senate. Sunny has the right way to police the issue which in some states all ready occurs. If a lottery winner wins the big prize they must pay back the state for the welfare they have received, I think that is the case in NY and also NJ
I would love to know how they would do this since lottery is a cash thing...ask for ID? What if you have someone else buy it for you? Sounds silly to me
The only thing I heard is that they wouldn't let you pay cash for the lotto at the same time you are using "food stamps".
Of course EBT benefits aren't cash anyway. I don't see how they could detect you using cash benefits unless everyone using them also has food stamps that they use at the gas station at the same time.
Ebt may be on a card, but isn't welfare just a check they cash? I don't know how you police that, but yes, I am for not allowing it to be used for drugs, booze, strippers, cigarettes, or gambling. Good luck with that.
I don't think they should be banned from playing the lottery for this, very cynical, but realistic, reason. How else are you going to get money from the poor? They don't pay taxes. That's the real reason NC wants to shut down sweepstakes. There's no moral high ground. It's just that every dollar they spend their, they don't spend on the lottery.
If NC was smart they'd go at the beach bingo parlors. Though by NC law prizes can't be more $10, play a $.50 game and see how much money you actually win. (hint: what's fifty times ten?)
I don't think they should be banned from playing the lottery for this, very cynical, but realistic, reason. How else are you going to get money from the poor? They don't pay taxes. That's the real reason NC wants to shut down sweepstakes. There's no moral high ground. It's just that every dollar they spend their, they don't spend on the lottery.
I don't agree with it not being a moral issue. This goes back to the 18th century when there was no lottery or video poker. All the GS is trying to do is close loopholes. They could enjoy the tax revenue if they pleased but they at least along with several police agencies have stated that it is a moral issue though I suppose they all could be lying.
And I don't think the poor are using the funds to add to their savings or 401K. You get money from them in sales tax and the community also benefits by their spending.
Location: Danville, VA - 3rd Capital of the Confederacy!
203 posts, read 412,573 times
Reputation: 334
"He comin' down de street, dat Numbers Man ... His smile's so big, I WON ... I knowed I can"
The subtitle at the top of this posting is a lyric from an old blues song (circa 1930's ~ 1940's, I believe) about the neighborhood "Numbers Man" who provided an opportunity for gamblers to indulge their addiction. A few won. Most lost.
(I hope I remembered the lyrics correctly, haven't heard that song in many years, my grandfather had it on an old 78 rpm phonograph record.)
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ... LOTTERIES ARE GOOD:
Public lotteries have been held in the western world since the reign of Augustus Caesar. The first known lottery in the Americas was held in 1612 by the Virginia Company to help finance the establishment of England's first colony in the "new world" ... in large part, that's how America began.
Numerous other lotteries, both public and private, were held throughout America's history (see the reference documents at the bottom of this posting), and gambling appeared to be a socially acceptable diversion in America ...
... until gambling wasn't socially acceptable in America anymore.
OOPS, LOTTERIES ARE BAD:
In the 1870's following a massive bribery scandal involving Louisiana's state lottery that had been operating nationwide, most gambling, and all lotteries, were outlawed!
Gambling had suddenly been made ILLEGAL, and what had previously been regarded as a "harmless pastime" by most quickly came to be regarded as IMMORAL by many, especially among residents of the Bible Belt.
And although the "rich" could still go play at luxurious gambling hotspots like Monaco and Havana (which would later also include such U.S.-based hotspots as Las Vegas, Reno, and eventually Atlantic City), most of the poor and working-class folk had to indulge their gambling urges with the neighborhood "Numbers Man."
Although that "Numbers Man" may have been running a lottery that was illegal and immoral, the fact remains that the "Numbers Man" still gave his customers better odds than any Official State Lottery soon to be created.
OOPS, MAYBE LOTTERIES ARE GOOD AFTER ALL, BUT ONLY IF RUN BY THE STATE:
New Hampshire was the first state to establish a state lottery, in 1964. After New Hampshire's lottery proved wildly successful, other states soon followed suit. And today in America, government lotteries are held by 43 states, DC, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
In a few short years, State governments had effectively put the "Numbers Man" out of business ... and somehow, that evil vice called GAMBLING was suddenly no longer illegal OR immoral ...
... as long as the State was running the Game.
FAST FORWARD TO THE CURRENT DILEMMA:
And now, with North Carolina's State Lottery so firmly entrenched, and so consistently successful for so many years, does its gummint actually have people purporting to run things who are so incredibly and damnably stupid, short-sighted, and arrogant that some of them actually think they will somehow be able to prevent "welfare recipients" from playing their game too if they so desire???
What's next for these right-wing "nanny stater" loonies? Will they attempt to pass legislation to prevent tomcats from chasing mice and fornicating?
That won't work either. Who the hell elected these people?
Fish gotta swim. Birds gotta fly. And people who believe in "luck" gotta play games of chance.
And if a welfare recipient somewhere should happen to get lucky, it's easy enough to get a friend to cash in that winning ticket, pay the friend a commission, and pocket the rest of the winnings.
Ob la di, ob la da. Life goes on.
Three Historical References FYI:
Lotteries (a well-footnoted historical study from the University of North Texas)
I would say let them play since there is no way to police them, and stop them. BUT, if they win any kind of big money make them pay back everything they have collected. If there is anything left over its theirs. A simple check of the state data base before paying them the money is all it would require.
Location: Danville, VA - 3rd Capital of the Confederacy!
203 posts, read 412,573 times
Reputation: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waiting2go
I would say let them play since there is no way to police them, and stop them. BUT, if they win any kind of big money make them pay back everything they have collected. If there is anything left over its theirs. A simple check of the state data base before paying them the money is all it would require.
That's an awful big "BUT" ... since if they buy a lottery ticket and pay cash there is no way to monitor their purchase of that ticket.
And like I said in my last post, which you may have missed:
"... if a welfare recipient somewhere should happen to get lucky, it's easy enough to get a friend to cash in that winning ticket, pay the friend a commission, and pocket the rest of the winnings."
With most state lotteries, federal income taxes (and sometimes state income taxes also) are deducted from one's winnings on the spot, before large payouts are made. So the "friend" will have already paid the "taxes" and still get a commission. And the winning welfare recipient would get the rest.
And nobody would know the difference, unless the lottery winner on welfare suddenly showed up with a new car or some other ostentatious display of sudden new wealth. Then there would undoubtedly be a problem. But if they just kept what was left of the cash they won, they could have a little nest egg, and live maybe a little better without anybody being the wiser.
However, most likely such an individual would end up spending all of his/her winnings on more lottery tickets, and still end up broke. That's the way it works with all games of chance.
And just like any other game of chance run by any other criminal syndicate, the house ALWAYS wins. North Carolina's lottery is designed to pay out about 50%, which means the "house" keeps half of the money it takes in. There will always be an occasional "winner" ... just enough to keep the others sucked into the game. But anyone who plays such lotteries on a regular basis will statistically be a LOSER.
Maybe a better way would be for states to stop running lotteries and stealing from the poor and working classes, and find more honest ways to generate the revenues they need.
Feel like making a donation to the state? Buy a lottery ticket. If it loses, you made a donation.
But if your ticket WINS, take the money and run. And don't ever play the damned game again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"He comin' down de street, dat Numbers Man ... His smile's so big, I WON ... I knowed I can"
