Full Version: Using Lotteries to support schools
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10949102/
In this link, the state of Tennessee has raised almost a half billion dollars for education in the past 2 years by having lotteries. Folks, the education system is supposed to teach kids job skills so that they can actually earn a living. What kind of message does the government send to the kids when it promotes gambling in order to support the schools? If youngsters are being fooled into believing that casinos are the way to create money for their schools, what motivation do they have then to actually have to actually learn in the classroom besides simply passing the test?
So, the question for debate is
Are lotteries and casinos good ways to fund schools, or any government program for that matter?
In this link, the state of Tennessee has raised almost a half billion dollars for education in the past 2 years by having lotteries. Folks, the education system is supposed to teach kids job skills so that they can actually earn a living. What kind of message does the government send to the kids when it promotes gambling in order to support the schools? If youngsters are being fooled into believing that casinos are the way to create money for their schools, what motivation do they have then to actually have to actually learn in the classroom besides simply passing the test?
So, the question for debate is
Are lotteries and casinos good ways to fund schools, or any government program for that matter?
QUOTE(skeeterses @ Jan 20 2006, 11:45 PM)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10949102/
In this link, the state of Tennessee has raised almost a half billion dollars for education in the past 2 years by having lotteries. Folks, the education system is supposed to teach kids job skills so that they can actually earn a living. What kind of message does the government send to the kids when it promotes gambling in order to support the schools? If youngsters are being fooled into believing that casinos are the way to create money for their schools, what motivation do they have then to actually have to actually learn in the classroom besides simply passing the test?
So, the question for debate is
Are lotteries and casinos good ways to fund schools, or any government program for that matter?
In this link, the state of Tennessee has raised almost a half billion dollars for education in the past 2 years by having lotteries. Folks, the education system is supposed to teach kids job skills so that they can actually earn a living. What kind of message does the government send to the kids when it promotes gambling in order to support the schools? If youngsters are being fooled into believing that casinos are the way to create money for their schools, what motivation do they have then to actually have to actually learn in the classroom besides simply passing the test?
So, the question for debate is
Are lotteries and casinos good ways to fund schools, or any government program for that matter?
Lotteries are very bad, for a variety of reasons. First, a lottery has no real visible infrastructure. Casinos employ anywhere from dozens to thousands of people. Kids see the folks working there, see the effort that goes into it, and the message that casino gambling is an easy way to wealth gets muted. The more casinos around, the stronger this effect.
The lottery, on the other hand, has nothing more than a clerk at the convenience store or liquor mart. From the perspective of the kid, the lottery is incidental, there isn't even any hard work involved in running it. Easy money all around.
Another problem with lotteries is they are run by the state, and as a result they bear the message that the state is DaddyWarbucks. State lotteries also put the state into the position of directly promoting self-destructive behavior by the citizens in order to enrich the state. This is an order of magnitude worse than taxing cigarettes and alcohol, or even allowing booze to be sold only through state liquor stores, because the gov't doesn't promote those.
Casino gaming presents its own problems, of a different nature. I believe that when casino gaming is the primary economic activity of a large region, then the "easy money" element is reduced, but it still bears a raft of negative effects. Of the two though, I consider lotteries to be far worse.
Are lotteries and casinos good ways to fund schools, or any government program for that matter?
In Colorado the lottery funds public open spaces and state parks. The lottery was voted in quite a while ago, 1985 I think, specifically to support what state funds were not. Once established, the legislature (Republican) tried to get the money into the general fund, but the voters soundly defeated the proposal. We do the lottery for a specific purpose that benefits all citizens, not the porkers out there at the funding trough.
On the other hand, some parts of Colorado have allowed casino gambling with limited stakes. This brought a little more life to Cripple Creek but also altered its historic sense quite a bit. It has done better than Black Hawk, which doesn't resemble the quaint little place it once was.
The point in this is that a lottery system is an effective way to raise funds but does have disadvantages. For one, we voters have to keep a sharp eye on the state legislature all the time, which is a disadvantage in one sense and an advantage in another. We ought to keep our eyes on the shysters all the time, period. The impact on communities is another disadvantage, not so much for the dire warnings of organized crime coming in, but that the soul of a community is lost, at least to a degree. It depends on how many people want to go to the casinos. Due to Cripple Creek being at 10,000 feet and quite a ways from Denver, it can't support as many casinos. Black Hawk is lower and closer to Denver, so it has gone all casino.
Two guys wanted to bring gambling to Manitou Springs, a funky place with a rich historical past and unique look/feel to it. The city council almost rode these guys out of town on a rail. The point here is that if a community sticks to its guns, gambling doesn't come in.
So, what about using a lottery system to raise education funds? Well, this would benefit the whole community by raising the money that taxation and bond issues don't. However, is the lottery less noble than taxation and bond issues? It's pretty hard to get new taxes put in these days, at least in conservative places like Colorado Springs. Woodland Park is more willing to pay to play. I do have to say that the Springs is changing, so maybe taxes will raise the money needed. However, even though taxes and bond bills are voted upon, those against them still have to either pay the taxes or take on some of the bond risks. With a lottery, nobody is forced to participate.
You'd think that would be attractive to conservatives, being as anyone not wanting to fund education doesn't have to. But then you get the church lady effect in there, so I guess it makes sense on a moral level. History has shown that the extreme damages that lotteries are supposed to have don't materialize in a well-run system.
Let's compare lotteries to the bond issues. With a lottery, you take a chance and don't really expect to win. With a bond, you take a chance and have much higher expectations of winning. If you lose the lottery, oh well. That was expected. But if you lose on a bond, litigation can be brought against the issuing community, forcing various economic choices, one of which is to raise taxes. Failed bond issues have destroyed whole communities in Colorado, putting huge individual debts on property owners.
So far lotteries are looking pretty good. What about those who can't handle it and drop the rent money on lottery tickets, then lose? Well, what about it? It isn't illegal to be stupid, and the cure for stupidity is enlightenment. There's such a thing as gamblers' anonymous for those who have trouble with choices.
Speaking of which, what about the other chances we take with our personal economics? Is the lottery more or less honorable than investing in pensions? The stock market? Futures? Why does the Federal Reserve Bank guarantee savings accounts up to $100,000 each, while S&Ls don't? Why did the government bail out S&Ls in the 1980s and early 90s?
I think that an education lottery could be workable, especially if the students who benefit study how economics work and how economics fail. Buying a lottery ticket is a long chance. So is buying a stock or a future while expecting the price to rise. There are options too, another form of risk, or in keeping with the terminology, gambling.
I also think that a lottery purchase comes with a good dose of honesty. Listen, your chances of winning are infinitesimally small. It only costs a buck though, and if you win you win huge. Just keep in mind that the vast majority of participants lose.
How does that pan out with pensions? Stocks? The reliability of these things are highly questionable, but who's talking about it to the kids?
So I'll go with yes, lotteries can be effective ways to fund government programs and education, plus that they are more honest and free (meaning freedom of choice) than other ways.
The few times that I buy a state lottery ticket, I can at least feel that my buck went toward something I care about, and if I win big, wooo-hooo! I get to gamble on other things like the stock market.
In Colorado the lottery funds public open spaces and state parks. The lottery was voted in quite a while ago, 1985 I think, specifically to support what state funds were not. Once established, the legislature (Republican) tried to get the money into the general fund, but the voters soundly defeated the proposal. We do the lottery for a specific purpose that benefits all citizens, not the porkers out there at the funding trough.
On the other hand, some parts of Colorado have allowed casino gambling with limited stakes. This brought a little more life to Cripple Creek but also altered its historic sense quite a bit. It has done better than Black Hawk, which doesn't resemble the quaint little place it once was.
The point in this is that a lottery system is an effective way to raise funds but does have disadvantages. For one, we voters have to keep a sharp eye on the state legislature all the time, which is a disadvantage in one sense and an advantage in another. We ought to keep our eyes on the shysters all the time, period. The impact on communities is another disadvantage, not so much for the dire warnings of organized crime coming in, but that the soul of a community is lost, at least to a degree. It depends on how many people want to go to the casinos. Due to Cripple Creek being at 10,000 feet and quite a ways from Denver, it can't support as many casinos. Black Hawk is lower and closer to Denver, so it has gone all casino.
Two guys wanted to bring gambling to Manitou Springs, a funky place with a rich historical past and unique look/feel to it. The city council almost rode these guys out of town on a rail. The point here is that if a community sticks to its guns, gambling doesn't come in.
So, what about using a lottery system to raise education funds? Well, this would benefit the whole community by raising the money that taxation and bond issues don't. However, is the lottery less noble than taxation and bond issues? It's pretty hard to get new taxes put in these days, at least in conservative places like Colorado Springs. Woodland Park is more willing to pay to play. I do have to say that the Springs is changing, so maybe taxes will raise the money needed. However, even though taxes and bond bills are voted upon, those against them still have to either pay the taxes or take on some of the bond risks. With a lottery, nobody is forced to participate.
You'd think that would be attractive to conservatives, being as anyone not wanting to fund education doesn't have to. But then you get the church lady effect in there, so I guess it makes sense on a moral level. History has shown that the extreme damages that lotteries are supposed to have don't materialize in a well-run system.
Let's compare lotteries to the bond issues. With a lottery, you take a chance and don't really expect to win. With a bond, you take a chance and have much higher expectations of winning. If you lose the lottery, oh well. That was expected. But if you lose on a bond, litigation can be brought against the issuing community, forcing various economic choices, one of which is to raise taxes. Failed bond issues have destroyed whole communities in Colorado, putting huge individual debts on property owners.
So far lotteries are looking pretty good. What about those who can't handle it and drop the rent money on lottery tickets, then lose? Well, what about it? It isn't illegal to be stupid, and the cure for stupidity is enlightenment. There's such a thing as gamblers' anonymous for those who have trouble with choices.
Speaking of which, what about the other chances we take with our personal economics? Is the lottery more or less honorable than investing in pensions? The stock market? Futures? Why does the Federal Reserve Bank guarantee savings accounts up to $100,000 each, while S&Ls don't? Why did the government bail out S&Ls in the 1980s and early 90s?
I think that an education lottery could be workable, especially if the students who benefit study how economics work and how economics fail. Buying a lottery ticket is a long chance. So is buying a stock or a future while expecting the price to rise. There are options too, another form of risk, or in keeping with the terminology, gambling.
I also think that a lottery purchase comes with a good dose of honesty. Listen, your chances of winning are infinitesimally small. It only costs a buck though, and if you win you win huge. Just keep in mind that the vast majority of participants lose.
How does that pan out with pensions? Stocks? The reliability of these things are highly questionable, but who's talking about it to the kids?
So I'll go with yes, lotteries can be effective ways to fund government programs and education, plus that they are more honest and free (meaning freedom of choice) than other ways.
The few times that I buy a state lottery ticket, I can at least feel that my buck went toward something I care about, and if I win big, wooo-hooo! I get to gamble on other things like the stock market.
QUOTE(skeeterses @ Jan 20 2006, 09:45 PM)
Are lotteries and casinos good ways to fund schools, or any government program for that matter?
Well, if the schools teach any courses on Statistics, it's certainly an amusing way to fund schools...
Lotteries aren't an inherently vile practice for the State to be involved with, and it's directly contributing to something beneficial and necessary. Can't say as I see a problem here.
Are lotteries and casinos good ways to fund schools, or any government program for that matter?
Nothing inherently bad. Taxes are taxes.
But there is a bait and switch aspect. For example, in Ohio the public schools are partially subsidized by the lottery. The only problem is, if lottery contributions rise, general funding falls keeping the total amount of funding constant. In other words, there is no net effect on the amount of school funding.
Taxing is fine, but let's not kid ourselves that the tax money is ear marked for a specific purpose---it's not.
Nothing inherently bad. Taxes are taxes.
But there is a bait and switch aspect. For example, in Ohio the public schools are partially subsidized by the lottery. The only problem is, if lottery contributions rise, general funding falls keeping the total amount of funding constant. In other words, there is no net effect on the amount of school funding.
Taxing is fine, but let's not kid ourselves that the tax money is ear marked for a specific purpose---it's not.
QUOTE(skeeterses @ Jan 20 2006, 11:45 PM)
Are lotteries and casinos good ways to fund schools, or any government program for that matter?
We're not the wild west... there is no "dirty money." In America, a dollar is a dollar, despite how it was earned/spent. If such funds are used by schools, I see no problem with it. If people feel like spending the money on lottery tickets, then there should be some kind of ulterior positive effect for allowing such a risk. In my community, the TPC is used to help support our schools, as well as the Florida lottery. We get money from many sources, none of which I would consider being worse that government funding... because it's all benefiting, in the strictest sense, us. If you feel like engaging on the evils of gambling, that's another debate.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.