why pay 1 person 200 mill for a lottery win?

[emilynghiem]

and then take half of it in taxes?. Instead, pay 2000 people 100k each, and have NO tax on that money. The cost will be the same, but the effect of the change will differ your results, a LOT. If you can't retire on 100k (cash) you're just a twit, anyway. I guaranteee that MANY times as many people will play your lottery, folks. That means LOTS more money comes into your gov't agency.

Why not set up a microlending system, teach the participants and/or winner how to invest in sustainable real estate that yields renewable revenue (for rental income). where they REPAY the loans and this pays for the next person.

Who is AGAINST people becoming financially self-sustaining and "equal citizens" independent from govt and welfare handouts? Anyone?

 

[rightwinger]

why pay 1 person 200 mill for a lottery win?

Because you get more people to play than if you gave 200 million people $1

 

[oldfart]

and then take half of it in taxes?. Instead, pay 2000 people 100k each, and have NO tax on that money. The cost will be the same, but the effect of the change will differ your results, a LOT. If you can't retire on 100k (cash) you're just a twit, anyway. I guaranteee that MANY times as many people will play your lottery, folks. That means LOTS more money comes into your gov't agency.

You need to read a book on human psychology. The system works as intended.

A good friend of mine was at the U of Mich psych dept in the 60's when they did the study for the gaming industry on optimal reinforcement for slots and lotteries. First they determined that the algorithm to figure it out was the same for lab rats as for humans, which was great because lab rats are a lot of cheaper. The only real difference was that while humans regarded flashing lights and a siren when they won at slots as recognition and positive reinforcement, the rats saw it as a distraction and nuisance in their quest for food pellets.

Anyway, the big prize is what gets new people in the door. This is more noticeable in the lottery as the pot gets near a record size; everybody buys a ticket. But most people after a certain number of non-wins get discouraged and go home. This follows a Poisson distribution and is very predictable. So slots and lotteries have smaller prizes to keep people playing even when they don't win the big prize. Slots are more efficient at this because the "recognition" drills ($50 of nickels in a bucket, flashing light, siren, photo of winner to take home, etc) are more important as reinforcement than the amount of the winnings. Combine the two approaches and you have progressive slots.

So whether its for the benefit of education or just private greed, gambling rests on the fact that we act pretty much like lab rats when it comes to gambling payoffs.