Why have we not invented a game with more winners? It seems easy to me!
2007-08-27 10:24:13 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Games & Recreation ➔ Gambling
You could make 300 families happy or you could make one happy. In life you need a house paid off and you are considered well off. Society is better off, when the deed is done for the greater good. In this case the greater good would be for 300 families
2007-08-27 11:56:14 · answer #1 · answered by kat j 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Unfortunately the fact is the bigger the jackpot the more people buy tickets. Both Powerball and Megamillions have adjusted the odds in recent times to make it even less likely to win, and therefore push the jackpot even higher. The odds are now, for example, ten times worse than the UK National Lottery.
At the end of the day the lottery is all about making money for charity. If they sell more tickets by allowing the jackpot to get crazy high, then they will continue to operate in this manner.
It's too bad, because I'd like to see a lottery that is easier to win, and collects the tax on the front end so that the winners don't have to pay. I'd also like to see the law changed so that the lottery companies can't lie to us about the value of the prizes. I think the way they do it is misleading. But it's unlikely to change any time soon.
2007-08-27 21:38:21 · answer #2 · answered by ZCT 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
More in taxes come out of the 300 million to one person, oddly enough, so the state isn't going to change that. I do like the idea of 300 people winning a million but the lottery officials would hate the paperwork.
2007-08-27 17:31:48 · answer #3 · answered by Jess 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋