- Increase the winning odds, cap the winnings to a million or so, limit the monthly amount spent on tickets....people to the right/left of you are suddenly winning jackpots, & people who don't want to participate also win by paying no tax!!!
2007-12-14 01:46:43 · 5 answers · asked by morkmath 2 in Business & Finance ➔ Taxes ➔ United States
Bad idea. In my state, California, the lottery prize pool is 50% of ticket sales. Let's presume the national lottery would do the same. Everybody would have to spend 15 to 30% of their income buying lottery tickets to make this work. That doesn't include people like me who would get a free ride because I wouldn't buy any.
2007-12-14 03:36:25 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
1. Since poorer people play lotteries more than rich people, that would REALLY be regressive.
2. It wouldn't be likely to raise enough money.
3. If people "right/left of you are winning jackpots", how is there going to be much left to fund government services?
2007-12-14 06:24:57 · answer #2 · answered by Judy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Stupid. The rich wouldn't play the lottery. We would be worse off. I hate lotteries and casinos. It's a tax on the stupid.
2007-12-14 02:46:13 · answer #3 · answered by Unsub29 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
What would we have to fund programs for all the senior citizens?
The lottery wouldn't generate enough revenue. However, many states are authorizing more and more casinos, because of the revenue it brings in.
2007-12-14 01:57:03 · answer #4 · answered by Griffin 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Stupid.
2007-12-14 02:35:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋