When state lotteries came into fashion in the US in the 1960s, after a hiatus of a half century, they were sold as easy, low-risk ways for states to funnel millions into public education and other social programs. But studies show that lottery play has a regressive impact, as the poor spend a much greater percentage of their income on tickets than do those in the middle or upper class. And because ticket payouts are typically 50 cents on the dollar, a far lower return than even slot machines in casinos, which are generally considered to have some of the worst odds in gambling, lottery playing is not something that can be called “responsible.”
People with addiction personalities, those on assistance or earning low wages, and others often feel that they can continue to buy tickets as long as they don’t spend more than they have. They also believe that they are performing a civic duty by helping their children, their family or the state. The ugly underbelly here is that they are deluding themselves into believing that they may one day be the one lucky winner, even though the odds are astronomically against them.
What’s more, the objective fiscal circumstances of a state do not seem to have any bearing on its acceptance or adoption of a lottery. Instead, state officials end up inheriting policies and a dependency on revenue that they can do nothing about. The result is that many state governments are utterly dependent on painless revenues and face constant pressures to increase them.
