Posted on 02/15/2006 7:12:58 AM PST by grundle
"Obviously, people will focus on people who win," said John Allen Paulos, a Temple University mathematician. "All the same dumb sticks who did the same thing [and lost] are invisible."
Author of a bestselling book, "Innumeracy," Paulos says lotteries have always owed their appeal to people's loose grip of math.
Paulos recalled a line from Voltaire: "Lotteries are a tax on stupidity."
Paulos once tore up a Powerball ticket on the eve of a drawing in front of an audience. "They all gasped as if I just slashed the Mona Lisa," he said.
To a mathematician, the lottery is a game where those who don't play have essentially the same odds of winning as those who do -- none.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
In addition, I think we don't respect money we do not earn. When we have to trade away part of our life for it, it has inherent value. When it's handed to us, it doesn't mean much.
Add that to poor math skills and you have disaster in the making.
What cost, in taxes, were there on those free trips?
What happened to him/her? I haven't heard that particular story. (I think.)
TIA.
It's fun to daydream for a few minutes of how much your life would change with all that money.....
It's like the old joke, "I'll offer you a lottery ticket for half price, and you'll have a one out of a billion less of a chance of winning, than if you pay full price."
Of course I didn't tell them it was for last week's lottery ticket. :)
"What is interesting is that on these progressive jackpots games, the prize money can reach the point where simply buying every combination of numbers could guarantee a profit "
It's been tried in modern times. I remember a story in the early 90s where a group of Australian investors actually did send people out to buy every possible combination of numbers for a US lottery after the jackpot got above the cost of buying all of those tickets. Unfortunately, the ticketing software at the time wasn't able to handle trying to process all of those tickets and by the time that the lottery cutoff time arrives, they'd only managed to get 70% of the numbers purchased. IIRC, they still got the winning numbers.
You have good, big dreams, Toby!
CA....
And how did he take that???
CA....
I don't play the lottery. Never have. Likely never will. However, someone should point out to the mathematician that "essentially" the same odds isn't the same thing as "the same odds." 1 in 1 billion is better odds than 0%, and like you say, somebody *does* win.
I understand your point.
If I were to win the lotto, there would be a tax on that as well.
But to answer your question:
1. Disney trip #1 had an ARV of $4200. Tax burden is about $1000. I got a full expenses paid trip for my family to Florida for 5 days for $1000.
2. Utah trip had an ARV of $7000. This included $2200 in cash, which more than off set the tax load.
3. Disney trip #2 - not yet taken. However we were planning a trip anyway by driving, staying offsite in a mid-quality room and with 4 days in the parks. For the same cost (including the tax load) we will be flying, staying in a deluxe resort onsite and will stay 6 days in the parks.
In any of these trips, I could have simply refused the prize and thus avoid the tax load. And they cost nothing to participate in.
How about George Best's description:
"I spent most of my money on booze and broads. The rest I just squandered."
CA....
Such wisdom is worthy of taglining. - OB1
He expects me to behave that way.
I use the Lottery as my retirement plan. My odds of a big payout are SIGNIFICANTLY higher than seeing dollar one of my Social Insecurity taxes returned after retirement. . . . (evil grin)
That's more than Bayes ever did.
Just wondering how prior probabilities, conditional probabilities and all that get involved. I agree, the odds of winning, given that you haven't bought a ticket is zero. If you do buy one they are slightly better.
Of course, economists deal in a person's "utility function", how much value is placed on the next dollar. Losing a dollar will have a negligible effect on most people's "utility function", while winning mega-millions will greatly increase it.
I've never, ever bought a single lottery ticket in my life (except with free coupons: I'm up $12.00, lifetime) but that's more a personal preference than evidence of any superior mathematical or analytic skill. I suspect that Democrats and Liberals are probably more likely than Republicans and Conservatives to buy them. What would Bayes say?
The guy who invented chess presented his game, along with the board, to the King.
The King was so pleased and proud at what his loyal subject had done, he offered him anything he wanted in the kingdom. It was his for the asking.
The chess inventor asked for grain. Each time grain would be placed on a square, the amount on the next square would be doubled. For example, on grain on square one, two grains on square 2, 4 grains on square three, etc., etc.
The King, like most people, including apparently you, just saw the small amounts visible in the first few squares. He couldn't envision what the later squares would cost.
By about 2/3 the way through the payoff, the King realized he did not have enough grain in the kingdom to pay this debt.
And so it is with your example.
After 2 weeks, 14 days, of doubling, most people, including likely you, won't have $409,600 in assets to double for day 15, let alone day 90.
Nice idea, perhaps, but I can't do it.
This is the way I understand your post - "Double the number each day".
If you've succeeded in doing this, you were either quite wealthy to start with, or you play the horses as few in history have played them.
CA....
LOL!
Tonights #300 million should be able to buy a pretty nice beach house and a few decent fishing trips, even after the various governments get done raping "their share" out of the pot!
How does AMT affect this, if at all???
CA....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.