Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tom McClintock: Selling off lottery would be bad deal
Sac Bee ^ | 5/24/07 | Tom McClintock

Posted on 05/24/2007 10:43:17 AM PDT by NormsRevenge

The old admonition, "When something seems too good to be true, it probably is," virtually screams from accounts of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposal to "privatize" the California Lottery.

Actually, to give credit where it's due, it's a Goldman Sachs/Lehman Brothers proposal; the governor is the pitch-man.

The details are subject to negotiation, but the deal works something like this: The state turns over the California Lottery and monopoly control over lottery gambling in California to a private consortium (led by Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers, could it be?) for the next 40 years. In exchange, the consortium pays the state a lump sum of about $37 billion. With that money, the government sets up a $22 billion endowment fund that will guarantee the schools what they're getting from the lottery now -- about $1.1 billion a year. That leaves an extra $15 billion to paper over the governor's deficit-spending and borrowing spree ...

The governor's spokesman calls it "a win-win for California on every front." California lottery sales are well below per capita sales in other states, and our lottery revenues are declining. By handing the operation over to a creative, innovative and dynamic corporation, the schools will be guaranteed a stable annual payment, the state gets an extra $15 billion, and the investors pocket the rest. What's not to like?

But wait a second. This is not privatization. Privatizing the lottery means contracting out services to competing firms that offer the state the best value at the lowest price. ...

--snip--

If there is so much additional money to squeeze out of the lottery -- and obviously there is or the Goldman Sachs crowd wouldn't be circling the Capitol -- shouldn't that extra money be going to the schools and not to a consortium of investment bankers?

(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: california; callottery; goldmansachs; lottery; mcclintock; milken; privatization; prop1c; schwarzenegger; selling
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

1 posted on 05/24/2007 10:43:20 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Lottery = Tax on the Stupid


2 posted on 05/24/2007 10:44:54 AM PDT by Londo Molari
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RhoTheta

Ping


3 posted on 05/24/2007 10:46:54 AM PDT by Egon ("If all your friends were named Cliff, would you jump off them??" - Hugh Neutron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

PS

Tom McClintock named Co-Chairman of Western CPAC

4 posted on 05/24/2007 10:49:57 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... For want of a few good men, a once great nation was lost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Londo Molari
I used to be against the lottery but now I am for it just for that reason. Since low income people typically do not pay any taxes and/or get a credit this is a beautifully elegant way to get them to pay something...
5 posted on 05/24/2007 10:55:17 AM PDT by jrestrepo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jrestrepo

I am still not becuase it IS a waste of money (on the average citizen) whom uses it, and can become an addiction, in addition if it is a tax for those without financial responsibility, then why not reduce taxes (spending) on everyone, instead of raising it on ANYONE!! That would be the Conservative way. Living within your means (Mr. Uncle Sam..DO IT)!


6 posted on 05/24/2007 11:03:06 AM PDT by JSDude1 (www.pence08.com.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Londo Molari

The MA Budget includes $10M for the Lottery’s Ad campaign.


7 posted on 05/24/2007 11:03:23 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JSDude1

I understand your position but I just can’t help liking the idea of taxing stupid people....voluntarily.

Part of the problem with what you propose is that then we need to eliminate drinking and smoking. Both are bad for you, both are heavily taxed, both are addictive but both are personal choices. For the record I do not smoke and I rarely drink so I do not have to pay this tax either.


8 posted on 05/24/2007 11:16:59 AM PDT by jrestrepo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jrestrepo

The lottery is nothing more than a “voluntary” tax. Which in my book makes it the most moral kind there is. I spend $5-10 dollars a month... after I have paid the bills and put money in the savings account. Who knows, I may get lucky.

It should stay in state hands where the voting public has some say over it.

If there is all this fraud and waste, pay Goldman/Sachs 5% of whatever such waste they can accurately identify in an indepenent audit every year. That way we get the best of both.


9 posted on 05/24/2007 11:20:17 AM PDT by PsyOp (All war presupposes human weakness, and seeks to exploit it. - Clauswitz, On War, 1832.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
...shouldn't that extra money be going to the schools and not to a consortium of investment bankers?

Hmmm...I'm thinking. ;)

10 posted on 05/24/2007 11:22:25 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("Wise men don't need to debate; men who need to debate are not wise." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PsyOp
In your case it sounds as rational as possible. Pay your bills, plan for the future then do what ever the heck you want with your disposable income.

However, I will bet that you are the minority with this. I agree that you might get lucky but for me I understand odds too well and I know that I will not win

11 posted on 05/24/2007 11:23:26 AM PDT by jrestrepo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jrestrepo
I agree that you might get lucky but for me I understand odds too well and I know that I will not win

I once remarked to a fellow statistician that I could achieve the expected value by not playing. He said, "You must think the game is fair." He was right about my error. I can do better than the expected value by not playing.

12 posted on 05/24/2007 12:03:36 PM PDT by JoeFromSidney (My book is out. Read excerpts at http://www.thejusticecooperative.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JoeFromSidney

You both indeed understand when I say that I will not win the lottery. Most people do not get that.


13 posted on 05/24/2007 12:39:45 PM PDT by jrestrepo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: stillonaroll; Right Cal Gal; whinecountry; Walkenfree; doodlelady; antceecee; atomic_dog; ...

McClintock Ping!


14 posted on 05/24/2007 1:10:05 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The governor is proposing something fundamentally different: handing an entire governmental agency along with its monopoly franchise and all of its revenues to a private interest until today's high school students are grandparents.

I hope Tom comes to the same conclusions and continues to be vocal when the same model is applied to numerous toll-roads, charter schools, and utility operations.

15 posted on 05/24/2007 1:16:32 PM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jrestrepo
Since low income people typically do not pay any taxes

The hell they don't. They pay sales, gas, and property taxes (in their rent). It adds up to an average of over $9,000 per year for a family of four.

16 posted on 05/24/2007 1:19:42 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
You are correct, I should have said income taxes.

And you would choke if you saw the taxes my wife and I paid as two educated professionals before my wife quite work to be a stay at home mother. I kid you not, I paid more in income taxes in 2006 than my mother earns, whom I support.

I would love to only pay $9000 a year!

17 posted on 05/24/2007 1:41:51 PM PDT by jrestrepo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

BTTT


18 posted on 05/24/2007 1:48:06 PM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jrestrepo
I kid you not, I paid more in income taxes in 2006 than my mother earns, whom I support.

Before we began home schooling, I calculated the taxes, the private school bill, the before and after day care bill, the extra transportation cost... I was a project engineer making $10,000 after costs. I quit.

Because of home schooling, my kids both started calculus before they were thirteen (one was eleven). The older one is about to finish MIT's biology text. She's on the board of directors of the local community concert association. They are currently about to starty a paid research job with a peer-reviewed academic paper as the end product. They're Thirteen and fourteen.

I promise you, when these kids are ready to leave for college, the universities will be falling all over themselves to get them. There will be scholarships.

As it is, I'm free to pursue my inventions while I teach these outstanding young people. My guess is that we'll be money ahead for having made this decision, without the pain and strain that our old lifestyle was inflicting, which could have led to a very expensive divorce.

19 posted on 05/24/2007 2:57:59 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

u betcha!

would be stupid.


20 posted on 05/24/2007 5:41:00 PM PDT by ken21 (tv: 1. sells products. 2. indoctrinates viewers into socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson