Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The government should scratch the lottery
The government should scratch the lottery
Sep 21, 2024 11:23 PM

State lotteries may seem like a good thing. They raise money for government programs like public schools. People contribute their money voluntarily (unlike most forms of taxation), which removes the moral weight involved in forcing people to hand over their money. They are fun games for the participants and can be life-changing for the winners.

These reasons lead many people to support – or at least tolerate – state lotteries. But the lottery deserves neither our support nor our toleration, as it has no place in an ethical government. Here are two major reasons why.

First, the lottery hurts the poor. The lottery is a regressive tax. Lottery tickets have the same price tag for rich and poor alike. Therefore, the poorer you are, the higher percentage of your wealth you pay to play. If John’s e is $10,000 and Susan’s is $100,000, and they each spend $500 on lottery tickets over a year, then John has paid 5% of his e while Susan has paid only 0.5%.

The federal e tax, by contrast, is a progressive tax, which means the richer you are, the higher percentage of your wealth you pay. Susan not only pays more e tax than John but a higher percentage of her e. Regressive taxes are a greater burden on the poor than the rich, while progressive taxes try to focus that burden on the rich.

But it gets worse. Studies have shown that while lottery e from all e brackets, e lottery players purchase more tickets than e players. One study found that people in the bottom 20% of e earners spent an average of $433 a year on lottery tickets, while those in the top e bracket spent an average of $193 a year. Another survey found that households with an e of less than $30,000 spent an average of $412 a year on lottery tickets – four times as much as households earning $75,000 or more spent. So, not only do the poor spend a larger percentage of their e than the rich on the lottery, but they actually pay more money in total.

Second, the lottery creates and exploits gambling addiction. Gambling addiction is a serious problem that can lead to more than just financial trouble. It harms the addict’s relationships and destroys families. Legal problems, drug and alcohol abuse, and suicide sometimes also result.

Much of the lottery’s es from taking advantage of people in desperation. Manipulative marketing campaigns sell an unlikely hope and leave many of the most desperate players worse off. Even some of those who win end up in a worse situation than before. Finally, above and beyond these external side effects, there is a moral issue. If we take excessive gambling to be a vice, then the lottery develops and prospers from bad moral behavior.

While the lottery presents itself as a good alternative to other forms of taxation, it is one of the worst forms of taxation. It profits, in large part, from the lower class, the desperate, and those struggling with addiction – people whom it further exploits and harms in a variety of ways.

But what about the government programs funded by lotteries? What would happen to these if we got rid of this revenue source? While it is questionable that lottery revenue really goes to the programs that its feel-good ads promise, the more important point is that the government already needs to cut spending. Since the lottery only accounts for a small percentage of most states’ revenue, if the states reduce spending by even one or two percent, we can keep important government programs without needing to increase taxes or exploit poor people with a lottery.

Both the Republican and Democratic parties are failing miserably to reduce spending, because excessive consumers of the lottery aren’t the only ones addicted to it. Money is the government’s drug of choice, and the government has all the power it needs to maintain its supply. It is, therefore, unlikely to stop feeding its addiction, even paratively small supplies like the lottery. This is why during the peak of the COVID-19 related shutdowns of businesses, despite recently instating an online lottery, Michigan kept in-person sales of lottery tickets open, even while closing many garden centers and churches.

Regardless of how states should rework their budgets or tax systems, the bottom line is that the lottery is a harmful way for the government to raise money. If our priority is simply to establish a voluntary tax, even if it harms people, then the government should also establish a monopoly in the tobacco industry and sell cigarettes to its citizens. After all, by selling cigarettes, we can raise needed money for schools, while providing pleasurable experiences for smokers.

But if our priority is to promote a society that leads to human flourishing, we must advocate both freedom and virtue. The lottery is not a moral way for states to raise money. The odds may be against many states scratching their lotteries, but if they do, our society will win big. You can bet on it!

Ou. CC BY-SA 2.0.)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Radio Free Acton – Why You Think The Way You Do
Radio Free Acton is back, this week featuring an interview with Dr. Glenn Sunshine. Dr. Sunshine is Chair of the History Department at Central Connecticut State University, and a Research Fellow at the Acton Institute. He’s also the author of a brand new book – available now at the Acton Bookshoppe – entitled Why You Think The Way You Do: The Story of Western Worldviews from Rome to Home. I had a chance recently to sit down with Dr. Sunshine...
Journal of Markets & Morality, Spring 2009
We’re happy to announce that the latest print issue of the Journal of Markets & Morality is available online. The Spring 2009 issue includes a noteworthy study by Alan T. Y. Chan and Shu-kam Lee. In “Christ and Business Culture: Another Classification of Christians in Workplaces According to an Empirical Study in Hong Kong,” Chan and Lee outline four types of Christians at work: Christian soldiers, panic followers, strugglers, and Sunday Christians. Following the classification, Chan and Lee “develop a...
Less Religion Means More Government
My article from this week’s Acton News & Commentary: munism adopted Karl Marx’s teaching that religion was the “opiate of the masses” and launched a campaign of bloody religious persecution. Marx was misguided about the role of religion but years later munists became aware that turning people away from religious life increases dependence on government to address life’s problems. The history of government coercion es from turning from religion to government makes a new study suggesting a national decline in...
The Inevitability of Finance And The Call of the Entrepreneur
“The Deal Professor,” Steven M. Davidoff, has a good piece at The New York Times website about the indispensability of finance to our economy. It briefly rebuts the view popularized in the Oliver Stone movie Wall Street, in which financiers are portrayed as greedy parasites. I left ment at the web page, noting that our documentary The Call of the Entrepreneur makes a similar case. I include ment below, since it may not pass muster with the ment moderator: A...
Church, State, and Restorative Justice
Last week Rick Warren’s church hosted the fourth Saddleback Civil Forum. This time the forum focused on reconciliation, particularly on the roles of the church and the government in promoting and fostering reconciliation after crime and conflict. The forum included special guests Paul Kagame, the president of Rwanda, and Miroslav Volf, a prominent theologian and native of Croatia. One of the things that typically happens in the course of tyranny and genocide is that the church’s social witness is either...
Philanthropy Cannot Serve Two Masters
This week’s mentary looks at the trend by many in the charitable sector to e increasingly reliant on government support. Sign up for the free, weekly Acton News & Commentary newsletter in the form here (right hand sidebar). —– The independence of American charities has steadily eroded in recent years as more philanthropic institutions e to see their mission as one of partnership or collaboration with the government. That’s a nice way of saying, “seeking government dough.” Now, in the...
Religion & Liberty Interviews Amity Shlaes
The new issue of Religion & Liberty features an interview titled “Debating the Depression” with noted columnist and author Amity Shlaes. Shlaes does a superb job at reminding us about some of the consequences associated with massive government spending and regulation. First and foremost among these consequences is the burden of debt and taxes we are heaping upon future generations. This kind of expansion, without the means to pay for it, will sadly have a negative impact upon the quality...
Christ, Culture, and the City
From the vision of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21 to Augustine’s City of God, the civitas is an enormously pervasive and rich biblical and theological theme. On the contemporary scene there area number of indications that evangelicals are looking more deeply and critically at engagement with the “city” as a social, political, ethical, and theological reality. This is part of the explicit vision of The King’s College in New York City, for instance, where Acton research fellow Anthony Bradley...
Impossible Promises on Health Care
I still haven’t quite gotten to a thorough fisking of “Exhibit B,” yet, and will have to be satisfied with arguing the following thesis in the meantime: It is impossible to increase insurance coverage in America without increasing medical spending. We cannot save enough on bureaucratic reform and government-induced petition” to offset the new costs associated with an influx of 40+ million new participants. Certainly the newly mandated premiums, paid by those who have determined for themselves that it is...
The Dog Days of European Socialized Medicine
In August, the Wall Street Journal Europe published an article exploring the difference in health care received by domesticated animals and humans. (see “Man Vs. Mutt: Who Gets the Better Treatment?” in WSJ Europe, August 8, 2009) The editorialist, Theodore Dalrymple (pen name for outspoken British physician and NHS critic, Dr. Anthony Daniels) argued that dogs and other human pets in his country receive much better routine and critical healthcare than humans: their treatment is “much more pleasant than British...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2024 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved