So who's giving up the lotto in October?
Discussion
crankedup said:
Packed in lotto when Branson lost out on the contract. Told me all I needed to know about Comealot and Government running the 'game'.
Really? If Branson had spread his filthy odour over the lottery you would have played it??? Or are you going to quote the 'not for profit' line he was trotting out ad infinitum?Have you ever read up on him? And not just the likes of Tom Bower's hatchet job
Moonhawk said:
roboxm3 said:
I don't really get the 'idiot tax' label that people give the Lotto.
It's just a line people with no imagination trot out to try and feel superior.Playing the lottery is no more idiotic than any other form of gambling - or any other frivolous crap people spend (waste?) money on.
I do the lottery... in the last twelve months ive won £25 at least 4 times. I realise i still havent broken even, and i realise i might not even win £25 again in the next 20 years. But its a tiny outlay (even on my non-PH Director salary) and i wouldnt mind winning a million.
daddy cool said:
Moonhawk said:
roboxm3 said:
I don't really get the 'idiot tax' label that people give the Lotto.
It's just a line people with no imagination trot out to try and feel superior.Playing the lottery is no more idiotic than any other form of gambling - or any other frivolous crap people spend (waste?) money on.
I do the lottery... in the last twelve months ive won £25 at least 4 times. I realise i still havent broken even, and i realise i might not even win £25 again in the next 20 years. But its a tiny outlay (even on my non-PH Director salary) and i wouldnt mind winning a million.
I did the maths when the lottery was first introduced and so have never bought a ticket, I'm not even a member of the works syndicate. I'm tempted to join the works syndicate not so much with the expectation of winning but rather as insurance against the remote possibility of being the only one turning up to work on Monday if they win the Euro Millions, not only would I be miserable I'd be really, really busy covering everyone else's jobs.
Amateurish said:
You are more likely to die before the results are announced, than you are to win the jackpot. A cheery thought for your Friday afternoon...
I've just had a go on tonight's Euro's as well (this thread prompted me to check and I had £2 in my account), so now there's a bit of added tension!! 
Those who don't do the lottery because of the odds, and/or claim "it's an idiot tax" haven't really thought it through.
Lottery players don't risk £2 for the odds; they risk £2 for the chance of a life-changing amount of money. The £2 they play each week will never produce a fraction of that figure over their whole lifetime. Every one knows they've got a tiny chance ... but they also know that non-players have no chance at all.
So, assuming you can fairly easily find £2 from somewhere in your personal budget, and assuming you really would like a significant windfall of money (whether to give up work and live a jet-set lifestyle, dream of starting your own business, become a philanthropist, etc), it can just as easily be argued that NOT playing is genuinely idiotic.
It's surely not that difficult to understand? There's a quality/quantity thing here - it's not about percentages, it's about a life-changing event.
You can look at this conundrum in many ways: e.g. being locked in a room with 10 tigers is not 400% worse than being locked in a room with 2 tigers. Even when the statisticians try to convince you that it is.
Lottery players don't risk £2 for the odds; they risk £2 for the chance of a life-changing amount of money. The £2 they play each week will never produce a fraction of that figure over their whole lifetime. Every one knows they've got a tiny chance ... but they also know that non-players have no chance at all.
So, assuming you can fairly easily find £2 from somewhere in your personal budget, and assuming you really would like a significant windfall of money (whether to give up work and live a jet-set lifestyle, dream of starting your own business, become a philanthropist, etc), it can just as easily be argued that NOT playing is genuinely idiotic.
It's surely not that difficult to understand? There's a quality/quantity thing here - it's not about percentages, it's about a life-changing event.
You can look at this conundrum in many ways: e.g. being locked in a room with 10 tigers is not 400% worse than being locked in a room with 2 tigers. Even when the statisticians try to convince you that it is.
Never bought a lottery ticket, never will.
Having said that, the parents of an old mate did win 2mill some years back, and the bloke who bought my first house after I sold it , was a very early winner of 250k.
Again, having looked at that, a miss is as good as a mile.
The fact is, its a voluntary tax, aimed at the gullible, those who live in the world of unrealistic expectations.
Want to gamble? Back a donkey at Haydock Park, its more fun, and the chances of a return are inestimably better.
Having said that, the parents of an old mate did win 2mill some years back, and the bloke who bought my first house after I sold it , was a very early winner of 250k.
Again, having looked at that, a miss is as good as a mile.
The fact is, its a voluntary tax, aimed at the gullible, those who live in the world of unrealistic expectations.
Want to gamble? Back a donkey at Haydock Park, its more fun, and the chances of a return are inestimably better.
Cheese Mechanic said:
The fact is, its a voluntary tax, aimed at the gullible, those who live in the world of unrealistic expectations.
Want to gamble? Back a donkey at Haydock Park, its more fun, and the chances of a return are inestimably better.
SighWant to gamble? Back a donkey at Haydock Park, its more fun, and the chances of a return are inestimably better.
Perhaps it needs repeating the majority of people playing know they have an extremely tiny chance of winning, they are buying a dream not making a rational gamble. What else can you buy for £2 that would match that?
JagLover said:
Sigh
Perhaps it needs repeating the majority of people playing know they have an extremely tiny chance of winning, they are buying a dream not making a rational gamble. What else can you buy for £2 that would match that?
I think thats bPerhaps it needs repeating the majority of people playing know they have an extremely tiny chance of winning, they are buying a dream not making a rational gamble. What else can you buy for £2 that would match that?
ks. I go entirely by the people who clog the tills on lottery days buying such false hopes, before we even mention scratch cards. These people are plainly, often, amongst those who can least afford such, yet they live on false hopes.
Its sad.
You have more chance of getting hit by lightning than winning any lotto jackpot anywhere, the odds are stacked in favour of the house and the only way to win it isnt to play it.
I wish a couple of million players would chuck their 2 quid my direction this week, theyd stand a better chance of winning.....
I wish a couple of million players would chuck their 2 quid my direction this week, theyd stand a better chance of winning.....
4v6 said:
You have more chance of getting hit by lightning than winning any lotto jackpot anywhere, the odds are stacked in favour of the house and the only way to win it isnt to play it.
Yes the odds are stacked in favour of the house. That's why it exists. But people don't play for the odds. 4v6 said:
I wish a couple of million players would chuck their 2 quid my direction this week, theyd stand a better chance of winning.....
Eh - how would that work?4v6 said:
You have more chance of getting hit by lightning than winning any lotto jackpot anywhere, the odds are stacked in favour of the house and the only way to win it isnt to play it.
I wish a couple of million players would chuck their 2 quid my direction this week, theyd stand a better chance of winning.....
No, regardless of the exceptionally long odds the only way to win the National Lottery is to play it. Plus if I gave you the £2 a ticket requires, I have 0% chance of winning, where as if I bought a ticket, I'd have a one in fourteen million chance, which is still better than zero isn't it?I wish a couple of million players would chuck their 2 quid my direction this week, theyd stand a better chance of winning.....
4v6 said:
You have more chance of getting hit by lightning than winning any lotto jackpot anywhere, the odds are stacked in favour of the house and the only way to win it isnt to play it.
I wish a couple of million players would chuck their 2 quid my direction this week, theyd stand a better chance of winning.....
No, regardless of the exceptionally long odds the only way to win the National Lottery is to play it. Plus if I gave you the £2 a ticket requires, I have 0% chance of winning, where as if I bought a ticket, I'd have a one in fourteen million chance, which is still better than zero isn't it?I wish a couple of million players would chuck their 2 quid my direction this week, theyd stand a better chance of winning.....
Mr E said:
I used to consider it a tax on the mathematically inept.
As I've got older, I consider it a tax on hope.
If people are aware of their odds of winning but happy to take the chance anyway, how would that be mathematically inept?As I've got older, I consider it a tax on hope.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff