Where is the US economy headed?

The odds are printed on the credit card contracts as well. I think its worse for the government to be running scams than for credit card companies. After all, whats good for the goose should be good for the gander. Face it, lotteries are get rich schemes, getting something for nothing, based on luck not work. It is a scam, plain and simple. At least most people using credit cards actually get something in return, some kind of merchandise or service for what they buy and pay exorbitant interest or fees for if they don't pay off right away, but almost any idiot knows this will happen if they don't pay the card balance. The majority of people buying lottery tickets get nothing at all. It is siphoning off billions of dollars out of the economy that could be used for something more useful.

THe Gambling industry.....rather GAMING INDUSTRY, argues that they are entertainment. This is supportable when the payout is around 90% as it is in Vegas. However, state lotteries pay out on average only 65% of every dollar that the mark spends.
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/econ/lotterypayouts.htm

And vegas is marketed to high rollers and by definition almost everyone who plays has to be well off enough to get to Vegas. State lotteries on the other hand are marketed to the lower class, who are the best customers. State lotteries can not claim to be entertainment, they are clearly a regressive tax.

Okie wrote:

The odds are printed on the credit card contracts as well. I think its worse for the government to be running scams than for credit card companies. After all, whats good for the goose should be good for the gander. Face it, lotteries are get rich schemes, getting something for nothing, based on luck not work. It is a scam, plain and simple. At least most people using credit cards actually get something in return, some kind of merchandise or service for what they buy and pay exorbitant interest or fees for if they don't pay off right away, but almost any idiot knows this will happen if they don't pay the card balance. The majority of people buying lottery tickets get nothing at all. It is siphoning off billions of dollars out of the economy that could be used for something more useful.

****************************************************************

Exactly. The majority of people who play the lottery are the masses. It has always been so and will remain that way since the people who play the lotteries do not understand the incredible odds against them. One of the major culprits involved in this horrible situation is the public school system in the USA. Whole months are spent by children painting pictures of Martin Luther King and Emiliano Zapata. That time should be spent learning math.

It is clear, after viewing tests which show the relative standing of various nations in the world, that US Students rank low.

Hawkeye 10 wrote:

And vegas is marketed to high rollers and by definition almost everyone who plays has to be well off enough to get to Vegas. State lotteries on the other hand are marketed to the lower class, who are the best customers. State lotteries can not claim to be entertainment, they are clearly a regressive tax.

******************************************************************

A REGRESSIVE TAX- yes, exactly. It is amazing to me that the Democrats, who piously excoriate any financial move which seems to be regressive, allow the lotteries to continue.

Francis wrote:

Genoves wrote:
Are you as good at finding evidence to show that someone is in error philosophically?
Frncus responded.
Yes, I am.

But I don't feel compelled as to explain him in what consists his error..

(Maybe my Gallic presumption..)

*************************************************************

Gallic presumption, my anus! What about Gallic cowardice? The French showed thier cowardice at least twice in the Twentieth century. They let the Germans beat them to a pulp in World War I and World War II, because they have no cojones.

Anyone who has read Shirer's classic--"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" is aware of the French full-blown pusillanimity.

Lotteries were largely a liberal idea, pushed by liberals, as a solution to all kinds of pet projects or underfunded bureaucracies. It is presented as a no cost solution to funding things like schools, parks, etc., as if it doesn't cost the people anything, which of course is as far from the truth as you can go. Slowly, state by state, lotteries have spread and grown to the point that if only the problem would be recognized for what it is, it is monumental. So far, it is swept under the rug as a non-issue, but a few people recognize it for what it is, a cancer on the economy, and maybe someday more people will confront the reality of the problem.

Good point --Okie. And, you may know that in Illinois( Obuma's state) lotteries were first started after some CONSERVATIVES objected because of the many problems that the lotteries would cause. The left wing liars then indicated that MOST of the money the state made from the lotteries would go the SCHOOLS.

How could anyone possibly be against that, Okie? For the children--the children.

What the latter day Blagojevitches and Burrises did not tell the populace is that the money from the lottery ending up in the State GENERAL FUND. How much did the schools get? Almost nothing!

Your memory is foggy. At the time BOTH the far left and the far right had problems with the idea of a lottery. It was the center that pushed it......as a low pain way to gain revenue.

The Schools......that was always a sales gimmick, a way to make the regressive lottery tax easier to sell to the masses. It did for a couple of years go to education, and was actually money that the schools would not have otherwise gotten. From then on it replaced general rev money that otherwise would have gone to the schools. Does it now go into the General fund? If so, it is nothing besides truth in advertising, as it was for all intents and purposes going into the general fund almost from the beginning.

Hawkeye 10. I beg to differ. My memory is and was not foggy concerning Lotteries. I was referencing the state in which I live--Illinois. What I wrote was absolutely correct with regard to Illinois.

Note:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Departments Cover Stories Inside Stories Web Extras Spin Offs New Voices Editor's Note Reporter Impact Keeping Current About Us Our Impact History Our Staff Awards Reprint Permissions Join Our Team Contact Us Privacy Policy Archives Donate Subscribe Find A Copy
Lottery Payoff Uncertain for Schools
By: Leah Samuel
Principal Joan Dameron Crisler would like her Arthur Dixon Elementary School to see more returns on the area's lottery spending. The school, at 8306 S. St. Lawrence Ave. on the South Side, is in the 60619 ZIP code area, which in the year 2002 led the state in lottery sales. (Photo by Louis Byrd III)In 1972, Illinois legislators proposed a lottery with the promise of bringing in more revenue for the state’s public schools.

But this year, the Education Funding Advisory Board of the cash-strapped Illinois State Board of Education presented a proposal to reform school funding statewide, and it made no mention of the lottery.

That’s because the board does not expect the lottery to do much for education, said Chairman Ronald Gidwitz.

“The lottery is an artifice for raising money,” he said. “It’s a specious approach to funding schools.”

While its profits go directly to the state’s Common School Fund, the lottery does not supplement school funding, The Chicago Reporter found. The lottery is one of several pots of money that go into the fund, the account from which the state doles out money to its 224 school districts, and it does not affect the state’s total education spending. Simply put, lottery money is not a bonus to schools, but just a regular part of the state’s education budget.

And the funding school districts receive from the state has nothing to do with how much their communities spend on the lottery. This has a particular impact on Chicago. The share of the Common School Fund going to the Chicago Public Schools is smaller than the portion of statewide lottery ticket sales contributed by the city.

Some principals, teachers and residents in the state’s highest lottery-selling areas say they can’t see the benefit to their schools, which still lack many basic necessities.

“I don’t know that it was ever supposed to be a supplement” to school funding, said Anne Plohr Rayhill, public relations director for the Illinois Lottery. “When the lottery started, it was to help fund the state budget in general, from what I understand.”

But that isn’t the way some lottery players understand it.

Yvonne Morris, who works as a technician with the Illinois Department of Human Services, spends $15 a week on lottery tickets.

“I hope the money is going to the schools, because that’s what they tell us,” said Morris, who is also a student at Governor’s State University. “I heard on TV that the majority of the money spent on the lottery goes toward schools.”

Even the lottery tickets themselves are not completely clear when it comes to explaining how much of the lottery money goes to schools.

Play slips for Pick 3, Lotto, Little Lotto and The Big Game/Mega Millions, along with machine-printed tickets, state on the back, “By law, all lottery proceeds are transferred directly into the Common School Fund.” Scratch-off game tickets, like those for “Red Hot Cash” and “Winner Take All,” state, “By law, net proceeds are transferred directly into the Common School Fund.”

Little Money
In 1972, advocates of a state-run Illinois lottery proposed that its profits could be used to fund public schools. In late 1973, after much wrangling by politicians, the Illinois General Assembly voted to establish the lottery. The first lottery tickets went on sale in July 1974, and profits from those tickets went into the state’s general fund.

It wasn’t until 1985 that state lawmakers passed a law directing all lottery profits to the Common School Fund. The rest of the lottery revenue covers lottery prizes, vendors’ commissions and administration costs.

“To begin with, we’re not talking about that much money,” said Marty Oberman, a former Chicago alderman and longtime lottery opponent. “It’s not like this money helps out schools all that much.”

Lottery profits have never made up more than 21 percent of the state’s total appropriations for primary and secondary education, according to the Illinois Bureau of the Budget.

The Reporter analyzed lottery sales and Common School Fund allocations in Illinois school districts.

While 33 percent of the state’s lottery sales in fiscal year 2002 came from Chicago vendors, the Chicago Public Schools received 24 percent of the Common School Fund that year.

Lottery profits go into the school fund, which also receives money from other state sources. Each school district then gets money from the state school fund based on revenues from local property taxes. Poorer districts, with less property wealth, get more. The money school districts receive is not based on the lottery money they contribute.

“There’s nothing that differentiates the ‘lottery dollars’ from ‘tax dollars’ or any other [school funding] sources,” said 40th Ward Alderman Patrick O’Connor, chairman of the Chicago City Council’s Education Committee.

Shell Game
“The lottery does not materially help public schools because it does not generate additional funding,” said Ken Gotsch, chief financial officer of the Chicago Public Schools. “Instead, it has simply replaced state funding already in place.”

When the state sets its budgets for public education, lottery money is part of the calculation, even before the amount of lottery profits is known. The education budget includes state projections of lottery profits.

But state education spending remains the same regardless of whether lottery profits meet, exceed or fall short of expectations. If lottery profits fall short, the state transfers money from other sources to make up the difference. And if the lottery exceeds projections, the state transfers less money.

As a result, the lottery does not provide additional school support money. School and lottery reform advocates call it a “shell game” that deprives public schools of needed funding.

Mike Colsch, interim director of the governor’s budget office, acknowledged that the lottery funding is not a supplement to the Common School Fund.

“The lottery is one of the revenue sources for state education,” he said. “And the transfer of General Fund money to the Common School Fund is driven by lottery revenues.”

“I agree that the lottery dollars are part of the state budget for education,” said state Sen. Donne Trotter, “but the program is not set up for those [lottery] dollars to go directly on top of the existing budget for education.”

“We have this game that says all the profit coming from this lottery goes into education,” he added. “But the Common School Fund has no surplus.”

Trotter has repeatedly challenged the state’s use of lottery profits in the last few years. His 16th District includes parts of ZIP code areas 60619 and 60628, which have the state’s highest lottery sales.

In 2001 and 2002, Trotter proposed legislation that would send state money into the school fund without regard to the lottery revenue. This would effectively turn the lottery money into a supplement to school funding rather than a replacement, he said. Each time, though, Trotter’s bill was referred to the Senate’s Rules Committee, which never brought it up for a vote by the whole chamber.

Sen. John Cullerton, whose 6th District includes the Loop, Near North Side, Lincoln Park and Lakeview neighborhoods, is one of two Democrats on the Rules Committee. He said a Republican governor and a Republican majority in the Senate keep the Trotter bills from becoming law.

“The way it works is that the Rules Committee is controlled by the majority party,” he said. “They decide whether a proposal ever goes to a vote. That’s the power they have.”

Lisa Sims, spokesperson for Senate President James “Pate” Philip, said making lottery a supplement to school funding would require that money be taken from other programs.

“Unless the Democrats have another way to replace the money in the budget,” she said, “those bills would not have worked.”

And, while school and lottery officials were aware of how the state uses lottery money to fund schools, few were willing to share their views about it.

“I have some personal opinions,” said Gidwitz, “but from an official position, my concern is that we get money, not how it’s generated. If someone is interested in my opinion, I will express it to the proper authorities.”

The Illinois Lottery’s Rayhill would not say whether the lottery money should supplement school funding.

“The legislature and the governor allocate it, [and] we hand it over,” said Rayhill. “We don’t tell them how to allocate it and we don’t tell them what to do with it.”

“I have my own personal opinion,” she added, “but I do not want to question the governor.”

School Struggles
Some teachers, parents and school officials don’t believe the lottery helps education. They point to needs in their schools as evidence.

Arthur Dixon Elementary School, at 8306 S. St. Lawrence Ave., is among several schools found in the 60619 ZIP code area, the lottery’s highest-selling area in the state in fiscal year 2002, with more than $23 million in sales.

Principal Joan Dameron Crisler said the school could use extra money to add on to Dixon, where all of the students are black and two-thirds qualify for free or reduced-price lunches. She said her school needs larger classrooms and space for computer and science labs, a theater and a photo or video production studio.

“We keep it in great shape, but it’s a 1929 building,” she said.

Just south of 60619 and second to it in lottery sales was the 60628 ZIP code area, which includes Pullman and most of Riverdale, Roseland and West Pullman. It is 94 percent black, with a per capita income of $16,735, according to the census. In fiscal year 2002, lottery sales there approached $21 million.

“You would think that we would get some of that money,” said Catherine Boganey, a member of the Local School Council at Edgar Allen Poe Classical Elementary School, 10538 S. Langley Ave. “I’m disappointed. We have to struggle to get computers in the school, and to get our kids field trips.”

The councils are 11-member boards of teachers, parents and residents who oversee the budget and other policies at each of the city’s schools.

Pat Daley, a teacher at nearby Countee Cullen Elementary School, 10650 S. Eberhart Ave., said it needs money to reduce class sizes and improve computer access. Cullen is 100 percent black.

“I had [a classroom with] 30 kids this past year,” Daley said. “I would have loved to have had 20. My school has not been connected to the Internet, although [administrators] talk about it.”

With more than $1 million in lottery sales in 2002, one of the most successful lottery retailers in 60628 is 115th Street Food & Liquor, between South Stewart Avenue and South Halsted Street.

The lottery and liquor counters greet shoppers just inside the store. In the moments before the midday drawing on a September afternoon, customers gathered near the lottery counter, their talk and laughter mixing with the high-pitch buzzing of the lottery machine.

Retired teacher’s aide and grandmother Maxine Claudio said that she spends about $50 a week on lottery tickets.

“I don’t believe that most of it goes where they say it goes,” she said of the lottery revenue. “As much money as the lottery makes, I don’t see the teachers getting better pay.”

Since the lottery’s contributions to the Common School Fund are mixed with tax dollars and other revenue, it’s hard to tell exactly how the lottery aids schools.

“I often hear parents say, ‘I bought a lottery ticket today, so I contributed to the school,’” said Daley, a member of the Chicago Board of Education in 1991 and 1992. “But the truth is, you can’t trace a lottery dollar to a school.”

Not Enough
Meanwhile, school leaders from the 60619 and 60628 areas feel that lottery proceeds should be distributed to schools in the neighborhoods where lottery tickets were sold.

“If the money can’t go to communities in proportion, that’s a little off,” Boganey said.

“We should be getting a commensurate return on those dollars,” said Crisler.

O’Connor, whose North Side ward does not include any of the state’s top-selling areas, said it would be “incomprehensible” and “inappropriate” to distribute the lottery revenues that way.

“Rewarding those communities that generate the most lottery ticket revenue makes no sense at all,” he said.

“Essentially, what it means is that neighborhoods that gamble more get better school services, and I don’t think that was the intention of the [lottery] legislation. I would prefer to overhaul school funding sources overall, rather than relying on the lottery.”

Gotsch of the Chicago Public Schools does not dismiss the idea.

“If they want to apportion lottery revenues according to sales, that’s up to them,” he said. “Our goal is simply to increase funding because the state isn’t doing enough. We’re 48th in the country in terms of state funding for education.”

If you are wrong about basic things like trillions, how can we take you seriously about the other stuff?

Isn't it nice to live without questioning his own shortcomings and prejudices?

Do foul language and insults improve the message you intend to pass onto others?

In addition, it would never come to my mind to make the average American responsible for the wrong doings of America as a nation..

But there we differ, obviously...

Inflation is actually the only thing I'm looking forward to right now Okie. My house had declined in value by 30% now, if I used the 30-40 year historical average (excluding the housing boom), I can only hope to see 3-4% increases year over year (once we hit bottom, let's say 2 years from now). It estimate that it will take me 13 years for my home to return to the value it was when I bought it. The only way I can hope to sell my house in the next 5 years is if we see some 10% inflation (which I think we will likely see). I just have to make sure that my salary keeps up with the inflationary trend (with promotions/raises I've been averaging 10% over last 6 years), and I'll be a very happy homeowner.

C'mon inflation!!!!!!

Plus, that will make the trillions we're borrowing now much easier for my generation to pay back. Screw all those people who hope to retire and travel; they're the fuckers who got us into this mess in the first place. Their chickens are going to be coming home to roost, and I LIKE IT!

I don't think my memory is foggy on this at all. A couple of states, Oklahoma and Colorado, both were pushed in by Democrats, call them centrists if you want, but they were liberal ideas, not conservative, no way, as conservatives always opposed this idea. Perhaps some of the politicians that pushed it in were so-called moderates, but the whole idea is liberal in philosophy, get something for nothing. And the entire idea of a bureaucracy or policy costing more than originally intended is a tendency of liberal policies, big government policies, as programs and bureaucracies never sink in size, or almost never, and the cost is always greater than claimed at the outset. Almost always. Count on it.

Essentially what you are saying is - its okay to punish the people that have been responsible and that have not gone into debt, but reward the people that have built up debt, by allowing them to pay the debts off in greatly devalued dollars. That goes along with what Clinton said about Obama's politics, its Chicago street thuggery. Economics has now gone the thuggery method, take what the responsible people have and give it away to the ones that aren't.

One big point about the above. It will work for a while, but in the long run will make the country alot poorer and less prosperous.

I will concede one point, the government has built up huge debts, and through inflation will pay the entitlements, such as social security, in inflated dollars. In a sense, the baby boomer generation must bear some of that responsibility, however, it was the irresponsible government that did it, not the people. So, on balance, you have a point, but I mostly do not agree with you at all.

Um, it isn't like anyone is taking steps specifically to encourage inflation.



What the ****? This makes no sense whatsoever. It has nothing to do with Obama or Chicago at all. You just can't help but throw in criticisms of Obama in every post, related to him or not, can you?



Who do you think is the boss of the government? The people. How you can blame one, but not the other, is beyond me.

Cycloptichorn

Inflation won't help you with the value of your house all that much because your money will be worth so much less even though it looks like more on paper. I do feel for your plight--my son and his family are in the same boat as they bought after the bubble was accelerating and when it burst, they were left owing more than the market value of their house.

But it wasn't those of us who are beginning to retire or are trying to retire now who got us into this mess. Real estate values have consistently increased at a modest rate along with the rest of the wealth of the nation UNTIL certain people in government began using their powers to maintain and increase their own power. Through threats and coercion they required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and certain other lending institutions to make too many risky loans and is THAT one single thing that started a snowball rolling that inflated real estate values to unrealistic heights. The market value of our house, for instance, doubled in the span of six or seven years. That should not have happened. But at least we bought at the honest value of the property and not halfway up or at the top of the bubble, so we didn't get hurt when it burst and everything crashed.

What we need are elected leaders who have OUR best interests at heart, and who do not cater to the special interests to feather their own nests. We need to start electing more economists and business people to Congress too--people who understand the consequences of the legislation they pass. And we need to vote out the bums who did this to us and let them live under the laws they passed for us.

Protecting irresponsible people from credit card companies is a noble goal I guess, but you still don't hear them talking about protecting irresponsible people from taking out mortgages when they have no track record or ability to repay them.

I don't think they've learned their lesson yet.

I guess you don't hear that if you don't listen; but tightening up lending standards and stopping predatory lending has been one of the topics under discussion in Washington right now, and in fact, I believe legislation is moving forward on this issue as we speak.

Cycloptichorn

I'm not saying it's OK...I'm just trying to find some silver lining. It's going to happen whether I like it or not. We have SSN, Medicare, and budget deficit problems galore right now, and there is NO WILL in our government (on either side of the political isle) to do anything about it.



Like Cyclops said....the government = the people. Get ready to reap what you've sewn.

Like I said...I just need to make sure that my salary keeps up with inflation and I'll break even.

If inflation goes up 10%, my salary needs to rise by 10% to break even. I've been able to manage that sort of increase over the last 6 years, I've got some incentive to keep that up.

10% increase over 6 years seems eminently doable.

Sorry to hear about your housing woes. Eventually however the market will bounce back somewhat, and you'll still have a roof over your head. I wonder, is the upside-down value making it hard to get credit or other issues?

Cycloptichorn

I did mean 10% annually, which I still see as being completly doable.

Not really any other credit issues. I still have something like 60k in available credit, but issuers are gradually reducing it (it was almost 100k early last year).

I don't finance cars or anything though, so I'm not sure if I'd have any trouble doing that.