Should those who rely on govt. assistance be able to keep their lottery winnings?

[DiamondSkin]

No one deserves to win the lottery. This isn't a job promotion that relies on skill or number of years in experience. It isn't a talent contest which relies on ones ability to sing, dance, or draw. It isn't earned. So, I suppose I am saying that impoverished people don't deserve to win the lottery, but I don't believe wealthy people or middle class people deserve to win it either.

Than if no-one deserves to win than those who win it regardless of who they are or their class should be able to keep it, no?

Why exclude a group of people from keeping it? If no-one else deserves to win, why aren't they excluded too?

 

[memfuzz]

I came from a poor family and had to drop out of school in the 11th grade to do lawn work, but i got my good enough diploma (GED) if i won it i would save it and keep work and put myself through school for a better job so i didnt have to use the govt

 

[StlKj]

I apologize. I only read that one particular post and made a judgement on it.

I do agree that lotteries are marketed towards those of lower income but I respectfully disagree with the notion that a poor person who wins the lottery will become poor again because they're too uneducated to properly manage their money.

People are poor for many reasons. Healthcare debt. A loss in the family. A disease. A hurricane. etc.

To group those of lower income as people who don't know the difference between a stock and a bond is being generalist.

If anything, I think many poor people will find the need to save their winnings as they are accustomed to a living of lack of discretionary income.

Actually, DS, that is perhaps not most often the case. I've read up on it a lot, and I was surprised to find out how many people lose the money they win or inherit. They do this not only because they often don't have the education on how to handle the money properly, but because of the mentality they possess without even knowing it.

There is some powerful psychology behind the idea that we get the reality that we expect, and if we don't, we make that reality fit what we have in our minds. Sure, some people can win the lottery and keep it, making investments and saving it away. But many don't do that.

I ask my students, "How many of you have ever gotten a raise?" After the show of hands, I ask them, "Now, how many of you, once you got that raise, found your level of debt increased right along with it?" Guess what--nearly every hand goes up again.

My big point with them is that it's not always about how much we make, but what we do with what we make. It's possible for a poor person to save every cent not spent on necessities and one day have a nice sum of money saved up. It's also possible for a millionaire to be in debt and teetering on bankruptcy. It's the mentality one has about one's reality that is quite often the problem.

Which ironically goes back to Alpha's assertion that there is something futile and wrong with purchasing tickets for something you have little chance of winning, while complaining about the cost of your kids and drinking a soda. The wrongness there isn't that he's an a-hole spending money he can't afford--the wrongness is that he can't see the futility and irony of the situation.

 

[Red Storm]

It's not just the fact that he receives food stamps and bought a lottery ticket that aggravated. That in itself, I wouldn't have even noticed. We were in line to pay, not having a chat. It was his loud complaining about the cost of his kids, asking if the store accepted food stamps since he didn't have cash, coupled w/ the lottery ticket purchase that got me. If you're complaining that your kids are draining you dry and you can't afford to support them, and it was basic needs not decadent expenses that he listed off, then why are you buying a lottery ticket?

Why? hoping he wins and gets out of the situation he is in.

 

[Alpha1851]

Than if no-one deserves to win than those who win it regardless of who they are or their class should be able to keep it, no?

So, you'd place no limitations on winnings then? I've mentioned that most states garnish winnings from those who owe child support, taxes, or other state debts. In some instances, the ticket holder receives no award at all. Additionally, in some states, prisoners cannot receive a lottery award (bought the ticket before the conviction). Is this okay w/ you?

Why exclude a group of people from keeping it? If no-one else deserves to win, why aren't they excluded too?

I'd love to exclude everyone from winning the lottery b/c then, the lottery wouldn't earn a profit which means it would go away. I believe the lottery taxes the poor, encourages gambling addiction, is largely misadvertised (in states that do garnish the winnings, the info isn't largely published b/c the state would experience a drop in ticket sales), encourages depression, and creates an atmosphere for crime and fraud. Exclude everyone from the prize money and it goes bye bye. Of course, I'm unable to wave to my Harry Potter want and make this happen.

Regarding the other exclusions, I have no opinion as to whether a cap should be set on lottery winnings when the winner is on public assistance. I think NY's ten year rule is too drastic. If the cost benefit analysis shows the cap is more effective, I'd probably buy into it, but only if the person was on public assistance at the time they bought the ticket. It depends on how much money it would save really and which factors were considered. Intercepting winnings for those who received benefits in the past ten years, five years, or one year, seems too much for me.

Regarding other exclusions, I agree w/ garnishing winnings from those who owe child support and taxes. Those are debts. Unlike the public assistance scenario, the individual knew the child support and taxes had to pd and they agreed to it in advance. Most people do not expect to pay back govt. aid unless they're some sort of error in their benefit amount.

I believe prisoners should be allowed to keep their lottery winnings, IF they purchased the ticket before pleading or being convicted. It costs money to house a prisoner, but many people aren't aware that prisoners are not only sentenced to prison time, but they're also fined up the ass. In my state, the law library fee is pretty significant.

It's 2:13 and I have to get up at 5:00 for work, so I'm going to work a little more on my brief then head to bed. I've enjoyed the discussion.

 

[Alpha1851]

Funny how you said earlier in the thread that you really didn't have an opinion one way or the other. Yet it was pretty clear you did.

Flip / flop. Flip / flop. Rinse, repeat.

Nope, just b/c the customer aggravated me, it doesn't mean I want to take away his food stamp benefits or cap his potential lottery winnings.

I flip-flop on just about every argument there is. Sometimes I flip-flop b/c no one else takes that side or they dismiss all the other points w/ a flip of their wrist b/c they think it's stupid. Sometimes I flip-flop b/c I know I'll learn something from the responses to my post. Sometimes I flip-flop b/c I don't have a solid opinion and can see it from all sides. Sometimes I flip-flop to see which arguments will fly and which ones aren't persuasive at all. Yes, I flip-flop and repeat. I flip-flop all over the place.

 

[DiamondSkin]

So, you'd place no limitations on winnings then? I've mentioned that most states garnish winnings from those who owe child support, taxes, or other state debts. In some instances, the ticket holder receives no award at all. Additionally, in some states, prisoners cannot receive a lottery award (bought the ticket before the conviction). Is this okay w/ you?

If a person is legally entitled to owing a debt than I have no problem with garnishment of winnings much like garnishment of wages.

However it has to go through trial much like it does with garnishment of wages so both cases can be presented.

I don't agree with a prisoner not being allowed to win the lottery winnings regardless whether they bought before or after their conviction.

A pure lottery is non-exclusionary. Anyone who buys a ticket has just the same amount of chance of winning as the next person. Nothing more. Nothing less. I don't care if the person is a murderer, a pedophile or friggin' Lex Luthor. By excluding any person, it creates a bias which makes a lottery something other than a lottery.

Obviously, a realistic option would be to place the winnings in the hands of a family member or friend who is legally contracted to handle the money until their release. If they are to never be released either due to life imprisonment or the death penalty, then they should have the right to will it to any person they like.

 

[StlKj]

Nope, just b/c the customer aggravated me, it doesn't mean I want to take away his food stamp benefits or cap his potential lottery winnings.

I flip-flop on just about every argument there is. Sometimes I flip-flop b/c no one else takes that side or they dismiss all the other points w/ a flip of their wrist b/c they think it's stupid. Sometimes I flip-flop b/c I know I'll learn something from the responses to my post. Sometimes I flip-flop b/c I don't have a solid opinion and can see it from all sides. Sometimes I flip-flop to see which arguments will fly and which ones aren't persuasive at all. Yes, I flip-flop and repeat. I flip-flop all over the place.

While I disagreed with some of the points Alpha made here tonight, it was exactly because of what she says here that I didn't have a problem with her making those points. If you've ever seen her in a thread where she has a strong set opinion, there is no flip flopping.

I don't learn anything if everyone I'm in a conversation with feels/thinks the same way I do. And sometimes the only thing I learn from someone expressing a different opinion is how firmly and happily I'm entrenched in my own.

 

[Alpha1851]

I don't agree with a prisoner not being allowed to win the lottery winnings regardless whether they bought before or after their conviction.

In my state, it's illegal to purchase a lottery ticket for another person (I'm not saying it doesn't happen anyway). Sentencing takes place on the same day as the pleading or conviction, usually directly thereafter. The prisoner can't purchase a lottery ticket since they can't physically enter a store to buy it, so if they've obtained a ticket after they've pleaded or been convicted, then they've obtained it illegally. So yes, I think it's okay to take those winnings. That's just my state, and others are different.

 

[Alpha1851]

If it really is a lawyer, it explains a lot. Especially the deflection on the hypocrisy charge.

"It"? Ouch. Well, if "it" was going to lie about "its" profession, "it" would've chosen something more popular, like teacher, doctor, or big dicked, gay porn model. Not to mention that some JUBBERS comment on "its" profession, instead of "its" arguments, as way to state that "it" is dumb. Obviously "it" wishes "it" had kept "its" profession to "itself."

 

[Alpha1851]

Mhm.

She does it to teach people.

Right.

That's what you got from:

I flip-flop on just about every argument there is. Sometimes I flip-flop b/c no one else takes that side or they dismiss all the other points w/ a flip of their wrist b/c they think it's stupid. Sometimes I flip-flop b/c I know I'll learn something from the responses to my post. Sometimes I flip-flop b/c I don't have a solid opinion and can see it from all sides. Sometimes I flip-flop to see which arguments will fly and which ones aren't persuasive at all. Yes, I flip-flop and repeat. I flip-flop all over the place.

------------------------

Only thing I learned from this thread is not to buy anything miss Law here deems "frivolous" in front of her because among other things she looks down on me for, she's really going to hate me for spending money I get from government funding on shit I really don't need.

Preach on Alpha. Apparently us uneducated people need your flip floppy information in order to 'grow.'

You think I'm teaching people instead of teaching myself, am preaching, and am looking down on people. I think you love playing the role of the victim, make wide ranging statements about the gay community and cry when it bites you in the ass, and are generally self-righteous. Who cares about how Ms. Law and Ms. Self-righteous view each other? Not a damn person. It has nothing to do w/ the topic.

 

[Alpha1851]

Here is what I saw, and what I think many others saw as well. Alpha posted a thread to complain about someone she saw spending food stamp on food and cash on lottery tickets and she deemed that act inappropriate. When people came down on her for that she changed her tune to "I have no opinion."

Better check again then.

Here is my first post raising the question:

The majority of our states have a state lottery, so what's your opinion on this. If they hit the jackpot, should individuals who receive welfare, state funded health care, food stamps, or WIC, be allowed to keep their winnings or should the money go back to the state?

Would your opinion change if the lottery winners previously relied on govt. help, but did not do so at the time they purchased the lottery ticket?

And here is my second post giving my take on the issue:

I stopped at a convenience store for gas, and noticed that the customer in front of me purchased a Coke and chips w/ food stamps and a lottery ticket w/ cash. I haven't formed a solid opinion yet as to whether the winnings should be garnished, but I was somewhat aggravated that the customer used food stamps, but had enough money to purchase a lottery ticket. On the one hand, I think that if you're relying on govt. benefits for survival, then you shouldn't waste money on a lottery ticket and those winnings should pay the govt. back so the money can be used to help other individuals in need. Many of our benefit programs are out of money and state defecits are skyrocketing in order to keep them going. The lottery jackpot could provide relief.

Also, laws governing the lottery and gambling vary btwn states, but several states automatically garnish the winnings of those who owe child support, taxes, or other state debts, so why not add govt. assistance as well (some states already do). Plus, taking at least a portion of the winnings might dissuade indigent people from playing the lottery which hopefully means they’ll have more money to spend on nec. items.

On the other hand, if these people are not able to keep their winnings, they'll continue to rely on govt. assistance until their situation improves, so allowing them to keep their winnings could be more cost effective in the long run. Additionally, the govt. does not typically regulate how individuals spend their money. Indigents who receive govt. benefits can purchase beer or cigs w/o big brother looking over their shoulder, so why should lottery tickets be any different. Also, depending on the state, lottery revenues help fund health care, education, economic development, and public roads among other things. If the state garnishes the winnings, it would discourage indigents from buying lottery tickets which could have a detrimental effect on the state’s budget.

I clearly set out both sides and you've agreed w/ several of my points. I'm interested in the issue, if you aren't don't chime in. You don't have to post in my threads you know.

 

[Alpha1851]

Does it state anywhere when you buy a lottery ticket that if you are on "state aid" or some other disclaimer that you will not be awarded the money if you play?

The state's statutes have the rules of course, but it isn't always clear and most people don't read through the codes. Some wouldn't even know where to start. Of course, our laws don't always fall in line w/ common sense.

In NY, there's a public assistance program where individual works for their welfare check. Similar to one of FDR's programs. Well, NY intercepts lottery winnings up to a certain amount if the individual received any public assistance benefits w/in 10 yrs. before winning the lottery. It incl. "working welfare" as well!

Many NY citizens were amazed that WEP fell into the category where lottery wins could be intercepted. After all, these folks worked for their welfare check, it wasn't a hand out. It seems like the state is double dipping.

Although the information is supposed to be readily available, judging from the responses in this thread, many JUBBERS were unaware of the caps and other laws surrounding state lotteries. Every state has at least one lottery limitation or benefit, some seem unusual. In MI and many other states, a church doesn't have to pay taxes on its lottery winnings since its tax exempt. In NJ and some other states, winnings are w/held on folks who defaulted on student loans. In ID, lottery prizes are garnished to pay back public assistance benefits. A proposal in GA to w/hold the total amount of public assistance benefits received from prize winnings of $600 or more did not pass. The weakening economy has brought it up for debate again. Most every state garnishes winnings if the individual's child support obligation is in arrears; however, the amount w/held and the prize amount which leads to the garnishment, varies btwn states.

Most state lottery commissions have websites which set out the rules and have a toll-free number and email section so citizens can ask questions. Some state lottery commissions print booklets and hand them out and some run periodic television ads. Information is also available at the retail stores where tickets are sold and is generally posted where folks can see. In some states, the entire rules must be posted in plain sight. Retailers are supposed to go through training and are ready to answer questions if asked. Often, lottery tickets have the rules too (but that doesn't nec. help here b/c the individual has already spent their money on the ticket). It seems that the information is out there(or at least it's supposed to be), but a person needs to be proactive about finding it BEFORE buying a ticket.

Again, judging from the responses here, many people didn't realize that some states w/hold winnings from those receiving public assistance. Is it b/c the particular JUBBERS don't reside in those states, or just don't play the lottery? Maybe. Or, is the information not where it's supposed to be. I can only answer for my neck of the woods, and the lottery rules are clear and largely available. But, I only noticed them this morning and that's b/c I looked for it--I wanted to find out what sort of ticket the customer had the various costs since I've learned in this thread there are scratch offs, numbered tickets, and many others, w/ each having various costs. I've never bought a ticket before or paid much attn to how it's played.

 

[trawler69]

Just to bypass the bicker fest this has become ( I have read the first 50 or so replies) I'm just going to answer the original question and give my reasons.

Yes they should be allowed to keep the money. The Govt relies on people playing the lottery, It funds not only the prize but charitable and other works. The govt also relies on the fact that it is the worse off who play it because of the psychological hope that maybe, one day, it will be them that win. Chances are many of these people are on benefit. If you remove the hope of them winning the big one and keeping it you lose their dollars. They will spend them on something else that probably has less financial benefit to the govt and the govt loses that chance of getting them off benefits if they were to win.

If they do win then first they come off benefit, second they pay tax on either the winnings or the interest from them, dependant on laws, and thirdly they spend the remaining money in the economy which gets largely recycled as tax in one form or another.

So at the end of the day it is essential that winners are allowed to get rid of their winnings themselves, regardless of where the stake came from, to remove that could effectively cripple the good (Debatable) that it does in redistributing the money of the poor / govt to needy causes. It is really just a way of speeding up the natural economic cycle and keeping money flowing.

 

[bankside]

Holy crap. I solved this problem back in Post 48. Everyone needs to unbunch.

BTW, GhoMo, Solara, I'm into taxing the churches too. And income tax for the priests etc.