• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

No winner for the $900M Powerball jackpot, Wednesday draw worth $1.3B

FieldTheorist said:
Right, I agree, but I also made that point in my first post. I'm not saying it's irrational to pay 2 bucks to have some fun, I'm saying it's irrational to spend 2 bucks and think about it like it's an investment.
Click to expand...

People that play the lottery know that they the 2 bucks they spent is gone forever. I will buy a ticket wednesday and will go back to work thursday. But it's better having a 1 in 212 million chance than having a 0% chance of winning 1.3 billion.
 
99percenter said:
People that play the lottery know that they the 2 bucks they spent is gone forever. I will buy a ticket wednesday and will go back to work thursday. But it's better having a 1 in 212 million chance than having a 0% chance of winning 1.3 billion.
Click to expand...

Or you could collect those 2 dollars a week and after a decade you'd have 1,040 dollars in your bank account. If you decided to invest it, you could have some 1,308 dollars in investments. It's not a huge amount, but it's better than 0.

Of course, that's assuming you don't do it for fun. If you do it for fun, then the 2 dollars isn't an investment, it's just for your own pleasure.
 
FieldTheorist said:
Or you could collect those 2 dollars a week and after a decade you'd have 1,040 dollars in your bank account. If you decided to invest it, you could have some 1,308 dollars in investments. It's not a huge amount, but it's better than 0.

Of course, that's assuming you don't do it for fun. If you do it for fun, then the 2 dollars isn't an investment, it's just for your own pleasure.
Click to expand...

Again, nobody buys a lottery ticket and says "this is an investment I'm making!
 
FieldTheorist said:
Or you could collect those 2 dollars a week and after a decade you'd have 1,040 dollars in your bank account. If you decided to invest it, you could have some 1,308 dollars in investments. It's not a huge amount, but it's better than 0.

Of course, that's assuming you don't do it for fun. If you do it for fun, then the 2 dollars isn't an investment, it's just for your own pleasure.
Click to expand...

It is fun. Nobody plays the lottery as an investment unless they have some serious gambling problems.
 
99percenter said:
It is fun. Nobody plays the lottery as an investment unless they have some serious gambling problems.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree. I'm just saying that the whole "it's better to spend 2 bucks to not have a 0% chance" is not really good reasoning. Again, I agree with you, the point of it is the fun.
 
JasperL said:
Well, the expected value of the payout and the cost per ticket just ARE the most important facts if you're trying to make a rational decision. The big odds don't change the calculation. You point out below that Wall Street would get involved if the payout was actually beneficial, which is true. But the reason they don't buy up every ticket is not because it's irrational, it's because there are objective factors working against that bet. First and foremost is the possibility of more than one winner - maybe 10 winners if the winning numbers are popular ones. Second is the practical impossibility of placing 292 million bets. You can pick the numbers, but it would be impossible to first prepare the tickets, and then run them through a scanner at a convenience store in the time allotted.

But I can guarantee you if Wall Street could make trades with guaranteed payout of 800 million before tax for 584 million in bets, with their money tied up for a matter of weeks, they'd do it tomorrow. They'd sell the winnings to a non-profit or a firm with huge NOL carryforwards (i.e. not taxes on the winnings), and make a huge payday for themselves.



As long as you an easily afford to lose the bets, it's still a rational bet if your ticket costs $10 or less. There is as good a chance that 1/trillion odds hit on the first draw as on the last.
Click to expand...

Do you think it's possible for sales to move to the Internet at some point? If so I can see an opening for purchasing a multitude of tickets.
 
definitely going to top a billion this time, it looks like.
 
I hope to find the winning lotto ticket laying on the ground. Odds are about the same but it doesn't cost me anything to play this way. Come on winning Lotto ticket!!! Come to daddy!!
 
Deuce said:
Again, nobody buys a lottery ticket and says "this is an investment I'm making!
Click to expand...

I have zero doubt that there are people out there right now borrowing money from their friends and saying, "Thanks buddy, I'll get you back for this, I'm playing the Powerball this week."
 
TurtleDude said:
what was funny was I heard one of the parents of a kid I coach saying-now its so high I will buy a ticket as if last week's jackpot wasn't high enough. the difference between 558 million and 806 million might matter to maybe 50 people in the USA/
Click to expand...

... but it could matter very soon. If you're to assume the simplest scenario that there's a $1.3 billion jackpot, you're the sole winner, you take the cash payout, the gov't take 40% and the odds of winning are 1 in 292.2 million: it gives a $480*1/292.2 = $1.64 value to each $2 ticket. The net return is -$0.36.

However if there's no winner on Wednesday and it bumps up to $1.7 billion, the expected value jumps up to $2.14 for each $2 ticket, leaving a positive net return and then all hell will break loose. That's because all the mathematically inclined risk takers living in no income tax states will realize the opportunity to try to game the system.
 
brothern said:
... but it could matter very soon. If you're to assume the simplest scenario that there's a $1.3 billion jackpot, you're the sole winner, you take the cash payout, the gov't take 40% and the odds of winning are 1 in 292.2 million: it gives a $480*1/292.2 = $1.64 value to each $2 ticket. The net return is -$0.36.

However if there's no winner on Wednesday and it bumps up to $1.7 billion, the expected value jumps up to $2.14 for each $2 ticket, leaving a positive net return and then all hell will break loose. That's because all the mathematically inclined risk takers living in no income tax states will realize the opportunity to try to game the system.
Click to expand...

I wil give you credit-that's an interesting argument
 
OrphanSlug said:
$1.3 Billion... the lines for numbers tickets should be epic.

:popcorn2:
Click to expand...

I really don't get why that is. When the lottery gets up there to a large amount people will go buy a lot of tickets. Generally when someone wins a big lottery its usually split between several people. Even a 1.3 bill lottery , you know they are going to take lump sum payout so prob 700m will go to taxes the balance will be likely be split between 4-6 people so maybe 100-150 m each. which is about the average amount when the lotto pays out. the min starting amount for pball is like 40m. so why people just get crazy when it gets up there like this. even winning the min amount after taxes still sets you up for life.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Quick! Rush out to your local lottery ticket seller, stand in along line and voluntarily offer the government $2 in exchange for a 1 in 292 million chance of hitting it really, really big! Never mind that the government will get between 1/3 and 1/2 of the (eventual) winnings without buying a single ticket. The sheeple are so stupid.
Click to expand...

i agree that it's dumb to waste time/gas to seek out lotto tickets, but if you're there already...

i don't think either the 1/3 the government keeps should be a deterrent either. I could live off $800 million just as easily
 
SocialD said:
I really don't get why that is. When the lottery gets up there to a large amount people will go buy a lot of tickets. Generally when someone wins a big lottery its usually split between several people. Even a 1.3 bill lottery , you know they are going to take lump sum payout so prob 700m will go to taxes the balance will be likely be split between 4-6 people so maybe 100-150 m each. which is about the average amount when the lotto pays out. the min starting amount for pball is like 40m. so why people just get crazy when it gets up there like this. even winning the min amount after taxes still sets you up for life.
Click to expand...

because they think they can't live off $40 mil
 
$1.3-plus Billion may be just enough to get me out to buy my first ever PB ticket.
 
I got powerball tickets today...five of them. But I didn't stand in line. I went to my local gas station early this morning...walked right up to the cashier...and bought them.

You see, I usually don't even think about lottery tickets but this jackpot is in the news so much I can't help hearing about it. But now that I have my tickets, I can forget about the whole thing. Heck, I might not even remember to check the numbers Wednesday night. LOL!!
 
brothern said:
... but it could matter very soon. If you're to assume the simplest scenario that there's a $1.3 billion jackpot, you're the sole winner, you take the cash payout, the gov't take 40% and the odds of winning are 1 in 292.2 million: it gives a $480*1/292.2 = $1.64 value to each $2 ticket. The net return is -$0.36.

However if there's no winner on Wednesday and it bumps up to $1.7 billion, the expected value jumps up to $2.14 for each $2 ticket, leaving a positive net return and then all hell will break loose. That's because all the mathematically inclined risk takers living in no income tax states will realize the opportunity to try to game the system.
Click to expand...

um, you do realize most lotto participants are in it because, however remote their chances to win, they figure there's 0 other possibility they'll ever escape their ****ty 8-5 job right? They seriously don't analyze it by ticket value

And to the vast vast majority the net return is -$2.00, every time. Also if you did win, you wouldn't give a damn about a few % on state sales tax
 
TurtleDude said:
I will give you credit-that's an interesting argument
Click to expand...
It's not all that exciting. It's the same business strategy as casinos and other gaming companies. All of the games they offer have a house edge to them. Which another way of saying that the expected value of each play in their games is slightly less than the player's bet. Like for roulette, it's a $0.95 value to the player's $1 bid. So in the long run, the casino will come out ahead as long as people show up to play the game.
 
No quick picks. I have inside info that it's going to be one through six.
 
brothern said:
It's not all that exciting. It's the same business strategy as casinos and other gaming companies. All of the games they offer have a house edge to them. Which another way of saying that the expected value of each play in their games is slightly less than the player's bet. Like for roulette, it's a $0.95 value to the player's $1 bid. So in the long run, the casino will come out ahead as long as people show up to play the game.
Click to expand...

I have always believed that lotteries are taxes on stupid people
 
chromium said:
um, you do realize most lotto participants are in it because, however remote their chances to win, they figure there's 0 other possibility they'll ever escape their ****ty 8-5 job right? They seriously don't analyze it by ticket value. And to the vast vast majority the net return is -$2.00, every time. Also if you did win, you wouldn't give a damn about a few % on state sales tax
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that as the pot grows, the return on a single ticket may flip to a positive net return which will then incentive attempts to game the system.
 
brothern said:
What I'm saying is that as the pot grows, the return on a single ticket may flip to a positive net return which will then incentive attempts to game the system.
Click to expand...

and how could you game the system other than buying say 60 million tickets so that you're likely to win?

i could see a billionaire trying it, if tickets were ever sold in unlimited quantity online
 
TurtleDude said:
I have always believed that lotteries are taxes on stupid people
Click to expand...

i am thinking the factory worker in my state who found out she won $300 million while at mcdonald's drivethru is rather glad she bought the ticket and couldn't give a **** less if about the taxes, because what's left is still like 150 million times her life savings
 
chromium said:
i am thinking the factory worker in my state who found out she won $300 million while at mcdonald's drivethru is rather glad she bought the ticket and couldn't give a **** less if about the taxes, because what's left is still like 150 million times her life savings
Click to expand...

yeah just like the kid who is a lottery pick for the NBA who cut classes and barely graduated high school to hone his turn around jump shot. and in their wake or millions who spent money they really didn't have to lose or were left with no education and no contract in the NBA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom