Is the National Lottery price rise 'a tax on the poor'? (poll)

Poll

Is the National Lottery price rise from Â£1 to Â£2 a 'tax on the poor'?

Angry Lottery players have vowed to stop buying a ticket after operator Camelot announced that the price of a Lotto line will double to £2.

More than 1,000 players vented their fury at the price hike on the National Lottery Facebook page this afternoon with many describing the increase as 'greed' while others predicted that it would signal the end of Camelot's involvement with the draw.

Many will condemn the rise as inflation on what is already billed in some quarters as a 'tax on the poor'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2263367/Lottery-tickets-cost-2--prize-matching-numbers-rise-25-payout-drop.html#ixzz2IDjQoQZa

Some of the comments:

Personally, I think it's a ridiculous statement, for several reasons;

1. Nobody needs to play the lottery - it's not necessary, and totally incomparable to food, housing, clothing etc.
2. Mathematically, it's a very poor idea to play the lottery - it only makes sense if you're willing to pay the fee for the entertainment value of waiting to see if your numbers come up. I play on occasion mainly for this purpose.
3. It's £2. Do be serious.
4. The idea that the poor only have the lottery as a way to 'better themselves' is laughable in a country in which education is free and compulsory for all.
5. The poor arguably shouldn't be playing the lottery at all considering it is a terrible 'investment' and they have much more pressing needs to attend to.
6. The price of a ticket hadn't risen before now since 1994. Almost twenty years with no inflationary rise was unusual.

Do you agree with me that it is not 'a tax on the poor', or do you think that it is?

-----
Featured on the TSR New and now page - home of the top content on TSR
-----

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 1

Heidihi7894

13

I think I agree with every point you made. Nobody forces the poor to play the lottery so I hardly see how it is a tax on them. It is also by no means the only way to better yourself financially, and isn't a particularly good one either. They could of course just buy half as many lottery tickets.

Reply 2

xoxAngel_Kxox

21

I clicked on yes, but meant no. Sorry I'm still half asleep!

I usually play twice a week via direct debit which costs me £8/£9 per month. This is fine, but if it moves to £16/£18 per month I will be cancelling the direct debit. I'm not saying I'm stopping playing entirely, but it seems to me that almost £20 isn't a monthly fee that I would like to pay, whereas £9 just seemed like a relatively small amount- I am aware it's just the psychological aspect that it sounds so much more.. so I will just play every so often instead.

I would love to win the lottery, but I am weighing that up against how unlikely it is, and instead of gaining £6mil I'm just losing £204 per year instead, which I could use on something better! Of course I've always been losing money, but the price rise has just made me think about it.

Reply 3

Aspiringlawstudent

OP

3

Original post by xoxAngel_Kxox

I clicked on yes, but meant no. Sorry I'm still half asleep!

I usually play twice a week via direct debit which costs me £8/£9 per month. This is fine, but if it moves to £16/£18 per month I will be cancelling the direct debit. I'm not saying I'm stopping playing entirely, but it seems to me that almost £20 isn't a monthly fee that I would like to pay, whereas £9 just seemed like a relatively small amount- I am aware it's just the psychological aspect that it sounds so much more.. so I will just play every so often instead.

I would love to win the lottery, but I am weighing that up against how unlikely it is, and instead of gaining £6mil I'm just losing £204 per year instead, which I could use on something better! Of course I've always been losing money, but the price rise has just made me think about it.

Out of interest, why don't you just switch to Euromillions if the price for the same is equal? The odds are less favourable, but considering winning either is incredibly unlikely you may as well go with one that has a much higher jackpot.

Reply 4

xoxAngel_Kxox

21

Original post by Aspiringlawstudent

Out of interest, why don't you just switch to Euromillions if the price for the same is equal? The odds are less favourable, but considering winning either is incredibly unlikely you may as well go with one that has a much higher jackpot.

I think I would die if I won that much. I mean, actually have a heart attack and die.

You do have a fair point though, and I've never played EM, no idea why!

Reply 5

Aspiringlawstudent

OP

3

Original post by xoxAngel_Kxox

I think I would die if I won that much. I mean, actually have a heart attack and die.

You do have a fair point though, and I've never played EM, no idea why!

I would imagine for quite a while I wouldn't believe it had actually happened; I think I'd be more numb than shocked.

Reply 6

Snagprophet

17

No-one's forcing you to give away your money gambling. Stop acting so entitled.

Reply 7

Aspiringlawstudent

OP

3

Original post by Snagprophet

No-one's forcing you to give away your money gambling. Stop acting so entitled.

You're not aiming that at me, are you?

Reply 8

almost_instinct

6

Original post by Aspiringlawstudent

Angry Lottery players have vowed to stop buying a ticket after operator Camelot announced that the price of a Lotto line will double to £2.

More than 1,000 players vented their fury at the price hike on the National Lottery Facebook page this afternoon with many describing the increase as 'greed' while others predicted that it would signal the end of Camelot's involvement with the draw.

Many will condemn the rise as inflation on what is already billed in some quarters as a 'tax on the poor'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2263367/Lottery-tickets-cost-2--prize-matching-numbers-rise-25-payout-drop.html#ixzz2IDjQoQZa

Some of the comments:

Personally, I think it's a ridiculous statement, for several reasons;

1. Nobody needs to play the lottery - it's not necessary, and totally incomparable to food, housing, clothing etc.
2. Mathematically, it's a very poor idea to play the lottery - it only makes sense if you're willing to pay the fee for the entertainment value of waiting to see if your numbers come up. I play on occasion mainly for this purpose.
3. It's £2. Do be serious.
4. The idea that the poor only have the lottery as a way to 'better themselves' is laughable in a country in which education is free and compulsory for all.
5. The poor arguably shouldn't be playing the lottery at all considering it is a terrible 'investment' and they have much more pressing needs to attend to.
6. The price of a ticket hadn't risen before now since 1994. Almost twenty years with no inflationary rise was unusual.

Do you agree with me that it is not 'a tax on the poor', or do you think that it is?

1. I'm not sure what your point is. We tax things that are non-essential too, like cigarettes for example. The problem is that increasing the price of a good will restrict some people's ability to purchase it. Pricing the poor out of paying for certain things is generally frowned upon.
2. Some people may play for entertainment purposes only, some people like the idea of winning the lottery and not having to worry about paying the bills and keeping a roof over their heads.
3. That £2 adds up. Don't be so condescending.
4. No one's argued that the lottery is the 'only way' in which the poor may better themselves. Find a better straw man.
5. Who are you to suggest what the poor should and should not be spending their money on?
6. Some might argue that a rise of 100% is even more unusual.

Reply 9

ed-

13

£1 a week is hardly tax is it.

A lot of people who are far from poor gamble.
I'm not poor and I buy the odd lottery, bet on the odd accumulator. Who doesn't want the chance to make more money for doing nothing?

Reply 10

getfunky!

21

It's an optional game, no one is forced to play.

Reply 11

username234673

17

Looks at the price of everything in 1994.
Looks at the price of everything now.

Do I really need to say more?

Reply 12

Aoide

11

This is stupid and shows a real problem with peoples attitudes. Aside from the essesntials needed to survive, you aren't entitled to any goods. People certainly don't have the right to be able to afford a lottery ticket. It is a luxury item and if you can't afford it then you don't get one. Part of being poor is not being able to buy things, I want a ferrari, but i'm not calling for them to half the price because I can't afford one. Pricing poor people out of essentials is bad, poor people being unable to buy luxury items is life.