Flutterby™! : a hundred k

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

a hundred k

2007-03-06 18:43:30.864592+00 by Dan Lyke 2 comments

An article about the glee that lottery officials are feeling about the $350+ million jackpot in tonight's drawing had this gem:

The result: The state lottery revised its forecast for sales in the current fiscal year, which ends in June, from $3.6 billion to $3.2 billion. That means $1.13 billion to public education rather than $1.27 billion.

Lottery spokesman Rob McAndrews said the state lottery takes problem gambling seriously and spends $100,000 a year fighting it. The agency is airing public-service announcements on radio and television all month.

Giggle. I'm bettin' that the lottery billboard on I-80 westbound just after the Bay Bridge costs 'em more than that.

[ related topics: Bay Area California Culture Gambling ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: made: 2007-03-06 22:05:17.608892+00 by: whump

Okay, that's a big enough jackpot that the utility of imagining what I'd do with $135M-Net of taxes is worth a dollar.

#Comment Re: made: 2007-03-07 00:37:05.623986+00 by: Dan Lyke

Yeah, at this point it's high enough that if you were guaranteed one winner, at circa in in 175M odds of winning, it's actually a rational decision.

Of course as inverse insurance there are other ways to make the occasional lottery ticket purchase a reasonable decision. And I think some people looking at the numbers have argued that if you pick higher numbers you're better off 'cause then you're biasing against sharing a win with people who use dates as "auspicious".