Is the Lottery a Regressive Policy?

The casting of lots to determine fortunes and property is as old as human history. The first public lotteries to offer prizes in the form of money were recorded in the Low Countries in the 15th century for purposes such as building town fortifications and helping the poor. Today, state lotteries generate billions of dollars in revenue each year and are an integral part of American culture. They attract players whose enthusiasm for the game is often accompanied by sophisticated strategies for winning – forming a syndicate, buying tickets in bulk, picking the right numbers, and limiting the amount spent on each ticket. Lottery advocates argue that this “painless” source of state revenue is essential to funding state services, including a generous social safety net.

But Cohen argues that the lottery is a regressive policy, even in its most charitable forms. The money that people spend on tickets robs them of the opportunity to save for the future or pay down debt. And, as state lotteries grow more commercialized, they tend to focus their advertising efforts on luring new customers, particularly those with less-than-ideal financial profiles.

The result, he says, is that the lottery promotes gambling as a way to improve one’s life—an unquestionably legitimate goal but a flawed one. Instead of encouraging people to save, lotteries are luring them into speculative investments that will, in the very rare event that they win, end up making their lives worse.