Employers this morning wait apprehensively to see if anyone is about to quit, following a single winner of the Big Wednesday State Gambling Scheme. Some lucky person from Masterton is $34 million plus better off. Did they have a job? On the other hand, are beneficiaries one less in number? Judging by the latest figures - some 302,000 on benefits and the highest since 2005, we may not notice.
For most of us this morning, it's back to the grindstone. Oh well, standing in those long lottery queues to buy a ticket is good training to stand in those long queues to register for the dole. Or can you do that over the internet now?
What will the lotteries commission do with all that extra money raised from this latest gambling splurge? Fund the gamblers support line? Lobby to curb excessive gambling? Maybe fund remedial reading lessons for politicians?
The lotteries commission has one important message for those who "invested" heavily in their retirement fund, and that message is translated from "it's all just a game" to the underlying and very important message:
"No refunds"
For most of us this morning, it's back to the grindstone. Oh well, standing in those long lottery queues to buy a ticket is good training to stand in those long queues to register for the dole. Or can you do that over the internet now?
What will the lotteries commission do with all that extra money raised from this latest gambling splurge? Fund the gamblers support line? Lobby to curb excessive gambling? Maybe fund remedial reading lessons for politicians?
The lotteries commission has one important message for those who "invested" heavily in their retirement fund, and that message is translated from "it's all just a game" to the underlying and very important message:
"No refunds"
Indeed "No refunds". And I am fully aware of that fine print. Similarly I wish to retain my own personal choice to place a mere $5 gamble or not. I am capable of deciding whether this is a good investment or not. I don't need others to make that decision for me. After all "it's all just a game".
ReplyDeleteFor sure, Sean.
ReplyDeleteAnd it makes sense for the State to control gambling.
They could make as much money again for worthy causes if they also took over prostitution and tobacco.
"And it makes sense for the State to control gambling." - I thought they already did. Lotto (at least) is a state monopoly if I'm not mistaken. Or are you referring to social control?
ReplyDeleteAnd we know they already tax tobacco heavily, so that has to be a form of control. As for prostitution, well aren't the hookers supposed to pay tax, now that it is legal.
Lotto is a type of State monopoly, and I was merely making the comment that rather than just have punitive taxes to curb behaviour, they have gone further with Lotto and actually run the business.
ReplyDeleteWhy not establish a "KiwiFag" and "KiwiBonk" line of business?
On the other hand, I suppose there is an exception to every rule.
"they have gone further with Lotto and actually run the business."
ReplyDelete- and what would more state intervention achieve? I mean, really?
"Kiwibonk" - is that a additional charge to the IR5 or a deduction?
Just musing out loud Sean. Musing that if the State uses our tax dollars to help gamblers, should they also be running Lotto?
ReplyDeleteThe answer "because it makes money" might explain controlling electricity.
The answer "because people still get to choose" doesn't explain why they stay out of other lines of business.
Maybe the answer "because the profits go back into the community" makes people feel better about gambling, knowing they aren't making some overseas corporation richer. Maybe it even helps increase their sales?
Just musing.