The Lottery and Its Critics
Throughout history, people have been casting lots to make decisions and determine fates. The lottery is the modern incarnation of this ancient practice, which was used by Roman emperors for everything from distributing land to divining God’s will. It came to America along with English colonists and was initially greeted with a range of negative responses, including from Christians who objected to gambling. However, it has since gained broad acceptance and now raises more than a quarter of a trillion dollars per year for state governments.
Lottery critics have generally focused on specific features of its operation. For example, they have argued that the advertising strategy is inherently biased toward keeping players hooked, and that state-run lotteries exploit the psychology of addiction as much as tobacco companies or video-game manufacturers do. They also point to the fact that, because state lotteries are run as businesses with a focus on maximising revenues, they are at cross-purposes with the public interest, particularly in terms of their impact on lower-income Americans.
It is important to consider these concerns when assessing the merits of lottery policy. In many ways, lottery criticism resembles the arguments made against public education or public welfare. Its supporters point out that the utility derived from winning a prize may well be sufficiently high to offset the disutility of the monetary loss incurred by purchasing a ticket. They also point to the fact that the lottery is a remarkably efficient way to generate revenue. It is not a stretch to say that most states would be hard-pressed to balance their budgets without it.