Considering the amount that you can win on Lottery, of course people will play more to increase their chances of winning, unfortunately those people don’t know how to know the probability to win on lotto and this is also why the government is making them fool literally, and taking advantage against them to collect more money. Though I support their Charity works but hopefully, bettors will not literally depend on this because hard works always pays off.
Probability does not apply when you are desperate to find a shortcut to a life that is advertised to you by these lottery outlets. When it comes to charity though, I am skeptic about it because people in power have the tendency to be corrupt and plunder this lottery earnings that was supposed to help the people in need. I find these lottery using the earnings for charity to help the poor that is funding these charity by buying lottery tickets to be a bullshit perpetual system with only the administration benefitting from it no matter. But a lot of people have requested to put it back because they think it is the only chance to raise themselves from poverty. nowadays, you can a lot of people fall in line just to get their hand to buy one ticket that might lead them to escape poverty but in most cases, that's become one of the reasons to stay in poverty because of such mindsets.
I think that there is a term for that kind of mindset, if I am not mistaken it is Gambler's fallacy wherein the belief that continuous bet on something even if you are losing will lead you to win someday, no statistics but just the belief that eventually you will hit the jackpot. I do not blame them for their decision though, this mindset was not innate. If people were taught at the early age financial literacy then that kind of mindset of luck reliance will not manifest in their adult life. i am a Lottery fan mate and i still Bet in lottery at least one or twice a week not because i am Poor but because this is the gambling i learned from my parents and even my grandies .
and i don't feel that way mate,i trust the government and give them a chance to seek taxes for the people.
Shouldn't you stop that tradition of buying lottery and put the money on things that is more essential or could return an interest, the money you spent on lottery could add up to buying an investment that will help in the long run. You might regret all that money you have spent on lottery in the long run, I am just reminding you and you are free not to do my advice. Good for you that you trust your government which means that they are doing their job and they are not screwing the people in your country. People are not mandated to bet on lotteries and that is enough I think to tell that it is not an abuse of the government. They tend to bet not because they are required but because it is their own likeness hoping to get a "better" life out of luck. Since they are having a tough time to get rich on their jobs, they are still gambling their luck to the other way of having huge mount of money. We cannot blame them from doing so, since in the first place they are not required to bet on lotteries. But it is true, winning is a punch to the moon and little do they know that as their trials are getting bigger, same thing happens with their losses.
Yes they are not technically abusing the people but they benefit from the perpetual cycle of poor people funding their lottery charity for the poor people. They do use psychological techniques when they advertise lottery which is in a way an abuse. I think people relying on luck makes them poor even though they have jobs, yes their jobs will not make them rich but if they do not manage their finances and find other ways to generate cashflow then nothing will happen. |
|
|
|
You forgot to mention the true appeal of a lottery and state lottery for example which is the cost of a ticket.Usually varies in developed countries between 1-3 Eur or Usd and in third world countries to 1 Usd max.These are amounts anyone can afford even those hanging near the poverty line as even the one with the minimum wage can decide to spend 5 usd on tickets every week and rely on luck.That is what makes lottery a very lucrative form of gambling even for people who only play lottery and are not real gamblers.
I forgot about that, and you are right. The ticket prices appeals strongly towards people as much as advertising. The individual price of the ticket is a psychological tactic employed by business to make people think that they are not spending that much when they are purchasing something which in turn makes the chances of this people to buy more go higher. Everyone will definitely hope to win a lottery, this is a natural thing because whatever prizes we get can be used as additional income. The problem is when it becomes a habit and costs a lot of money to pursue the opportunity. What is wrong is not in the habit but using a lot of money to get a chance to win the lottery so that the habit becomes bad.
The chance to win the lottery is always related to luck, although buying many combinations can increase the odds, but if we are not lucky then we could still lose.
I agree that occasional bets are alright, but this occasional bets could be bad when you are buying bulks of tickets. Habitual lottery betting is as bad as buying a lot of combinations in one go because they only differ from time scale, buying 12 tickets occasionally is the same as habitual 1 ticket. Lottery for the most part is always a lose for those who bet. The promise of a good life after winning the lottery is what gets poor people hooked to playing the lottery. I have known a lot of people 'taking care' of certain numbers for decades and still hasn't won a single cent, and have even told them had they saved those few $ per bet, they would have gotten somewhere else now.
I have my share of people who have played the lottery and regretted doing it too. Thanks especially to my parents for teaching the dangers of playing lottery. I feel bad for this people and the money that they have spent because I always imagine what could have been of their money if they did not spend it on lottery to take chance to get the jackpot, if only they knew of compound interest or investment, they could have been more happier and more content than the people winning the jackpot. lotto did not make any promises but people are the ones that assumed it . infact lotto is still questionable to some if this is really legit or its only a way to milk people but not totally milk because its said that government based lotto are being tax or can go to the charity . i hope that was true and they dont lie when they say that . people in any status make bets on lotto not just the poor , comparing lotto to astraunut is new to me but its not fair because anyone can be an astraunut while winning in lotto is close to impossible. no mathetmatician can make a combination but i agree that buying all the possible combination can increase your win chance
You are right in some parts, yes people assumed it but that is because they are introduced to it through advertisements. The comparison of chances to become an astronaut and winning the lotto has statistics to back it up. And no, not everyone can be an astronaut because there are only few countries that have a space program, unless you are born in those countries, the chances goes to zero. Not mentioning the training and the requirements to become one. |
|
|
|
The pros and cons depend on how addicted the player. If they only spent like $10 per month, it's really not a big deal for the hope of getting rich. People need hope!
The cons start when they spent more and have foolish expectations.
10$ might look insignificant on a small but imagine if they do it zealously for a year, that is 120$ in annual spending in lottery which does not guarantee a win. If they used it for other things like essentials in a household if you are from a low income household or you could have invested it in bitcoin if you have access in purchasing it. There are plenty of options out there to spend that amount that has worth. It may look insignificant in annual scale but the accumulation over time will make you regret your decision to spend it on lottery tickets. I totally agree with the idea that lottery is a poor man's tax, but when you're in that position and desperate - it looks like a way out. The odds against you are so astronomical that you are effectively wasting money if you do this form of betting on a regular basis. There will always be a winner, but you'll find that lottery operators are constantly tweaking the numbers and it is rarely to favor the people buying tickets.
That is the sad reality about lottery, it entices people the idea of easy escape in poverty even when the odds are stacked against them in colossal scale. I have to commend the first people to introduce lottery to the masses because masses hate tax but they love gambling. Yes there will be occasional winners but either they spend it on stupid things that effectively waste the money or they become so miserable because they do not know what to do with the money they have. There is a book about the latter that documents winners of lottery and their behavior after winning. I forgot the title but I think it can easily be searchable. I have a negative attitude to state lotteries, as I do not believe in the integrity of such lotteries. In my opinion, more transparency is needed to ensure the necessary level of trust. This could be achieved using a blockchain, but my state is unlikely to do it.
I am the same as you, because most of the news headline in my country is all about corruption in the government. I effectively lost faith in the lottery system in my country even if they say that the proceeds will go to charity. |
|
|
|
The British government has offered a pathway to UK citizenship to around 3 million residents of Hong Kong, who have British National (Overseas) status. I am not sure how many of the residents are going to apply, but this is a big blow for China. If UK goes ahead with its plan, then it will trigger a massive brain drain and eventually it will destroy the HK economy.
Hongkong is a special economic zone, I do not think it will affect their economy, the selling point of Hongkong is its real estate and people from around the world are flocking there to buy one and I do not think that the brain drain will destroy the economy because besides having expensive real estate to fund the economy, it is also a tourist destination. Obviously which democratic country would want itself to be ruled by a communist again? No matter how ruined your country is people of this century still prefer democracy.
I wouldn't want to live in a communist country too, with stories from yesteryear about the hardships of the people living in communist states and atrocities committed by the people in those countries, it will be a definite pass for me. Democratic is the closest thing we have to a utopic government, if only the masses are actively participating in the community and they care about the social injustices happening then democracy will work as intended. But we can't have that because of human's primal instinct to compete with one another. |
|
|
|
I couldn't say that it is really a scum way to tax the people since it's still from the government and they spend it as well to health, charities and so on and I'm seeing it's for the good cause in the long run.
Unless the people behind the government spending and the government is corrupt. The money will only go straight from someones pocket. We all know that most third world country (which my country is) is either corrupt or tolerates corruption. The funny thing is that where most lottery is sold is in the poorest neighborhoods.
That is funny in a way but this is the scary thing about lottery, it specifically targets the low income households which does not contribute much in tax but with their number bigger than high-income households, they exploit this instead of truly helping. |
|
|
|
Even being a statistician wouldn't make you win lotteries. They can only calculate the amount actually required to achieve a certain success rate, but in the end, a 100% success rate is close to impossible, unless you buy out every ticket, but if not? Then you can only infinitely approach the rate of you actually winning.
I am not saying it will make you win per se, what I was saying there is that you have an edge if you know the statistics to predict the result. Buying all possible combination can win you profits especially some lottery have conditions that can net you some break even like 3 of your number matched the winning number. Lotteries offer huge prizes due to the number of people that can actually join it, without burning a hole into their pockets. For a small price, there's also a small chance of them winning big, so it is technically a great business idea. Pros and cons? I doubt there's actually one when you're playing a game that relies on luck. It's like no matter how much you discuss the pros and cons there, there's really no changing the result of it, no matter what.
That is a dangerous attitude towards finances, saying that it does not cost a lot when buying lottery tickets is nothing compared to the travel time you wasted to buy the lottery ticket and if you add up the accumulated money you spent on it and other people, you will be surprised that it is not a big deal. |
|
|
|
There are controversies about it, there are rumors about it. Every election period someone wins the jackpot and even my father-in-law who works for a governor told us that there are instances that the lottery in our country is rigged and fake people are chosen to collect the jackpot for election money. There is no way for us to verify this but this makes sense since most mega jackpot are won during election perior or even prior to that.
That is really scummy for the people behind the curtains taking the jackpot after earning a profit from the sales of lottery tickets. There are controversy everytime money and officials in the government is involved, I do not get this people plundering the money of the people, is a lot of money worth to tarnish their reputation. The craziest thing you said is the lottery is rigged because they need to pull off this some kind of heist in front of their citizens watching the lottery draw. It could be a conspiracy but it also be true because there is no definitive proof. |
|
|
|
I don't see it as a tax since they are free to avoid it but most of the poor are really clinging into it.
They are paying for it every once in a while to try their luck on hitting that jackpot that is almost impossible to get.
And I understand them even though I hate the idea for them it is a small sacrifice to have a chance of becoming a multi millionaire.
That is what I meant by saying that lottery is the tax for poor people. Honestly, if they only rely on chances then they wouldn't get far. Most statistics on lottery players has shown that most of the players come from low income household. Even if they are free to avoid, then how come people aare still betting on it, there is only one to blame and that is the advertisements that promises things specifically targeted towards these people. Even if you win the lottery, most winners suffers Sudden Wealth Syndrome. |
|
|
|
Well coming to territorial expansion of China. One thing I can tell you it's not about resources only. It's maybe more about pride or something. They fought harsh for Tibet which is more of a liability than a resource. It's a large piece of barren land with not much to offer. Similarly now they are fighting for some land in Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh with India this land too is more or less barren and apart from having some strategic advantage is useless. HongKong and Taiwan maybe said as expansion for resources.
I can agree at a certain point, I think this is more of an intimidation tactic rather than glory for their country. Hongkong's case is that they are invalidating the agreement they had between United Kingdom that makes Hongkong free state until 2047, they do not see it as a resource expansion, this is more on One China Policy like the case with Taiwan with Taiwan not wanting to associate with Mainland China and wanting to be recognized as a country. |
|
|
|
|
Lottery is the most notorious of all the gambling institution. The promise of a good life is what makes this a lucrative attraction for the people below or hanging in the poverty line. Although the odds of winning is higher than becoming an astronaut, many still take the chance to get the coveted numbers. Unless you are a statistician/mathematician or you have the money to buy all the combinations, winning is close to impossible.
Do you think that the pros of playing lottery outweigh the cons or vice versa?
Is government owned lottery a scummy way to tax the poor people?
How far are you willing to gamble to win the coveted jackpot (If you are playing lottery)?
|
|
|
|
Another way to check is the alexa ranking I have installed Alexa toolbar so I can check the traffic stat phishing site will always have a very low traffic stats here is the real Electrum traffic stat This site ranks:
#58,288 of course besides checking the PGP. That traffic tracker is a new for me, I have heard of similar sites that have this sort of function. I will check this one out, and I think this deserves a topic of itself because it can help you identify sketchy sites from the real one. The problem with the website mentioned is that it is an ad so we can't rule out that it really is a scam site because no one visits ads that much in my opinion, I am not saying that the site is legit too but with the mindset that every site traffic rank is the basis of legitimacy will be detrimental for sites that are overshadowed by scam site. |
|
|
|
People should be able to move money over borders as they wish to and not have it restricted by governments.
You can move money across the borders although there is a certain amount that is allowed. I think having a fixed amount to be moved across borders is reasonable enough because this can be a cause for wide scale money laundering. Bitcoin improves the economy by promoting a more open and fair system of trade that is free from government regulation and consfication. Money laundering shouldn't be a crime as it just means someone is trying to keep their own money, and the most terrorism/war is funded by governments using fiats and involuntary taxation that cryptocurrency can further free us from. The trillion dollar war in the middle east didn't come from Bitcoin, it came from the US governments and governments around Europe directly financing terrorism themselves.
I think money laundering should be a crime, that is one twisted way of saying that you do not want to pay your taxes. The reason that money laundering is illegal is because government's lifeline is the taxes that is payed by the people. The so called war has been going on even before the inception of bitcoin, I think using the reason that bitcoin did not fund this war does not prove anything. |
|
|
|
Blockchain technology is one the fastest growing degree that offers digital and technical skills accordingly. The future of the world will depend on the blockchain that I believe. If you are searching for it for a good career with blockchain then this is the high time to grab this chance. There has a huge possibility of making a bright future.
It does offer a great oppurtunity and I agree with that, hopefully more people are going to pursue this niche in technology because the technology is still in its infancy which means that the potential is still unimaginable. The problem with this one though is that the resources to refer for learning is still limited so possible enthusiast will have a hard time because they have to explore although the discovery will be worth it. |
|
|
|
All of this would happen only if Trump wins the election. I think he is the one who started this whole campaign against China to which first China retaliated and then under aegis of USA, India i ls trying to retaliate too. But if Bidden wins I think we might see an altogether different China. Chinese are pretty simple I think they are just interested in business and won't create nuisance until you give them good business which obviously Bidden would support. But I know India won't take the first step in attacking China and China too would be reluctant to announce a full out war with any country so I feel these incidents are just skirmishes and nothing like WW3
This is not a matter of who is leading the country, this is an agreement between four countries. Trump's presidency might have affected it in some way but I think that is besides the point. This so called Chinese interest in business, I do not think that they want just to do businesses. Remember that resources are limited and China knows this, so they decide to make a move by territorial expansion through financial and political leverage. The problem is that all of them do not know how to compromise and each country are trying to one up the other. |
|
|
|
I'd love to get more feedback on this. What do you guys think about the podcasts, is there something you would change?
You should set up some kind of Patreon to keep your podcast afloat and to get production value higher. And try to strive to be different from other podcasts and discuss niche topics in regards to bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general. |
|
|
|
No, it does not counter the advice of diversifying the portfolio because to manage many coins in our portfolio isn't easy, and that will need skills to do that. It will no problem if you have those skills, but if you don't have the skill to manage too many coins, buying bitcoin as the main investment will not be a problem.
With only having bitcoin as the investment, that means we can make a profit in the future, and it is okay to have only one coin in your portfolio. Diversifying a portfolio will be good, only if you know how to manage it.
I can see where you are coming at. If I look at it with deeper understanding, it is advisable that I will focus on one coin before trying to diversify my portfolio so I have a feel and learn the ins and outs of the game without risking too much. Unfortunately, people become greedy if the price starts to rally and breaks their target price, and they will not sell at that price instead of waiting for another high price. At least, the advice for people to sell their coin, whether it's bitcoin or altcoin, is when the price can reach 2x of your bought price so that you can make a profit. But if you can accept the risk to wait for longer, you can still hold the bitcoin, but you don't have to regret if the price can't increase higher.
Is it advisable or reasonable to set a price point where you sell the coin? In my opinion, it can be dangerous because the target might not be reached because of out of control market elements or the target might come late. |
|
|
|
|
If you are making an accusation, make sure to move your thread in the Scam Accusations board. Other replies already emphasized the importance of providing an evidence, the big reason for that is to make sure that your accusation have some grounds so the suspect can't just walk away by denying everything. This also helps you to see if you are credible and that you legitimately are a victim and not just finger pointing anyone in a witch hunt.
|
|
|
|
|
If the thread is not actively participated by the OP and it promotes scams instead of a healthy discussion of ideas and arguments then I think that it is fair that the thread to be deleted. This has to be applied to the most extreme cases where it is occasionally bumped by unhelpful replies that are there for the sake of bumping the post, the reasoning behind that is most scam threads tend to fade in obscurity with most replies telling that the thread promotes scam.
|
|
|
|
Well in my country we also have limited use of bitcoin but we prior t keep the coins on holding as investments.
Hope you learn to do so because it is not only the use to buy product or service but it can be a profit provider for long term.
it is sad to say that a currency like bitcoin are keeping hold but for now this is the only way we can be safe in this until the adoption finally happens soon.
Most in the consensus does not have that much shop that have a bitcoin integrated in their transaction system. Volatility might be the number one reason that businesses do not integrate them in the first place, imagine your coffee shop updating their price from time to time so they can get a profit and as a customer, I do not want to see that my favorite food to order just keeps on changing its prices, the system to update precisely is very expensive especially for small businesses. |
|
|
|
Lorence.xD you are right, we can live without banks. It's evolution, from tribes
to modern world, banks were essential before, even now they are a big part of
economy, but with introducing crypto-currencies we see that we can do things without banks as third party service. We needed them before, but now I can send coins to
anywhere, why I need to go bank and pay them to do that for me when I can do it myself and it will be cheaper.
Thank you for agreeing with my opinion. One thing that I want to add to further my argument is if people stopped asking for compensation for their work because money is just a construct that our services have value. Although my addition to the argument is impossible in the current setting, it is still a possibility. The problem with crypto is its unreliable volatility that could spell disaster to a business that fully relies in crypto. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
