lottery

RHFOY · 23-12-2010, 18:15

does anyone agree with this? we should have two national lotteries, the midweek one should be for people on an average income of 30k or less, including the unemployed.. this would include 20 wkly prizes off 100k and 10 at 25k, the less well paid could still do the other lottery but not vice versa, this would take people of the dole.

jaysay · 23-12-2010, 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by RHFOY

does anyone agree with this? we should have two national lotteries, the midweek one should be for people on an average income of 30k or less, including the unemployed.. this would include 20 wkly prizes off 100k and 10 at 25k, the less well paid could still do the other lottery but not vice versa, this would take people of the dole.

Na lifes a big enough lottery as it is

RHFOY · 23-12-2010, 19:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Na lifes a big enough lottery as it is

well thats true.. but this idea would help the lottery of life by making the less well of and the poor richer, camelot take far to much for other problem areas that need support, we need to look closer to home on things like this... charities could benefit by all businesses having to give a minimum of 20 pound a wk to these NECESSITY,causes, imho..

jaysay · 23-12-2010, 19:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by RHFOY

well that's true.. but this idea would help the lottery of life by making the less well of and the poor richer, camelot take far to much for other problem areas that need support, we need to look closer to home on things like this... charities could benefit by all businesses having to give a minimum of 20 pound a wk to these NECESSITY,causes, imho..

Playing the lottery is a personal choice, you only have to look on here there are a few you have never played the lottery once, I myself have played it every draw since it inspection

lancsdave · 23-12-2010, 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by RHFOY

charities could benefit by all businesses having to give a minimum of 20 pound a wk to these NECESSITY,causes, imho..

Is that on top of buying a shovel and grit to clear their own pavements ?

RHFOY · 23-12-2010, 20:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by lancsdave

Is that on top of buying a shovel and grit to clear their own pavements ?

salt is cheaper, plus most of us have a shovel in the shed.. somewhere

lancsdave · 23-12-2010, 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by RHFOY

salt is cheaper, plus most of us have a shovel in the shed.. somewhere

Most of us also have a brush, should we all sweep the streets too ?

MargaretR · 23-12-2010, 20:39

I don't like the idea.
The people on low incomes are the ones who can least afford to fritter a few pounds a week on the lottery. It encourages gambling and false hopes - the odds against winning are phenomenal.

Better that they be encouraged to save those few pounds and then buy premium bonds
.....where their money does not disappear into some funding for some project they are never likely to benefit from.

RHFOY · 23-12-2010, 20:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by lancsdave

Most of us also have a brush, should we all sweep the streets too ?

of course not :-)

DaveinGermany · 23-12-2010, 20:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by MargaretR

It encourages gambling and false hopes - the odds against winning are phenomenal.

I think most are also aware of that, but it's that fantasy, the imagining of what could be if only ! That's folk for you, all with a dream of being a winner, making it big. Part of the reasoning why these "make me famous" programmes have such a following. Personally I can't stand them, I've got enough to do keeping my own life in order & above water than to wonder if Tilly Mint or Fred Basset, will make it to the end & get rich & famous.

RHFOY · 23-12-2010, 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by MargaretR

I don't like the idea.
The people on low incomes are the ones who can least afford to fritter a few pounds a week on the lottery. It encourages gambling and false hopes - the odds against winning are phenomenal.

Better that they be encouraged to save those few pounds and then buy premium bonds
.....where their money does not disappear into some funding for some project they are never likely to benefit from.

in my idea all the money goes back into all the local communities in turn and it wont be spent on worthless projects..
maybe im being too ideal here, it must be my altruistic personality...

steeljack · 23-12-2010, 21:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by RHFOY

does anyone agree with this? we should have two national lotteries, the midweek one should be for people on an average income of 30k or less, including the unemployed.. this would include 20 wkly prizes off 100k and 10 at 25k, the less well paid could still do the other lottery but not vice versa, this would take people of the dole.

thought the aim of unemployment benefit was supposed to be a temporary bridge to cover hard times between jobs , not to support a lifestyle , I'm thinking the lottery is a bit of a luxury, not something the founders of the Welfare State had in mind at its creation

RHFOY · 23-12-2010, 21:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

I think most are also aware of that, but it's that fantasy, the imagining of what could be if only ! That's folk for you, all with a dream of being a winner, making it big. Part of the reasoning why these "make me famous" programmes have such a following. Personally I can't stand them, I've got enough to do keeping my own life in order & above water than to wonder if Tilly Mint or Fred Basset, will make it to the end & get rich & famous.

with a lottery for the working class or poor the poorer get richer and what they spend ringing in and voting could be spent on lottery tickets in their community even rather than nationally, ie if 1million was won in accy every wk and every wk we had 10 winners at 100k each im sure when the community as 360 winners in 6 months, it would be a roaring success.
example.. sadly this xmas is going to be a low key affair and the kids in some households will not be receiving gifts from santa?? could you have imagined the number of tickets sold last night on the accy community lottery??? today the town would have 10 more 100k winners,,

RHFOY · 23-12-2010, 21:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by steeljack

thought the aim of unemployment benefit was supposed to be a temporary bridge to cover hard times between jobs , not to support a lifestyle , I'm thinking the lottery is a bit of a luxury, not something the founders of the Welfare State had in mind at its creation

im sure i mentioned folk under 30k.. and lots of people are on benefits at no fault of their own,, and an 100k win would have 10 off the dole if they were all onit every wk, thats 520 a year, and alot off very happy people..

cashman · 23-12-2010, 21:19

would never work, people on benefits, or earning under 30k, would need to be able to prove the fact fer starters, then some bright spark in government would proclaim, reduce benefits, they can afford to squander it.