Senator Wins Lottery - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

maleficent · 10-21-2005, 03:23 AM

Quote:

Big Win for a Senator: $853,492 From Powerball
WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 - While driving to the Capitol for a vote on Monday, Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire stopped at a service station to buy gasoline. Just for fun, he bought $20 worth of Powerball Lottery tickets.

This morning, he checked the newspaper and saw that he had a ticket that matched the first five winning numbers, though not the Powerball number. "Wow," he recalled thinking. "I must have won about a hundred bucks."

More, actually. Today, Mr. Gregg banked a check for $853,492.

"Every American believes in good fortune and good luck, and I'm no different than anyone else," he said at a news conference. He said he does not play the lottery often, but was intrigued by the jackpot of some $340 million.

A Powerball ticket winning the jackpot was sold in the Jacksonville, Ore., area but had not been claimed at last report. Mr. Gregg was one of 47 players who matched five numbers for a substantial consolation prize.

Mr. Gregg, a Republican who heads the Senate Budget Committee, has $1.5 million to $6.2 million in stocks, real estate and other investments, according to his latest financial disclosure form. He is one of at least 40 senators who enjoy millionaire status.

The senator said he and his wife, Kathleen, would talk about what to do with the money, once he has paid the taxes on it. Some of it may go to the Hugh Gregg Foundation, which supports New Hampshire charities and is named after the senator's late father, a former governor of the state.

Mr. Gregg said he was grateful to the service station clerk who ran after him as he was leaving because he had left one of his tickets behind. "She was a very pleasant young woman," he said. "She might have kept it, and for all I know it might have been the winning ticket."

The talking heads on the local news this morning were going nuts over this.. they were completely appalled (dare i say jealous) that a millionaire would win the lottery. He doesn't need the money, so therefor he shouldn't have won.

For years, the slogan of the NY Lottery was all it takes is a dollar and a dream are rich people not allowed to have that dream too? I'd be willing to bet most of this guys money is tied up in paper anyhow.. now he's got actual cash...

Does it bother you that a weathly person won a share inthe lottery? How about the fact that he's a US Senator? Is this even a newsworthy event?

Personally, I say, good for him... He's on the budget committee so I'd imagine that he'd be pretty good at managing money - he's not going to go to a strip club and spend it all there...

Latch · 10-21-2005, 03:50 AM

I don't see this as a newsworthy event...

The lottery is completely random.. and if he took the chance to buy the ticket, he should have the opportunity to win, just like everyone else that bought a ticket. Whatever money he has beforehand is irrelevant (sp?). Sure, now he has more of the stuff (maybe he can finally fill his pool with $50 bills and go swimming)... but whatever.. the guy won fair and square (most likely, I doubt it was rigged), and that's life.

To all the people crying about it... better luck next time.

MageB420666 · 10-21-2005, 04:07 AM

The lottery doesn't pick winners based upon those who deserve or need the money most. It's completly random, anybody who plays has a chance at winning.

And I do think that someone winning $850,000 is a news worthy event, although the fact that the winner was a senator doesn't matter much to me.

little_tippler · 10-21-2005, 04:09 AM

I think it's fair, he played, he won. So what?

Just as an aside, my boss is pretty wealthy and he plays 50 € of tickets for the Euromillions lottery. He's never won big but he occasionally wins some money. It's allowed. There's no prerequisite for the players is there.

Psycho Dad · 10-21-2005, 04:16 AM

A great many people where I work seem to make plans for the future based on their faith that they are going to hit the Powerball one day. It is going to be interesting how they act over this. I've got a strong feeling that a good number of them are going to be crying the "he ain't got no right" song this morning.

albania · 10-21-2005, 04:35 AM

The lottery is like that really hot chick you had a crush on but knew she would never go out with you. I mean she's there for you to dream, and rarely sometimes you get the chick. Now I lost track of what point I was trying to make, oh yes, anyone is allowed to dream even guys that already have hot girlfriends.

shakran · 10-21-2005, 04:49 AM

while there's nothing inherently wrong with a wealthy senator winning the lottery, the feeling of many is that he shouldn't play since he doesn't need the extra money - he should let someone else get it.

Of course, that leads you to question why the state is sponsoring gambling in which most people who really need the money will in reality just be wasting their own money in the attempt.

jwoody · 10-21-2005, 05:05 AM

There was a big scandal in Britain, when a convicted rapist won about £7 million on the lottery while he was in prison.

The biggest bone of contention was that he was allowed to buy a ticket, considering the lottery is a form of gambling.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3554008.stm

Following his release The Sun newspaper tracked him down and found he was living under police protection, with a new identity, and it was all paid for by the taxpayer.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005450513,00.html

There is a change of the law being discussed which would mean any future, imprisoned lottery winners would have to pay for their own protection.

The chances of another prisoner winning the lottery are slim, to say the least, but the new law will also mean that anyone with a large amount of money will have to pay for their own protection upon release.

BigBen · 10-21-2005, 06:55 AM

The lottery allows us to dream. I buy a ticket every once in a while (just one ticket, since it was proven mathematically that my chances are the same with one ticket or a thousand).

340 Million? Did I read that correctly? Even with federal tax taking half and state tax taking another quarter, that still leaves 85 million dollars in prize money to be claimed by one person? Wow.

In Microeconomics, there is a cool curve called the consumption possibility frontier, and you plot your income against this curve. You maximize your welfare by choosing the point along the budget line that intersects with the highest utility curve...

What would 85 million dollars do to your consumption possibilities? I really believe that I would go insane... but they call those people "eccentric".

I dream about winning 10 million, and occasionally about winning 15; but 85 M AMERICAN? That is too much.

As far as the senator winning, I could care less. I always believed that the lottery is a tax on the mathematically impaired. The thing is, when you look at the proportion of money that this senator spends on lottery tickets (20 dollars divided by 5 million, or however much he is worth on paper) it is considerably smaller than the average lottery player (5 bucks divided by a couple of grand net worth).

The senator can afford to play the lottery, because his amount of relative disposable income is exponentially larger than Johnny and Suzy Powerball Player. I suggest society should be disgusted and upset that a single parent living dangerously close to their means is playing the lottery, not this rich senator.

Poppinjay · 10-21-2005, 07:07 AM

I really wanted to be indignant when he won. That was my base response, and my basist character. The part of me that wants to call republicans doody heads.

The fact is, he probably will put the money to darn good use. So many of the lottery winners have been so trashy. There's a growing story about lottery winners going bankrupt because they don't know how to handle it. The latest was the 4 people who spllit the powerball in Ohio in the late '90s. They ran out, got motorcyles, hot cars etc.

Does anybody remember Evelyn Adams who won the Jersey lottery twice? She lives in a trailer now. It's all gone.

Willie Hurt rang the Michigan lottery for $3.1 million in 1989. Two years later he was broke and charged with murder. He spent his fortune on a divorce and crack.

The variouis lotteries have left a trail of tears, bad business decisions, and lawsuits. It's amazing the slights that turn into full assaults after a person gets a few million.

Janite Lee won $18 million in 1993. Lee was generous to a variety of causes, particularly politics, education and the community. 8 years after winning she had filed for bankruptcy with only $700 left.

Ken Proxmire won $1 million in the Michigan lottery. He moved to California, went into the car business with his brothers and within five years filed for bankruptcy.

Several winner fall prey to "loan"companies who will give out money immediately with the future lottery checks as collateral. You can imagine how that works out. Milllions have evaporated down those snake holes.

And of course, if you're poor or even middle class, you have poor or in debt relations. And they want some cash.

The worst person to win millions, is somebody who has no concept of how to manage money.

Redlemon · 10-21-2005, 07:09 AM

I agree with everything BigBen just said: if you play, you are purchasing the chance to dream about winning for a bit, not a chance to actually win. I'm too coldly logical to even do that.

A buddy of mine at a previous workplace would play one of the smaller payout lotteries. He came in excited one day, since he had just won $100 or something. I asked him how much he had payed out so far to get that $100, which deflated him. Oops, sorry to kill your buzz there.

denim · 10-21-2005, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakran

while there's nothing inherently wrong with a wealthy senator winning the lottery, the feeling of many is that he shouldn't play since he doesn't need the extra money - he should let someone else get it.

My "take" on this is that he was contributing. According to CNN.com he played something like $20 worth of tickets. He therefore contributed to the pool to be won. I doubt he expected to win, but he played, so it could happen. And it did. Check out the CNN story, as Mal is correct in that he's largely tied up in stocks and real estate. Not that he's poor, nonono. Still, if you play, you can win.

politicophile · 10-21-2005, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigBen

The lottery allows us to dream. I buy a ticket every once in a while (just one ticket, since it was proven mathematically that my chances are the same with one ticket or a thousand).

I don't mean to threadjack, but I did want to counter this misinformation.

Let's say that you're playing Pick Three, where you select three numbers from zero to nine. There are 10^3 (1,000) possible numbers. Thus if you buy one ticket, your odds of winning are 1/1000. If you buy ten tickets, your odds are 10/1000, or 1/100. Buying ten times as many tickets makes you... ten times more likely to win! (Caveat: if you buy the same number more than once, this rule does not hold true.)

The same rule applies for lotteries with more numbers, too: It's just that the difference between one out of 10 billion and one out of 100 billion aint really significant in the real world.

5757 · 10-21-2005, 02:23 PM

Honestly, yes. I feel a bit jealous. I don't see any problem with him winning though. He bought the ticket fair N square. Now, he could donate some of his winnings to me, or maybe someone else here on tfp! It would be ALL good then.
I think this is news worthy. It's entertaining. I know a few people that might cuss a bit after reading this!

BigBen · 10-21-2005, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by politicophile

I don't mean to threadjack, but I did want to counter this misinformation.

Let's say that you're playing Pick Three, where you select three numbers from zero to nine. There are 10^3 (1,000) possible numbers. Thus if you buy one ticket, your odds of winning are 1/1000. If you buy ten tickets, your odds are 10/1000, or 1/100. Buying ten times as many tickets makes you... ten times more likely to win! (Caveat: if you buy the same number more than once, this rule does not hold true.)

The same rule applies for lotteries with more numbers, too: It's just that the difference between one out of 10 billion and one out of 100 billion aint really significant in the real world.

Woah now, hold on a second...

You and I went to different statistics classes, and I recommend that you ask for a refund of your tuition.

Probability does not divide into itself, no matter how much you would like it to. Saying the same thing in a different way, you cannot compound your odds like that, in a random event like the lottery.

When computing odds, saying that you have a one in 10,000 chance in something and then doing it ten times DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE COMPUNDED YOUR ODDS BY A FACTOR OF TEN.

Yor now have a 10 in 10,000 chance of success, which is microscopically better, and not worth the 9 subsequent tries.

I appologize for using the words "Mathematically the Same", but I was trying to make the point that there was such little marginal benefit from purchasing the second and subsequent tickets that you might as well light the money on fire for good luck.

I am glad I could clear that up.

politicophile · 10-21-2005, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigBen

When computing odds, saying that you have a one in 10,000 chance in something and then doing it ten times DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE COMPUNDED YOUR ODDS BY A FACTOR OF TEN.

Let me give you a vastly simpler example so that we are on the same page:

Suppose I tell you that I have picked a number between one and ten and you are to guess that number. Now, if you guess once, you have a 10% chance of being right. This is the case because you win in 1 scenerio out of the 10 possibilities. 1/10 = 10%

Now, in the same scenerio, if you guess twice, you have a 20% chance of selecting the correct number because you win in 2 scenerios out of the 10 possibilities. 1/10 = 20%

Let's make this even simpler. Suppose that you must guess a number between 1 and 4. If you guess once, there is a 25% chance that you will select the correct number because you win in 1 scenerio out of the 4 possibilities. 1/4 = 25%

If, in the same scenerio, you are given two guesses, you have a 50% chance of guessing correctly because you win in 2 scenerios out of the 4 possibilities. 2/4 = 50%

Let's make this even simpler. Suppose that I am going to flip a coin and you are to guess whether it comes up heads of tails. If you guess once, then you have a 50% chance of being correct because you win in 1 scenerio out of the 2 possibilities. 1/2 = 50%

If you guess twice in this scenerio, then you have a 100% chance of being correct because you win in 2 scenerios out of the 2 possibilities.

My statistics teacher can keep his money, thank you.

shakran · 10-21-2005, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denim

My "take" on this is that he was contributing. According to CNN.com he played something like $20 worth of tickets. He therefore contributed to the pool to be won. I doubt he expected to win, but he played, so it could happen. And it did. Check out the CNN story, as Mal is correct in that he's largely tied up in stocks and real estate. Not that he's poor, nonono. Still, if you play, you can win.

Don't get me wrong - I don't have a problem that he won. But then I also don't agree with people that think rich individuals MUST be charitable with their money. Bullshit, it's their money, they can do whatever they want with it. Did he need the money? No, but then I didn't need the beer I bought today - I could have given the money I spent on beer to a homeless guy - but no one bitches at me for that, do they?

Redlemon · 10-22-2005, 05:56 AM

And BigBen and politicophile have just detailed for us the difference between engineers and scientists. Heck, one of my engineering teachers would drop variables from equations to simplify them, saying "That term will be less than 5% of the answer, so it isn't worth considering."

Marvelous Marv · 10-22-2005, 10:15 AM

I can't believe that none of the people who would say "The senator shouldn't be awarded the money" have found this thread yet.

If the senator would like to keep his position for life, all he has to do is refuse to accept his salary from now on, and he'll keep getting re-elected. What is it, $150-175k a year? Chicken feed. They make more than that from speaking engagements, "gifts," and other bribes.

superiorrain · 10-22-2005, 12:58 PM

The question we all have to ask ourselves is, if i won and i was a senator what i do? Answer: be happy and go off and do whatever we like with the money, i personally would buy a new computer but that's just me.

The lottery is really just a tax on the poor, at least here in Britain sometime ago i saw a statistic of the demographics who regually bought more than one ticket. Prodominately the lower end of the social classes. I still make the occasional flutter and as soon as i win big, i'll let hal know by giving a sizable donation.

mystmarimatt · 10-22-2005, 01:12 PM

I'm not angry about it. I didn't buy a lottery ticket, so I had no chance. No skin off my back. The fact that he won, and isn't by any means poor, on top of being a public figure, is what I like to refer to as being "mildly ironic."

MSD · 10-22-2005, 08:59 PM

This thread is getting boring. Where are all the whiny people?

shakran · 10-23-2005, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superiorrain

The question we all have to ask ourselves is, if i won and i was a senator what i do? Answer: be happy and go off and do whatever we like with the money, i personally would buy a new computer but that's just me.

No you wouldn't if you wanted to be reelected. If this guy doesn't donate most, if not all, of the money to charity his voters will be PISSED. They have no right to be, but that's what'll happen.

Poppinjay · 10-23-2005, 05:11 AM

If you started fundraising for re-election, I could see that happen. On the other hand, he could make very public announcements that he's not going to set up any fundraising machine because of this windfall. He could make a reak big deal about that and garner some good will.

ScottKuma · 10-23-2005, 05:18 AM

Bah. He buys the ticket, he gets the same chance as any of us.

I bought $20 worth, didn't make a freakin' dime outta it. HOWEVER, I got some nice daydreams out of the chance to win.

Wasn't worth $20...but then again I usually only spend $5 on the lottery.

shakran · 10-23-2005, 05:21 AM

I don't think even that would help him much. Look what happens when Bill Gates donates to charity. He could drop tons of money and people would still whine about it. In fact, over the years he's donated 2 BILLION 718 million dollars, yet people still rail on him for not being charitible enough. Once a public figure becomes significantly richer than his public, especially if it's all at once through luck, his public gets pissed if he's not overly generous with his cash.

Poppinjay · 10-23-2005, 05:43 AM

I think with Bill Gate's case, most people aren't aware of the fact he's given out so much. I am. I also know that people still rail against him because it's not MICROSOFT that's giving the money.

His image suffered tangentally from a problem during the dot com boom, media started doing stories on how charitable all these new millionaires were. Turned out, not very. So the techno crawd got slammed as greedy bastards.

Karma took care of them.

Fallon · 10-23-2005, 06:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakran

No you wouldn't if you wanted to be reelected. If this guy doesn't donate most, if not all, of the money to charity his voters will be PISSED. They have no right to be, but that's what'll happen.

Last I knew, I'm one of his voters and I could give a rats ass what he does with the money. Good for him. I'm no Republican fan, but he's good in my book and this doesn't change the fact. This also goes for most of my friends and family.

canuckguy · 10-23-2005, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSelfDestruct

This thread is getting boring. Where are all the whiny people?

I think because the first couple of posts were all for him (positive) winning the money, if the first posts were complaining about him winning then you would see a different tone. I think most people don't like the fact that he won the money since is so rich, but don't want to admit there jealous. imo.

as for moi, well i could careless. Good for him for winning the money.

shakran · 10-23-2005, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fallon

Last I knew, I'm one of his voters and I could give a rats ass what he does with the money. Good for him. I'm no Republican fan, but he's good in my book and this doesn't change the fact. This also goes for most of my friends and family.

Which would be great for him if all he had to do was win your vote. Unfortunately, there's just a few other votes he needs to worry about as well

Fallon · 10-23-2005, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakran

Which would be great for him if all he had to do was win your vote. Unfortunately, there's just a few other votes he needs to worry about as well

Quite true, but with all the good he has done our state, I don't think this will sway people.

shakran · 10-23-2005, 08:25 AM

I hope you're right. If he loses the next election it should be because the other guy is better than him, not because of a lottery ticket.

maskedrider · 10-25-2005, 06:45 PM

Well it's really not the fault of the senator that he won the lottery but when you think about it, it does seem unfair because he's already rich.

politicophile · 10-25-2005, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maskedrider

Well it's really not the fault of the senator that he won the lottery but when you think about it, it does seem unfair because he's already rich.

Would you care to articulate how you came to this conclusion?

samson501 · 10-25-2005, 10:13 PM

see,1 and 1 does make 3. i don`t give a rats a** what he does with it. yea his money is on paper and most of the winnings will be as soon as the bookeepers get it.

10-21-2005, 04:07 AM	#3 (permalink)
MageB420666 <Insert wise statement here> Location: Hell if I know	The lottery doesn't pick winners based upon those who deserve or need the money most. It's completly random, anybody who plays has a chance at winning. And I do think that someone winning $850,000 is a news worthy event, although the fact that the winner was a senator doesn't matter much to me. __________________ Apathy: The best outlook this side of I don't give a damn.

10-21-2005, 04:09 AM	#4 (permalink)
little_tippler Leaning against the -Sun- Super Moderator Location: on the other side	I think it's fair, he played, he won. So what? Just as an aside, my boss is pretty wealthy and he plays 50 € of tickets for the Euromillions lottery. He's never won big but he occasionally wins some money. It's allowed. There's no prerequisite for the players is there. __________________ Whether we write or speak or do but look We are ever unapparent. What we are Cannot be transfused into word or book. Our soul from us is infinitely far. However much we give our thoughts the will To be our soul and gesture it abroad, Our hearts are incommunicable still. In what we show ourselves we are ignored. The abyss from soul to soul cannot be bridged By any skill of thought or trick of seeming. Unto our very selves we are abridged When we would utter to our thought our being. We are our dreams of ourselves, souls by gleams, And each to each other dreams of others' dreams. Fernando Pessoa, 1918

10-21-2005, 04:16 AM	#5 (permalink)
Psycho Dad Mulletproof Location: Some nucking fut house.	A great many people where I work seem to make plans for the future based on their faith that they are going to hit the Powerball one day. It is going to be interesting how they act over this. I've got a strong feeling that a good number of them are going to be crying the "he ain't got no right" song this morning. __________________ Don't always trust the opinions of experts.

10-21-2005, 05:05 AM	#8 (permalink)
jwoody Shackle Me Not Location: Newcastle - England.	There was a big scandal in Britain, when a convicted rapist won about £7 million on the lottery while he was in prison. The biggest bone of contention was that he was allowed to buy a ticket, considering the lottery is a form of gambling. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3554008.stm Following his release The Sun newspaper tracked him down and found he was living under police protection, with a new identity, and it was all paid for by the taxpayer. http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005450513,00.html There is a change of the law being discussed which would mean any future, imprisoned lottery winners would have to pay for their own protection. The chances of another prisoner winning the lottery are slim, to say the least, but the new law will also mean that anyone with a large amount of money will have to pay for their own protection upon release. __________________ .

10-21-2005, 06:55 AM	#9 (permalink)
BigBen Comedian Location: Use the search button	The lottery allows us to dream. I buy a ticket every once in a while (just one ticket, since it was proven mathematically that my chances are the same with one ticket or a thousand). 340 Million? Did I read that correctly? Even with federal tax taking half and state tax taking another quarter, that still leaves 85 million dollars in prize money to be claimed by one person? Wow. In Microeconomics, there is a cool curve called the consumption possibility frontier, and you plot your income against this curve. You maximize your welfare by choosing the point along the budget line that intersects with the highest utility curve... What would 85 million dollars do to your consumption possibilities? I really believe that I would go insane... but they call those people "eccentric". I dream about winning 10 million, and occasionally about winning 15; but 85 M AMERICAN? That is too much. As far as the senator winning, I could care less. I always believed that the lottery is a tax on the mathematically impaired. The thing is, when you look at the proportion of money that this senator spends on lottery tickets (20 dollars divided by 5 million, or however much he is worth on paper) it is considerably smaller than the average lottery player (5 bucks divided by a couple of grand net worth). The senator can afford to play the lottery, because his amount of relative disposable income is exponentially larger than Johnny and Suzy Powerball Player. I suggest society should be disgusted and upset that a single parent living dangerously close to their means is playing the lottery, not this rich senator. __________________ 3.141592654 Hey, if you are impressed with my memorizing pi to 10 digits, you should see the size of my penis.

10-21-2005, 03:50 AM	#2 (permalink)
Latch In Your Dreams Location: City of Lights	I don't see this as a newsworthy event... The lottery is completely random.. and if he took the chance to buy the ticket, he should have the opportunity to win, just like everyone else that bought a ticket. Whatever money he has beforehand is irrelevant (sp?). Sure, now he has more of the stuff (maybe he can finally fill his pool with $50 bills and go swimming)... but whatever.. the guy won fair and square (most likely, I doubt it was rigged), and that's life. To all the people crying about it... better luck next time.

10-21-2005, 04:35 AM	#6 (permalink)
albania Psycho	The lottery is like that really hot chick you had a crush on but knew she would never go out with you. I mean she's there for you to dream, and rarely sometimes you get the chick. Now I lost track of what point I was trying to make, oh yes, anyone is allowed to dream even guys that already have hot girlfriends.

10-21-2005, 04:49 AM	#7 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	while there's nothing inherently wrong with a wealthy senator winning the lottery, the feeling of many is that he shouldn't play since he doesn't need the extra money - he should let someone else get it. Of course, that leads you to question why the state is sponsoring gambling in which most people who really need the money will in reality just be wasting their own money in the attempt.

10-21-2005, 07:07 AM	#10 (permalink)
Poppinjay You had me at hello Location: DC/Coastal VA	I really wanted to be indignant when he won. That was my base response, and my basist character. The part of me that wants to call republicans doody heads. The fact is, he probably will put the money to darn good use. So many of the lottery winners have been so trashy. There's a growing story about lottery winners going bankrupt because they don't know how to handle it. The latest was the 4 people who spllit the powerball in Ohio in the late '90s. They ran out, got motorcyles, hot cars etc. Does anybody remember Evelyn Adams who won the Jersey lottery twice? She lives in a trailer now. It's all gone. Willie Hurt rang the Michigan lottery for $3.1 million in 1989. Two years later he was broke and charged with murder. He spent his fortune on a divorce and crack. The variouis lotteries have left a trail of tears, bad business decisions, and lawsuits. It's amazing the slights that turn into full assaults after a person gets a few million. Janite Lee won $18 million in 1993. Lee was generous to a variety of causes, particularly politics, education and the community. 8 years after winning she had filed for bankruptcy with only $700 left. Ken Proxmire won $1 million in the Michigan lottery. He moved to California, went into the car business with his brothers and within five years filed for bankruptcy. Several winner fall prey to "loan"companies who will give out money immediately with the future lottery checks as collateral. You can imagine how that works out. Milllions have evaporated down those snake holes. And of course, if you're poor or even middle class, you have poor or in debt relations. And they want some cash. The worst person to win millions, is somebody who has no concept of how to manage money. __________________ I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet Last edited by Poppinjay; 10-21-2005 at 07:14 AM..

10-21-2005, 07:09 AM	#11 (permalink)
Redlemon Devoted Donor Location: New England	I agree with everything BigBen just said: if you play, you are purchasing the chance to dream about winning for a bit, not a chance to actually win. I'm too coldly logical to even do that. A buddy of mine at a previous workplace would play one of the smaller payout lotteries. He came in excited one day, since he had just won $100 or something. I asked him how much he had payed out so far to get that $100, which deflated him. Oops, sorry to kill your buzz there. __________________ I can't read your signature. Sorry.

10-21-2005, 02:23 PM	#14 (permalink)
5757 Insane Location: Vegas!!	... Honestly, yes. I feel a bit jealous. I don't see any problem with him winning though. He bought the ticket fair N square. Now, he could donate some of his winnings to me, or maybe someone else here on tfp! It would be ALL good then. I think this is news worthy. It's entertaining. I know a few people that might cuss a bit after reading this! __________________ Hey! Wait! I've got a new complaint, Forever in debt to ((your)) priceless advice. - Nirvana

10-22-2005, 05:56 AM	#18 (permalink)
Redlemon Devoted Donor Location: New England	And BigBen and politicophile have just detailed for us the difference between engineers and scientists. Heck, one of my engineering teachers would drop variables from equations to simplify them, saying "That term will be less than 5% of the answer, so it isn't worth considering." __________________ I can't read your signature. Sorry.

10-22-2005, 10:15 AM	#19 (permalink)
Marvelous Marv Cunning Runt Location: Taking a mulligan	I can't believe that none of the people who would say "The senator shouldn't be awarded the money" have found this thread yet. If the senator would like to keep his position for life, all he has to do is refuse to accept his salary from now on, and he'll keep getting re-elected. What is it, $150-175k a year? Chicken feed. They make more than that from speaking engagements, "gifts," and other bribes. __________________ "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher

10-22-2005, 12:58 PM	#20 (permalink)
superiorrain Psycho Location: London	The question we all have to ask ourselves is, if i won and i was a senator what i do? Answer: be happy and go off and do whatever we like with the money, i personally would buy a new computer but that's just me. The lottery is really just a tax on the poor, at least here in Britain sometime ago i saw a statistic of the demographics who regually bought more than one ticket. Prodominately the lower end of the social classes. I still make the occasional flutter and as soon as i win big, i'll let hal know by giving a sizable donation. __________________ "The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to go beyond them into the impossible." - Arthur C. Clarke

10-22-2005, 01:12 PM	#21 (permalink)
mystmarimatt Omnipotent Ruler Of The Tiny Universe In My Mind Location: Oreegawn	I'm not angry about it. I didn't buy a lottery ticket, so I had no chance. No skin off my back. The fact that he won, and isn't by any means poor, on top of being a public figure, is what I like to refer to as being "mildly ironic." __________________ Words of Wisdom: If you could really get to know someone and know that they weren't lying to you, then you would know the world was real. Because you could agree on things, you could compare notes. That must be why people get married or make Art. So they'll be able to really know something and not go insane.

10-22-2005, 08:59 PM	#22 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	This thread is getting boring. Where are all the whiny people?

10-23-2005, 05:11 AM	#24 (permalink)
Poppinjay You had me at hello Location: DC/Coastal VA	If you started fundraising for re-election, I could see that happen. On the other hand, he could make very public announcements that he's not going to set up any fundraising machine because of this windfall. He could make a reak big deal about that and garner some good will. __________________ I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

10-23-2005, 05:18 AM	#25 (permalink)
ScottKuma Insane Location: Maineville, OH	Bah. He buys the ticket, he gets the same chance as any of us. I bought $20 worth, didn't make a freakin' dime outta it. HOWEVER, I got some nice daydreams out of the chance to win. Wasn't worth $20...but then again I usually only spend $5 on the lottery. __________________ A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take from you everything you have. -Gerald R. Ford GoogleMap Me

10-23-2005, 05:21 AM	#26 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	I don't think even that would help him much. Look what happens when Bill Gates donates to charity. He could drop tons of money and people would still whine about it. In fact, over the years he's donated 2 BILLION 718 million dollars, yet people still rail on him for not being charitible enough. Once a public figure becomes significantly richer than his public, especially if it's all at once through luck, his public gets pissed if he's not overly generous with his cash.

10-23-2005, 05:43 AM	#27 (permalink)
Poppinjay You had me at hello Location: DC/Coastal VA	I think with Bill Gate's case, most people aren't aware of the fact he's given out so much. I am. I also know that people still rail against him because it's not MICROSOFT that's giving the money. His image suffered tangentally from a problem during the dot com boom, media started doing stories on how charitable all these new millionaires were. Turned out, not very. So the techno crawd got slammed as greedy bastards. Karma took care of them. __________________ I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

10-23-2005, 08:25 AM	#32 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	I hope you're right. If he loses the next election it should be because the other guy is better than him, not because of a lottery ticket.

10-25-2005, 06:45 PM	#33 (permalink)
maskedrider Banned	Well it's really not the fault of the senator that he won the lottery but when you think about it, it does seem unfair because he's already rich.

10-25-2005, 10:13 PM	#35 (permalink)
samson501 Upright	see,1 and 1 does make 3. i don`t give a rats a** what he does with it. yea his money is on paper and most of the winnings will be as soon as the bookeepers get it.