Yeah, AJH would get a chunk up front instead of having to wait for me to die to collect it from my estate. I think it would be nice to, say, use AJH to fund a convention in which not a single dancer needed to pay a registration fee to attend.
Or bribe the organizers not to have a honky-tonk queen contest. :-)
Or I could use it to pay Rick Hawes' bar tab. :-) :-) :-)
> Or I could use it to pay Rick Hawes' bar tab. :-) :-) :-)
I'm not sure twenny-odd million would be enough for that. Don't forget, you'd have to factor in all of the sexual harassment lawsuits that would ensue ...
I dunno... GALA Choruses' quadrennial festivals have become bland & institutionalized since they chose to use in-house professionals only to produce them. Having the locals work on the conventions is exhausting but it does make for a better convention overall, I think.
Normally I'd be supportive, but I happen to know I have the winning numbers for tonight - sorry about that. However, as a conciliatory gesture, if I win the whole thing outright tonight, I'll pick up the tab for your sister's wedding :-)
Consideration #1: Odds of winning if you never buy a ticket: zero Odds of winning if you buy a single $1 ticket: non-zero. Yes, the odds of winning are inifinitismally small, but there's a huge statistical difference between zero and non-zero.
Consideration #2: Cost of a lottery ticket for cheap entertainment: $1 Cost of a move ticket for cheap entertainment: $9 (ignoring the $$$ for drinks & popcorn) $1 < $9, therefore lottery ticket is cheaper entertainment.
Lotteries are a tax on stupidity iff the purchaser actually actually expects to win or the purchaser has used funds which were required for essentials instead of discretionary spending. For most of the rest of us, it's just a cheap passing amusement.
Consideration #1: Odds of winning if you never buy a ticket: zero Odds of winning if you buy a single $1 ticket: non-zero. Yes, the odds of winning are inifinitismally small, but there's a huge statistical difference between zero and non-zero.
Consideration #1A Odds of losing if you never buy a ticket: zero Odds of losing if you buy a single $1 ticket: better than even.
I don't know the rates for whatever outfit runs your lotteries are, but the Ontario Lottery Corporation pays out 41c for every dollar intake. Meaning that for every $100 investors customers put in, they will get back $41, and lose $59. Sounds like a mug's game to me.
There's a large difference between losing zero and losing over $30 a year, assuming one $1 ticket a week. There's a huge statistical difference between losing nothing and losing 59% of your investment.
Lotteries are a tax on stupidity ...
I didn't say that. I'm just pointing out that they're a tax on those who can't do statistics.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
What? Whaaaaaaaat? [ducking]
no subject
Or bribe the organizers not to have a honky-tonk queen contest. :-)
Or I could use it to pay Rick Hawes' bar tab. :-) :-) :-)
no subject
I'm not sure twenny-odd million would be enough for that. Don't forget, you'd have to factor in all of the sexual harassment lawsuits that would ensue ...
Convention
Re: Convention
And I do hope Atlanta does bid in 2011!
no subject
no subject
Damn...
Re: Damn...
Failing that, we're booked the next two weekends but I think we're clear the first weekend of October...
Re: Damn...
Re: Damn...
Hell, we may need an entire staff! :-)
Re: Damn...
no subject
no subject
Consideration #1:
Odds of winning if you never buy a ticket: zero
Odds of winning if you buy a single $1 ticket: non-zero.
Yes, the odds of winning are inifinitismally small, but there's a huge statistical difference between zero and non-zero.
Consideration #2:
Cost of a lottery ticket for cheap entertainment: $1
Cost of a move ticket for cheap entertainment: $9 (ignoring the $$$ for drinks & popcorn)
$1 < $9, therefore lottery ticket is cheaper entertainment.
Lotteries are a tax on stupidity iff the purchaser actually actually expects to win or the purchaser has used funds which were required for essentials instead of discretionary spending. For most of the rest of us, it's just a cheap passing amusement.
no subject
Odds of winning if you never buy a ticket: zero
Odds of winning if you buy a single $1 ticket: non-zero.
Yes, the odds of winning are inifinitismally small, but there's a huge statistical difference between zero and non-zero.
Consideration #1A
Odds of losing if you never buy a ticket: zero
Odds of losing if you buy a single $1 ticket: better than even.
I don't know the rates for whatever outfit runs your lotteries are, but the Ontario Lottery Corporation pays out 41c for every dollar intake. Meaning that for every $100
investorscustomers put in, they will get back $41, and lose $59. Sounds like a mug's game to me.There's a large difference between losing zero and losing over $30 a year, assuming one $1 ticket a week. There's a huge statistical difference between losing nothing and losing 59% of your investment.
Lotteries are a tax on stupidity ...
I didn't say that. I'm just pointing out that they're a tax on those who can't do statistics.
no subject