And what about the government's take.

Reader comment on: Multiply Your Money

Submitted by David Gerstman (United States), Feb 11, 2013 16:46

To emphasize your point: Ads for the lottery regularly trumpet the jackpot amount. But that amount is only relevant if the winner takes the money over 20 years!

If the winner takes the money as a lump sum payout (which, I understand, makes more sense due to taxes) the jackpot is roughly 60% of the jackpot. (That and many more details of the payout are here.)

And of course there are the taxes.

Say a business adverstised a product for $10,000, but then when you bought it you actually had to pay the company $14,000, you're right, the AG would be all over said company. But deceptive sums are the way government does business.

A few months ago I drove though a depressed section of Baltimore. Two things stood out among the broken down houses. One was a state of art looking church. The other was the colorful lottery sign.


Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.

Other reader comments on this item

Title By Date
The odds with bookies were much better than state run books [32 words]nrgFeb 14, 2013 02:58
What's the problem? [10 words]MattLFeb 12, 2013 06:45
Good thing FINRA only regulates the private sector [22 words]Tom ElliottFeb 11, 2013 22:41
⇒ And what about the government's take. [150 words]David GerstmanFeb 11, 2013 16:46
No surprises here [35 words]Dan CalabriaFeb 11, 2013 19:25

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to And what about the government's take. by David Gerstman

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.