Skip to main content

The Illinois Lottery

457093665-marie-steele-holds-her-dog-little-bit-as-she-purchases

I find this story hard to believe. The State of Illinois has told its lottery winners that they'll be getting IOUs, not actual cash, because Illinois is so poor.

Really? Isn't that particular expense supposed to pay for itself? That is, the losers pay for the winners, and the state takes a cut like bookies from time before memory and casino managers from memories before time?

How did that become so complicated?

Heck of a recommendation for government as an institution: capable of screwing up even the numbers-running racket.

And as cynical as I may be about governments, this story is still hard to believe. what is there we don't know yet?

Comments

  1. As far as I understood IOU is some kind of the debt acknowledgement paper. They are taking advantage of the trustful people. And when are they going to pay them? What about the state watchdogs, what are they doing!? I was reading TheLotter review and was about to play it online. Fortunately I came across the news.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Great Chain of Being

One of the points that Lovejoy makes in the book of that title I mentioned last week is the importance, in the Neo-Platonist conceptions and in the later development of the "chain of being" metaphor, of what he calls the principle of plenitude. This is the underlying notion that everything that can exist must exist, that creation would not be possible at all were it to leave gaps.

The value of this idea for a certain type of theodicy is clear enough.

This caused theological difficulties when these ideas were absorbed into Christianity.  I'll quote a bit of what Lovejoy has to say about those difficulties:

"For that conception, when taken over into Christianity, had to be accommodated to very different principles, drawn from other sources, which forbade its literal interpretation; to carry it through to what seemed to be its necessary implications was to be sure of falling into one theological pitfall or another."

The big pitfalls were: determinism on the on…

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.



We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majestic wate…