Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Is there any justice to Anonymity for Lotto Winners?


Anonymity in Lottery Winnings...  

9 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I haven't read comments above. They may change my opinion.

=====

At present, I think that the whole point of a lottery is a winner - 2 million individuals each give $1 with the hope that they will be a millionaire.

Unless the 1.9 million individuals (or so) losers see that someone, one winner, won.

To me, first, any lottery wants to show publicly a winner: she/he/you win $1 million; you're the next Tom Cruise.

Second, lotteries are a tax on people bad at math.

 

Edited by August1991
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

In a way it's great to know some struggling individual won in a draw. But the way our world works of course there are a million entities that are going to go through alot of trouble to relieve the winner of their good fortune. Anonymity hopefully will reduce this. 

I also think there should be a cap on lotto winnings, ten people winning a million dollars is far more beneficial then one person winning ten million in my opinion. Hell, I might even buy a ticket then. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Michael Groves said:

Hi, I saw your post and immediately became interested, the topic is really interesting and very controversial, I agree with many answers, I support some of them partially.

I posted this a long time ago and so don't remember all of what I said. But basically I question the trust of the lotteries if they should keep the winner anonymous because we cannot determine publicly whether it is fraudulent or not, whether the statistics of the winners are actually relatively poor people (who invest in such things more per their income) or due to wealthy people exploiting the way you CAN cheat using the math and having the capital to purchase them. 

For instance, if you are an accounting firm, say, with lots of money you might have available even for a short time, you can guarantee a win if you can use money from their clients to purchase all the odds necessary to win. I mention 'accounting firm' specifically because Canada's first major mult-million dollar wins came from and rewarded the staff of just such a firm. We have a weak means of proving the draws as well that only  requires 3 people, the one doing the draw, some security personel, and, the Deloit-Touche firm representative. I've never seen any other firm allowed to do this and question why the draws are not made live, public, and with the capacity of regular people to participate in checking the draw. [bingo games that have official lottery status have to allow anyone to go up and check the balls. A mere pinprick can prevent or aid the ball to pass. (I'm not sure which)

My initial posting here occurred after some particular win in the U.S. major lottery case that permitted special status in court for someone who won to stay anonymous setting an unusual precedent there. 

 

Note that lotteries here in Canada, unlike the U.S. are tax free! This makes it more concerning given it can act as a mechanism for laundering, unfair wins based upon power of those who have the money to purchase the odds involved, or some other potential fraudulent activity. [Note that since I wrote this, news had revealed that gambling casinos have used gambling to launder indeterminate millions through casinos here in Canada and attracts International interests for this. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

In a way it's great to know some struggling individual won in a draw. But the way our world works of course there are a million entities that are going to go through alot of trouble to relieve the winner of their good fortune. Anonymity hopefully will reduce this. 

I also think there should be a cap on lotto winnings, ten people winning a million dollars is far more beneficial then one person winning ten million in my opinion. Hell, I might even buy a ticket then. 

When one becomes a famous star, they too 'suffer' from the loss of anonymity. But when one selects the BENEFITS gained by such an interest, you have to accept the loss and the burden of having to deal with the schemers who might attempt to use them. And they DO get the same problem and worse than a mere lottery winner. 

As such, when you buy a lottery ticket, the loss of anonymity is necessary and relatively smaller 'debt' the the 'profit' of winning. I doubt our lottery systems are secure. They  also set up ours in Canada as "Interprovincial", a technical way of preventing either provinces nor federal level entities from directly looking into their books. 

AND, note that the anonymity is replaced AFTER the anounced winners and so the only contention one would have regarding such problems is about family members who would take advantage of you. While this occurs, how can one actually utlize some official anonymity to prevent one's own family and friends from discovering this. 

The likely reason for asking for anonymity in U.S. Powerball lottery is that someone very notable (and thus probably already very rich), won that lotto. Imagine, for instance, if it turned out to be Donald Trump himself, for instance! Knowing who can rule out suspicious wins that the public are not normally able to determine with any realistic confidence. Expecting us to have FAITH in some third party fiscally-interested organization, like an accounting firm, is liable this kind of abuse themselves. It's expecting the fox to look out for the hens. 

EDIT: By the way, anonymity is NOT made into a law for all people, ....just special unknowns. That was particularly the U.S. Powerball draw win a while back. Suggested example publicly asserted said something about prior undercover cops who might need special protection? [Could even be some prior mob rat who was hiding under a new identity through the system. Now THAT would be both valid YET suspect at the same time!]

Edited by Scott Mayers
Added content at 'EDIT'
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scott Mayers said:

When one becomes a famous star, they too 'suffer' from the loss of anonymity. But when one selects the BENEFITS gained by such an interest, you have to accept the loss and the burden of having to deal with the schemers who might attempt to use them. And they DO get the same problem and worse than a mere lottery winner. 

As such, when you buy a lottery ticket, the loss of anonymity is necessary and relatively smaller 'debt' the the 'profit' of winning. I doubt our lottery systems are secure. They  also set up ours in Canada as "Interprovincial", a technical way of preventing either provinces nor federal level entities from directly looking into their books. 

AND, note that the anonymity is replaced AFTER the anounced winners and so the only contention one would have regarding such problems is about family members who would take advantage of you. While this occurs, how can one actually utlize some official anonymity to prevent one's own family and friends from discovering this. 

The likely reason for asking for anonymity in U.S. Powerball lottery is that someone very notable (and thus probably already very rich), won that lotto. Imagine, for instance, if it turned out to be Donald Trump himself, for instance! Knowing who can rule out suspicious wins that the public are not normally able to determine with any realistic confidence. Expecting us to have FAITH in some third party fiscally-interested organization, like an accounting firm, is liable this kind of abuse themselves. It's expecting the fox to look out for the hens. 

EDIT: By the way, anonymity is NOT made into a law for all people, ....just special unknowns. That was particularly the U.S. Powerball draw win a while back. Suggested example publicly asserted said something about prior undercover cops who might need special protection? [Could even be some prior mob rat who was hiding under a new identity through the system. Now THAT would be both valid YET suspect at the same time!]

You're overcomplicating this. 

Lack of anonymity is the definition of stardom. 

Keeping the winner's identity secret will at least reduce a bunch of crooks from trying to rob bim/her, I know it won't eliminate everyone,we're not talking witness protection here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

You're overcomplicating this. 

Lack of anonymity is the definition of stardom. 

Keeping the winner's identity secret will at least reduce a bunch of crooks from trying to rob bim/her, I know it won't eliminate everyone,we're not talking witness protection here. 

I don't get why people trivialize 'trust' issues here. We are in an era where hacking is easily being done because of odd faith people place in shit like this. 

If you buy a lottery ticket, you give up your right to privacy precisely because hacks can, are, or will be used by such 'faith' being expected as a standard of behavior by those who uniquely CAPITALIZE on such weaknesses. Do not trivialize this issue. 

This is not overcomplicating the issue. If you GAIN a severe benefit through such permitted forms of gambling, AND 'anonymity' is assured, that is a perfect way for criminals to stage fraudulent games. There is no way for society to determine if any actual fraud is being done and makes the lotteries who would use such practices SUSPECT of using such means to steal money from people and even LAUNDER money by how such 'anonymity' provides one to account for any losses. 

I am surprised at the responses here but not surprised that you speak also in anonymity. I dare those of you right-wingers to expose your FAITH here by stop hiding behind anonymity. If you think it safe for us to blindly trust things like the lottery operations, why would you not be as trusting to be open and honest of who you are directly? How hypocritical.

 

 

Okay. Wait. If you are so 'trusting' then lets have a lottery where you give me your money for the chance (wink wink) to win. Since you have faith in anonymous people, you should have even MORE faith in someone who is not anonymous, right? Then I'll sell you tickets and I'll do the draw in private to assure anonymity is preserved for the unfortunate winners' rights! 

Maybe you are dumb? Or...maybe you are criminals hoping to con others into being so gullible? [I'm being rhetorical here, not personal to whomever you might be.]

Edited by Scott Mayers
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

Lack of anonymity is the definition of stardom. 

'stardom' is a winfall as is a lottery winner. 

 

19 hours ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

Keeping the winner's identity secret will at least reduce a bunch of crooks from trying to rob bim/her, I know it won't eliminate everyone,we're not talking witness protection here. 

What makes you think winners are not elible to be the 'crooks'??

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

Scott... Buddy, you are way over thinking this. 

The opening question/pole is regarding "winners" anonymity, not the whole industry. 

No, I am not. I opened this to question if anyone notices how this occured:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/05/mega-millions-1-point-5-billion-winner-stays-anonymous-why-thats-smart.html#:~:text=Luckily for this Mega Millions,lottery winners to remain anonymous.&text=If you live in a,entity to receive your winnings.

But you and some others are responding to this as though it should be normal for all when I was questioning whether even one case like this exception and the States that permit it should be permitted given the risks of fraud. Here's one from here in Canada:

https://globalnews.ca/news/4252331/how-can-a-30m-lottery-winner-remain-anonymous/

The question isn't about whether this should be an exception but rather IF ANY exception should be permitted as these case examples. The deciding body itself are neither provincial nor federal departments but themselves, the Interprovincial corporations that set these up in the first place. I can't argue the specifics in the U.S. but that in principle this is troubling to me. If one cannot accept a win directly, pass it off to another in some negotiated trust. But it should still be possible to determine who won. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still simple, it's not illegal for wealthy people to participate in lotteries, you place your bet, you take your chances. 

If the lottery organizations are corrupt then that should be addressed by the appropriate authorities. It's no different then any other entity.

There are people around here that are very wealthy but many don't know it, should that be advertised? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The lottery is a public system - winners are therefore declared publicly.

The lottery is gambling - sometimes when you win, you lose (long-term).

The lottery is a flawed - don't expect perfection with so many loopholes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/14/2020 at 6:55 AM, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

It's still simple, it's not illegal for wealthy people to participate in lotteries, you place your bet, you take your chances. 

If the lottery organizations are corrupt then that should be addressed by the appropriate authorities. It's no different then any other entity.

There are people around here that are very wealthy but many don't know it, should that be advertised? 

What 'authority'? It is "interprovincial" and not bound to neither federal nor provincial oversight or controls. There is no means to assure society that the lotteries are merely frauds here in Canada. While there will be certain 'wins' that are fair, this is only rational of any minimally intelligent orgnaization  used to hide the unfair ones. (I should know. I won once but had my ticket stolen from me for being too young and powerless to do anything about it...and  this was by family! The lack of means to get the details of the lottery prevented me from discovering information that could  have helped me. So fuck the concern for privacy on the mere announcement of who won.) 

And, what does the nature of one's wealth 'here' relate to whether the public should know WHO the winners are in context to lotteries? Our lotteries are tax-free and so also prevents wins to be determined in any official way that is accountable to the very public that permits them. As all societies have known from the start, the biggest fruads occur in 'lotteries'. They are used to fraudulently PROTECT those theives who make and keep wealth. The jails are filled with criminals of less dubious crimes than the wealthy who are assured to keep for being able to be caught. 

Why do you side with this kind of behavior? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/23/2020 at 7:29 AM, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

You do realize you don't have to buy tickets right? 

Ohh, what a clever piece of advice!! ?? :huh:

This is about the politics that permit fraud for the wealthy with ease and with the inability to have sincere accountability to the very public that permits these Lotto Corporations. I'll be keeping your response here in mind if I should find you complaining here regarding politics. Example absurdity of response:

"You think taxes are unfair?" ..."You do realize that you don't have to live here, right?" 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements



×
×
  • Create New...