On Sun, May 11, 2003 at 10:36:08AM -0700, Tim May wrote:

On Sunday, May 11, 2003, at 06:35 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote:

...

On Sat, May 10, 2003 at 09:10:01PM -0700, Tim May wrote:

...

On Saturday, May 10, 2003, at 08:44 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:

...

On Sat, May 10, 2003 at 10:03:43AM -0700, Tim May wrote:

...

Which is all evolution in action, except that government should not be in the construction and business development business. (I would go further and say that nothing in the U.S. Constitution, which states and localities are bound by, justifies taking money from citizens to give to businesses. No matter "how smart an investment" it looks to be. Ditto for governments running gambling operations, but I digress.)

I agree with all the rest of this, however, I think you're wrong about the gambling. I think that's the only way gov't ought to be allowed to fund itself, by selling lottery tickets.

A superficially good idea ("sounds good!"), but ultimately silly.

Government bans gambling, or heavily regulates it, or declares illegal the exact odds it grants itself.

You're not making much sense here, Tim. Who said anything about making gambling illegal?

You're being deliberately obtuse. You're on the verge of entering my filter file.

Gambling is not a free market in most U.S. states. Government runs the gambling franchise in most states.

This is what I said.

I'm being obtuse? Give me a break. I clearly said that "I think that's the only way gov't ought to be allowed to fund itself, is by selling lottery tickets." I can't imagine how anyone could read that and think that I was talking about the situation we live in today. Who cares if gambling is illegal today? WTF does that have to do with anything -- I was clearly talking about some hypothetical future scenario, as in a vastly reduced government where lotteries were what they used for funding instead of taxes. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com