by A Morris

Created on: April 17, 2009

Should the government put a limit on lottery winnings they would in effect be making the lottery means-tested. The idea behind the lottery is that everyone has an equal chance of winning the same sum, no matter how low those odds might be. How could it possibly be fair to allow a millionaire to win the lottery, but prevent a person on government benefits from winning? This would purely make the rich richer.

When you think about it, people on benefits have a greater need to win the lottery in the first place. Remember, not everyone claims benefits because they can't be bothered to get a job. There are people who claim incapacity benefit because of illness or disability, and the money would probably greatly enhance their quality of life. Single parents may claim benefits to get them through the daily cost of living alone with a small child. There is a great misconception that being on welfare means you are a layabout with no impetus to work. This is just not true for a large number of claimants.

The lottery has become another form of tax. Revenue from the tickets people buy is divided amongst charities, companies and foundations, like the Olympics. Every ticket bought represents a way of taking money from the people and putting it back into services. The question is; does the government have any right to impose limits on the lottery? It is not, in itself, a political organisation, so would the government even have jurisdiction to do so?

Given that individuals buy different amounts of tickets, how would the government police such a ruling? What about business syndicates, with as many as fifty people involved? Would you start dividing the winnings between them based on who earns the highest wage? The whole idea is simply unfathomable and unrealistic. A large part of the lottery's appeal is that it can be won by anyone. You don't need a degree or paperwork to prove you are eligible. Aside from an age limit (which is absolutely necessary), it is not possible to place further limitations on it without changing the whole nature of the system.

I can understand the anger people feel when they think their hard-earned taxes are paying for someone to sit at home and not bother to get a job, happily being supported by the State. However, as I mentioned before, this is not the case for many people who are claiming welfare. In today's economic climate, huge numbers of the population are claiming benefits because they can't find a job. Would you deny them the chance of winning the advertised jackpot? Would you want your own winnings to be limited because you happened to have worked hard all your life but now you have been on welfare for two months due to unemployment?

The UK lottery is available to anyone who can afford to buy a ticket. Those who can't, or don't wish to be involved, don't play. The idea of limiting anyone's winnings smacks of sour grapes. There are two options; either limit the amount any individual can win and donate more to charity, or leave it alone. People are so quick to promote the idea that "All men are equal" (and by men I mean mankind), when it suits them, but not when they think they have something to lose.

Learn more about this author, A Morris.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.