At least those often fund things like state education so, over time, the pool of victims is maybe lessened by the success of the program? Maybe?

(I am not defending state lotteries, but I do think there's some distinction to be made between "we actively exploit people to maximize our profits for our own sakes" and "we regulate the passive exploitation of people to supplement taxes in a regressive manner." Or something. I dunno, maybe somebody has more elaborate thoughts on this to share.)

In many places where gambling is banned, there is still gambling. And in places where it's legalized, it can (in theory) be effectively regulated (if there's political will, which is difficult to muster sometimes). And say what you will about lotteries, but it's far easier to blow your life savings at casinos and with sports betting than buying a bunch of lottery tickets.

See nature preserves that are funded by regulated big game hunting of the preserved nature.

It's a fun moral question. At what point do you give up trying to make someone/a population healthier and say "well if you're going to be this way, we might as well get some use out of you"?

"we regulate the passive exploitation of people to supplement taxes in a regressive manner."

I was convinced by this for a full 30 seconds before I realized there are millions of advertisements for the state lotteries. They aren't just regulating a market that will exist with or without the state, they are actively promoting and encouraging it

> At least those often fund things like state education so, over time, the pool of victims is maybe lessened by the success of the program? Maybe?

You have some numbers to check.

(“Elaborate thoughts” aren’t needed here - are more people spending less on the lottery? where does each state spend the money?)