Unearned Income

The article entails information about the numerous benefits of having a state-run lottery. The first portion gives recent information about the economic climate in the United States. As several states are seeking creative ways to meet financial needs without increasing taxes. It is noted that a state lottery is a form of voluntary taxation that allows the state government to achieve enhancements in education, welfare program, public transportation, etc. Secondly, information about the history of the lottery was explained in great detail as to why the lottery is used as a tool by government and other entities dating back over 500 years. Great examples were given such as President Thomas Jefferson using the lottery as a means to sell his property,

The lottery preys on the people it is supposed to be helping. It is funded through lottery players, which are usually low income minorities. One example that proves this is when Duke university economist Charles Clofelter and Phillip cook found that “ blacks, high school dropouts and people in the low income category” ( source D), are the heaviest

Great discoveries always begin with great questions. Barbara Ehrenreich asked two great questions, “how does anyone live on the wages available to the unskilled” and “how were the roughly four million women about to be booted into the labor market by welfare reform, going to make it on $6 to $7 an hour” (2001, p. 12). To answer the questions, Ehrenreich embarked upon a journey to discover for herself, whether she could match income to expense as a low-wage worker. In effect, Ehrenreich tested the fundamental premise of The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, also known as welfare reform, in order to determine whether those individuals formerly on welfare and largely unskilled, could earn a living wage on the

Winning the lottery sounds pretty cool doesn't it? Mostly everyone has thought about how excited and happy they'd be if they won. Well think again, in Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery," she portrays a different, more gruesome lottery than what one may imagine. To develop her overall theme of tradition, Jackson employs the use of foreshadowing, irony, and satire.

Lotteries generally bring riches to the winner however that’s not the case in Shirley Jackson’s Short Story, “The Lottery,” published June, 1948. The story starts out very pleasant and calm with a tiny flinch of nervousness from the lottery participants. It seems at first that the winner of the lottery would get a somewhat significant prize considering all the build up to the big prize reveal, however, the winner, Tessie Hutchinson, ends up getting stoned to death by the kids and adults alike. Instead of a big happy prize Jackson wrote the story to point out meaningless victimization and inhumane activities that have taken place throughout history. Some violent and dark events of that time that highlight Jackson’s viewpoint of inhumanity

When most people play the lottery today, they think about having wealth. Generally, people who win are happy about it whether they win one dollar or a million. The lottery in our society has grown to support education and it is often worth several million dollars. Usually, the winner of the lottery gains a lot of recognition for the money they win. But what would happen if there was a small town where people held a yearly lottery in which the “winner” was the member of the town who was not sacrificed? This question is answered in Shirley Jackson’s short story, “The Lottery.” In reading this story, and reading literary criticism about the story, there were many symbols and much symbolism in this story.

Hicks, Jennifer. “Overview of the Lottery.” Chattanooga State. Detroit: Gale, 2002. From Literature Resource Center.

“The Lottery” is a short story by Shirley Jackson, first published on June 26, 1948. The story was initially met with negative critical reception due to its violent nature and portrayal of the potentially dangerous nature of human society. It was even banned in some countries. However, “The Lottery” is now widely accepted as a classic American short story and is used in classrooms throughout the country.

Other states lottery programs can be used as a blueprint to establish a lottery in the State of Alabama. As an example, the State of Oregon takes the lottery’s revenue and distributes it into four groups. These fours groups are “Public Education”, which receives 57%, 27% is given to the “Economic Development [and] Job Creation”, “Problem gambling treatment” receives the least, at a total of 1%, the last 15% is evenly divided into two groups of 7.5% which goes to both

In 2008 total money spent on welfare was equally about $16,800 for each person in poverty, equal to about $50,000 for a family of three below the poverty line. Now the author explains in his opinion Americans can do a better job with the money we already spend, while saving the government (ultimately saving us the taxpayers) money. His ideas is similar to the block grant reforms utilized in the 1990s, where welfare recipients gained nearly 25% more income through actually working, while the government reduced welfare recipients and benefits saving the taxpayers 50% over ten years(Ferrara, 2014).

Edin and Lein wanted to discover the surviving strategies of single mothers who are on welfare or work on a low-waged job. They argue “neither welfare nor low wage work gives single mothers enough income to meet their families’ expenses” (253). To find out the set of survival strategies of single mothers to make ends meet Edin and Lein interviewed 379 low income single mothers. They chose their interviewees from different cities, different aged group, and different ethnic background. Most mothers who are on welfare wanted to find a job and be out of the welfare but the primary problem that single mothers face was that “family economics”. With the minimum wage income it was impossible for the single mothers to bring the ends meet. Neither working nor being on welfare was enough to survive therefore mothers who are on welfare supported their budget by generating substantial supplementary income. Edin and Lein states that “welfare recipients generated extra income by working at side jobs, obtaining cash from network members, community groups and local charities”. They also get cash help from the family members, child’s fathers, and from a boyfriend. Because they were afraid to lose welfare benefits they did not tell anyone about the extra income they have. To survive they needed both the welfare benefits and the extra income. It was very difficult to establish a trust with the interviewees in the beginning because they were afraid if they talk about it they might lose the

To support her side of the argument and to answer these counterarguments Jimenez share a few statistics. She tells us that the New York Times reported in 2002, that the state-run lotteries brought in a revenue of $20 billion dollars, and that this is only 4% of the states income. She also tells us about one study in a report from the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy that shows people who earned $10,000 a year bought almost three times as many lottery tickets than those who made $50,000 or more a year. This shows us that more poor people buy lotto tickets, so more poor people are paying the taxes that benefit education and social services.

In today’s society we perceive the lottery as being a great fortune brought down upon you by Lady Luck. It is a serendipitous event, even if the person has done nothing to earn it. One would never see the lottery as an unfortunate occasion that occurred in your life because it is supposed to bring prosperity into your life. Also, one would not dare to think that winning the lottery would bring such repercussions as injury or death. In the short story “The Lottery” by Shirley Jackson, the author could have used Mrs. Tessie Hutchinson as the town’s scapegoat due to their reluctance to change traditions, her horrible work ethic, and minority status as a woman.

“The Lottery” is a short story written by Shirley Jackson and published in 1948. The title of the story initially leads readers to believe the story is going to be about someone winning some kind of prize. Even the opening of the story seems to protest any foul play or cruel behavior. What the reader is introduced to is a seemingly friendly gathering of a small village community, members all gathered around anxiously awaiting their drawing for the lottery. The village members all chatter amongst one another in a tone that kind neighbors would take with one another. To the surprise of the reader, the story provides a shocking twist. The story is not about someone winning a prize. Instead the story reveals

Furaker and Hedenus (2009) were able to find an uncertain result that showed the effect of a person winning a lottery on their work behaviour