Logo
    Search

    12. Is America Ready for a "No-Lose Lottery"?

    en-usNovember 17, 2010

    Podcast Summary

    • Americans' Struggle with Savings and Love for LotteryHalf of Americans can't afford a $2000 emergency in 30 days, including those with six-figure salaries. Despite this, Americans spend about $1000 per year on lottery tickets, highlighting a need for improved savings habits.

      Americans are generally horrible at saving money, with half the country unable to come up with $2000 in 30 days, which means they are one emergency or crisis away from dire circumstances. This is not just the poor as even those making $100k-$150k per year struggle. However, Americans are excellent at spending money, including on lottery tickets, with households that play the lottery spending about $1000 per year on tickets. The US will buy about $60 billion of lottery tickets, with some locations selling in excess of $8-9 million per year. This is a sign that Americans need to improve their savings habits, as many are one disaster away from severe financial pinch.

    • The Appeal of the Lottery: How Skewness and the Chance to Dream Big Drive SalesPlaying the lottery offers the potential to change one's life, but the cost of consistently buying tickets can add up. While winning may cause people to forget their losses, it's important to consider what we are sacrificing in order to play.

      The lottery is the most popular form of gambling in the US, with half of adults surveyed having played in the past year. The appeal lies in the chance to dream big and win big, which is a phenomenon economists call 'skewness.' Skewness is the idea that the small odds of winning a big prize still offer the potential to change one's life, which is not offered by traditional investments like money market accounts. Regular people do spend a lot of money on lottery tickets, but Melissa Kearney, an economics professor at the University of Maryland, wonders what people are sacrificing in order to buy them. While winning may cause people to forget their losses, the cost of consistently playing the lottery can add up.

    • The Thrill of the Lottery and the Goal of Saving MoneyPrize-linked savings combine gambling excitement with positive financial outcomes, offering low-wealth individuals a chance to save money and potentially win big. This concept has been successful in other countries and could benefit American households.

      Researchers are exploring the idea of prize-linked savings, a new financial product that offers the thrill of the lottery with the goal of saving money. Low-wealth individuals often turn to state lotteries as their only chance of accumulating large sums of money. A recent survey found that 20% of American adults believe their greatest chance of winning hundreds of thousands of dollars is through the lottery, increasing to 40% for those making less than $25,000 a year. Prize-linked savings offer a win-win situation, catering to the American appetite for gambling while offering positive returns. This concept has generated enthusiasm among economists all over the world and has been successful in countries like the UK and South Africa.

    • Prize-Linked Savings: A Fun Way to Save and Win BigPrize-Linked Savings accounts offer a fun way to incentivize saving money and can be a game-changer for improving savings rates, especially for low-income Americans who typically struggle to save. Despite legal limitations, several credit unions have piloted the idea successfully.

      Prize-Linked Savings account provides an attractive option for people to save money, especially low-income Americans with a frighteningly low savings rate. The possibility of a life-changing payout appeals to people's preference for highly skewed payoffs, and it taps into the human tendency of loss aversion. However, state laws prohibit such a program in most states, as only state-run lotteries are legal. Peter Tufano's research convinced him that the idea could help Americans, and in Michigan, a group of credit unions piloted the idea. Prize-linked savings programs offer a fun way to save, engaging people who find banking services mundane. This structure has the potential to be a game-changer for people looking to improve their savings while enjoying the process of doing so.

    • Save to Win: How Prize-Linked Savings Program Encourages Better Saving HabitsSave to Win incentivizes savings via a lottery system. Participants can win prizes for every $25 saved. The program helps people without savings plans and promotes local credit unions and the economy.

      Save to Win is a successful prize-linked savings program that incentivizes people to save money by providing a fun way to do so through a lottery concept. Participants have a chance to win cash prizes, including a grand prize of $100,000, for every $25 saved in a one-year certificate of deposit. By introducing a competitive element to savings, Save to Win attracts customers who previously had no savings plan and who may have spent money on lotto tickets or gambling. The program has proven particularly effective in South Africa, where many people are unbanked and their savings are kept outside the mainstream banking system, hindering economic growth. By taking part in Save to Win, individuals can contribute to their own financial stability while supporting their local credit unions and the economy at large.

    • The Million a Month Account: A Creative Solution to Banking ExclusionBy pooling interest paid on small accounts and offering lump sum prizes, MAMA attracted over a million new customers. Creative solutions can provide benefits to those excluded from traditional banking systems.

      The Million a Month Account, also known as MAMA, was a creative solution to the problem of excluding people without bank accounts from the banking system. By pooling little bits of interest paid on all the little accounts and paying it out in lump sum prizes to select lucky winners, Keip's bank attracted over a million new customers. However, the success of MAMA attracted the attention of other banks and regulators, as well as the South African National Lottery, who initially thought it fell under promotional competition but later labeled it as a lottery. Despite the controversy, MAMA's success proved that creative solutions can attract new customers and provide people with benefits they otherwise may miss out on.

    • MAMA, A South African Savings Program Shut Down Over Lottery DisputeMAMA's savings program was successful in reducing the number of unbanked individuals in South Africa by allowing a minimum deposit of 100 rand, but it was shut down due to a lottery dispute and lack of interest on deposits.

      MAMA, a savings plan program in South Africa, brought in over a million customers and $200 million in deposits before being shut down by the National Lotteries Board. The board claimed that the program infringed upon the state lottery's right to be the only game in town. However, the lawyer who represented the lottery argued that MAMA's lack of interest on deposits was an issue, as South Africa has a relatively high interest rate. The program was aimed at the unbanked, but most of the funds came from regular customers with free money to spare. Despite its closure, MAMA successfully helped reduce the number of unbanked South Africans by making it easy to open an account with a minimum deposit of 100 rand.

    • The Success and Failure of MAMA, a Prize-Linked Savings AccountAlthough MAMA did not achieve its initial goal of expanding banking to the unbanked population, it still attracted new customers and significantly lowered the cost of acquiring them through its innovative approach to savings accounts.

      MAMA, a prize-linked savings account, aimed at expanding banking to the unbanked population by offering a lottery payout. However, the majority of the deposits came from the banked and more wealthy customers. The program was shut down by the National Lottery, but it did successfully attract new customers and expand banking. Robert Keip, the creator, stands by its success, stating that 20% of MAMA accounts were opened by previously unbanked individuals. However, lottery officials in America are not enthusiastic about the idea of prize-linked savings. Even though MAMA did not reach its primary goal, it still managed to acquire $200 million in deposits and lower the cost of acquiring new customers from $300 to $5.

    Recent Episodes from Freakonomics Radio

    598. Is Overconsolidation a Threat to Democracy?

    598. Is Overconsolidation a Threat to Democracy?

    That’s the worry. Even the humble eyeglass industry is dominated by a single firm. 

    We look into the global spike in myopia, how the Lemtosh got its name, and what your eye doctor knows that you don’t. (Part two of a two-part series.)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Maria Liu, professor of clinical optometry at the University of California, Berkeley.
      • Harvey Moscot, C.E.O. of MOSCOT Eyewear and Eyecare.
      • Zachary Moscot, chief design officer of MOSCOT Eyewear and Eyecare.
      • Cédric Rossi, equity research analyst at Bryan Garnier.
      • Tim Wu, professor of law, science and technology at Columbia Law School.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJuly 25, 2024

    597. Why Do Your Eyeglasses Cost $1,000?

    597. Why Do Your Eyeglasses Cost $1,000?

    A single company, EssilorLuxottica, owns so much of the eyewear industry that it’s hard to escape their gravitational pull — or their “obscene” markups. Should regulators do something? Can Warby Parker steal market share? And how did Ray-Bans become a luxury brand? (Part one of a two-part series.)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Neil Blumenthal, co-founder and co-CEO of Warby Parker.
      • Dave Gilboa, co-founder and co-CEO of Warby Parker.
      • Jessica Glasscock, fashion historian and lecturer at the Parsons School of Design.
      • Neil Handley, curator of the British Optical Association Museum at the College of Optometrists.
      • Ryan McDevitt, professor of economics at Duke University.
      • Cédric Rossi, equity research analyst at Bryan Garnier.
      • Tim Wu, professor of law, science and technology at Columbia Law School.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJuly 18, 2024

    EXTRA: People Aren’t Dumb. The World Is Hard. (Update)

    EXTRA: People Aren’t Dumb. The World Is Hard. (Update)

    You wouldn’t think you could win a Nobel Prize for showing that humans tend to make irrational decisions. But that’s what Richard Thaler has done. In an interview from 2018, the founder of behavioral economics describes his unlikely route to success; his reputation for being lazy; and his efforts to fix the world — one nudge at a time.

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Richard Thaler, professor of behavioral science and economics at the University of Chicago.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJuly 15, 2024

    596. Farewell to a Generational Talent

    596. Farewell to a Generational Talent

    Daniel Kahneman left his mark on academia (and the real world) in countless ways. A group of his friends and colleagues recently gathered in Chicago to reflect on this legacy — and we were there, with microphones.

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Maya Bar-Hillel, professor emeritus of psychology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
      • Shane Frederick, professor of marketing at the Yale School of Management.
      • Thomas Gilovich, professor of psychology at Cornell University.
      • Matt Killingsworth, senior fellow at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.
      • Barbara Mellers, professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania.
      • Eldar Shafir, director of the Kahneman-Treisman Center for Behavioral Science & Public Policy at Princeton University.
      • Richard Thaler, professor of behavioral science and economics at the University of Chicago.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJuly 11, 2024

    595. Why Don't We Have Better Candidates for President?

    595. Why Don't We Have Better Candidates for President?

    American politics is trapped in a duopoly, with two all-powerful parties colluding to stifle competition. We revisit a 2018 episode to explain how the political industry works, and talk to a reformer (and former presidential candidate) who is pushing for change.

     

    • SOURCES:

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJuly 04, 2024

    594. Your Brand’s Spokesperson Just Got Arrested — Now What?

    594. Your Brand’s Spokesperson Just Got Arrested — Now What?

    It’s hard to know whether the benefits of hiring a celebrity are worth the risk. We dig into one gruesome story of an endorsement gone wrong, and find a surprising result.

     

    • SOURCES:
      • John Cawley, professor of economics at Cornell University.
      • Elizabeth (Zab) Johnson, executive director and senior fellow with the Wharton Neuroscience Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania.
      • Alvin Roth, professor of economics at Stanford University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 27, 2024

    593. You Can Make a Killing, but Not a Living

    593. You Can Make a Killing, but Not a Living

    Broadway operates on a winner-take-most business model. A runaway hit like Stereophonic — which just won five Tony Awards — will create a few big winners. But even the stars of the show will have to go elsewhere to make real money. (Part two of a two-part series.)

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 20, 2024

    EXTRA: The Fascinatingly Mundane Secrets of the World’s Most Exclusive Nightclub

    EXTRA: The Fascinatingly Mundane Secrets of the World’s Most Exclusive Nightclub

    The Berlin dance mecca Berghain is known for its eight-hour line and inscrutable door policy. PJ Vogt, host of the podcast Search Engine, joins us to crack the code. It has to do with Cold War rivalries, German tax law, and one very talented bouncer.

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Lutz Leichsenring, executive board member of Clubcommission Berlin and co-founder of VibeLab.
      • PJ Vogt, reporter, writer, and host of the podcast Search Engine.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 17, 2024

    592. How to Make the Coolest Show on Broadway

    592. How to Make the Coolest Show on Broadway

    Hit by Covid, runaway costs, and a zillion streams of competition, serious theater is in serious trouble. A new hit play called Stereophonic — the most Tony-nominated play in history — has something to say about that. We speak with the people who make it happen every night. (Part one of a two-part series.)

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 13, 2024

    591. Signs of Progress, One Year at a Time

    591. Signs of Progress, One Year at a Time

    Every December, a British man named Tom Whitwell publishes a list of 52 things he’s learned that year. These fascinating facts reveal the spectrum of human behavior, from fraud and hypocrisy to Whitwell’s steadfast belief in progress. Should we also believe?

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 06, 2024

    Related Episodes

    Want to win the lottery right now? Here's how to pick numbers with your tarot cards

    Want to win the lottery right now? Here's how to pick numbers with your tarot cards
    It's official: Wednesday's Euro lottery is over 50 million euros and America's "Power Ball" jackpot is a mind-blowing $1.3 BILLION! It is time to show you how to grab some of that cash for yourself. Screw you hard-working billionaires! I made my fortune overnight! So, how to win the lottery. That is the question everyone is asking. Well, today Becky, Leslie, and I sat down to show you exactly how we plan on doing it. This is the most exact step-by-steep methodology using the tarot I believe you can find anywhere; and it is free. I didn't want to hand you a pre-formatted system of "just do this and trust me" picking winning numbers, so I walked you through a small part of the research I have been doing. I wanted you to see how we came to these conclusions, and how they represent the most stable and credible method of translating tarot card images into lottery numbers. The process of picking lottery numbers using your tarot deck is a LOT easier than trying to explain it, so don't let the explanation of it all scare you off. You will need one or two decks, depending on how complicated your lottery system is. All we talk about today is how to win the lottery. If you have any questions, or if you try this out, please email me (me@dustywhite.net) and let me know how you did. THANK YOU for being here! :-) Dusty