Community Chat

[PeterDM]

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

.....   is all wrong !!!

One person might win $1.3 billion?    Seriously?

I'm not a lottery ticket buyer, but I've always thought multiple winners of more modest prizes makes SO  much more sense .....  for example, if the lottery is at $200 million, why can't there be 200 winners of $1 million?   Or 40 winners of $5 million?    Or ... whatever.   You get the idea.

Not only would it still be a good prize, but more chances to win.    Face it, even a cash prize of $1 million after taxes is a lot better than a kick in the head!  

---

If the system worked that $200 million would give 200 winners $1 million dollars, not as many people would play the lottery, so the jackpot would never even get that high.  They do have a system in place where ticket holders who have a few of the numbers win smaller amounts of money, so it's not like the person or persons who match all the numbers are the only ones who win.

[house_cat]

Isn't it ironic that Americans will stand in line to give money when they think they might win big, but many of those same people would never, ever pay extra taxes to improve conditions and schools in impoverished neighborhoods?  Don't we all win big when we lift up those less fortunate?

[PenneyT]

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

I didn't buy any lottery tickets because I won't need the money.  

Based on extensive communications with Publishers Clearing House, I know I'll be winning their grand prize next month.  lol

---

Sure, Tink, if you want to gamble on them, go ahead, but I've been told by a member of the Nigerian Royal Family that I should expect a big check any day now!

[house_cat]

Steve Harvey called last night and told me that I was the LOTTO winner.

Then he called back and said he was mistaken :-(

[Tinkrbl44]

---

@Maudelynn wrote:

One winner, 10,000 winners.  It's all good.  Not sure why anyone has to win the lottery to help others.  Non-lottery winners can donate food to pantries, diapers to the diaper drive, used clothing to shelters, and the list goes on.  These small donations help quite a bit and don't require the giver to be worth a billion.

---

I didn't know there even was such a thing as a "diaper drive"!

[MaggieMack]

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@Maudelynn wrote:

One winner, 10,000 winners.  It's all good.  Not sure why anyone has to win the lottery to help others.  Non-lottery winners can donate food to pantries, diapers to the diaper drive, used clothing to shelters, and the list goes on.  These small donations help quite a bit and don't require the giver to be worth a billion.

---

I didn't know there even was such a thing as a "diaper drive"!

---

@Tinkrbl44, in my community we have a charity called the Teddy Bear Den that collects products for low income moms, like diapers and wipes and formula. They also have Mentor Moms to help those especially young mothers who need help adjusting to the rigors of motherhood. They also accept feminine hygiene products which they distribute. My Kiwanis Club supports this charity with a "diaper drive" and monetary donation.

[Tinkrbl44]

---

@MaggieMack wrote:

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@Maudelynn wrote:

One winner, 10,000 winners.  It's all good.  Not sure why anyone has to win the lottery to help others.  Non-lottery winners can donate food to pantries, diapers to the diaper drive, used clothing to shelters, and the list goes on.  These small donations help quite a bit and don't require the giver to be worth a billion.

---

I didn't know there even was such a thing as a "diaper drive"!

---

@Tinkrbl44, in my community we have a charity called the Teddy Bear Den that collects products for low income moms, like diapers and wipes and formula. They also have Mentor Moms to help those especially young mothers who need help adjusting to the rigors of motherhood. They also accept feminine hygiene products which they distribute. My Kiwanis Club supports this charity with a "diaper drive" and monetary donation.

---

Sounds good .... but how about also helping with birth control for those that can't afford to have kids?   I know I sound cynical, but people need to be responsible and NOT bring kids into the world that they can't care for.    Okay, I'll get off my soap box now .... and I apologize if my comments offended anyone.   

[jackthebear]

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@MaggieMack wrote:

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

---

@Maudelynn wrote:

One winner, 10,000 winners.  It's all good.  Not sure why anyone has to win the lottery to help others.  Non-lottery winners can donate food to pantries, diapers to the diaper drive, used clothing to shelters, and the list goes on.  These small donations help quite a bit and don't require the giver to be worth a billion.

---

I didn't know there even was such a thing as a "diaper drive"!

---

@Tinkrbl44, in my community we have a charity called the Teddy Bear Den that collects products for low income moms, like diapers and wipes and formula. They also have Mentor Moms to help those especially young mothers who need help adjusting to the rigors of motherhood. They also accept feminine hygiene products which they distribute. My Kiwanis Club supports this charity with a "diaper drive" and monetary donation.

---

Sounds good .... but how about also helping with birth control for those that can't afford to have kids?   I know I sound cynical, but people need to be responsible and NOT bring kids into the world that they can't care for.    Okay, I'll get off my soap box now .... and I apologize if my comments offended anyone.   

---

This 1000%  and not cynical, being real

[MaggieMack]

@Tinkrbl44, your comments didn't offend me at all, I wish the same thing as you. But we can't control what we can't control, and can only come in with support after the fact. If anything irritates me, it is the young women who show up to pick up supplies with smokes in their pockets, ciggies are expensive and take from what the babies could use.