Any Brits still up: Help us explain this funding thing? How much does the govt give a millionaire like Mo Farah?

Mark Bateman wrote:

It is morally unjustifiable that this money goes to enlarge even further the bank balance of athletes such as Farah and Ennis who everyone accepts made hundreds of thousands of pounds from their Olympic successes. At the very least , should not they be asked to repay any funding they received - once they are reaping the commercial rewards of that funding?

And as for funding going to American athletes such as Tiffany Porter .... don't get me started on that one!!!

You did read the thread yep?

Farah and Ennis would not have received a penny from lottery funding for a number of years now because it's MEANS TESTED.

I would suggest not getting started on Tiffany Porter either, chances are you would be completely clueless on that subject too.

wejo wrote:

I find it interesting how everyone is saying the money doesn't come from the taxation it comes from the lottery really trying to say the money doesn't come from the government.

If the money from the lottery wasn't going to athletes, it could be spend on roads, poverty programs, health care, military, you name it.

Just because it's a not a direct tax doesn't meant it's not government money.

Money is fungible.

Having said that I applaud the Brits for supporting Olympic sport with government money. I personally believe Olympic athletes inspire the next generation of kids.

Wejo, I get what you're saying about money being fungible, but is that any different from a policeman buying a donut with his own money? Technically his salary is paid by the taxpayers, which could be reduced so that they have more money for roads, poverty programs, you name it... So even though it's government money I think they can justify it in different ways.

jobz wrote:

Is Farah really a millionaire?

Mo Farah hardly needs lottery funding these days, god knows how much appearance money he has received to run in track races in Britain since the Olympics, plus revenue from appearing in adverts - but he was also handed £750,000 to run just halfway! in this years London Marathon with the commitment to run the full distance in the 2014 race.

English are so racist they think Farah is an African.

If the money from the lottery wasn't going to athletes, it could be spend on roads, poverty programs, health care, military, you name it. (quote)

Not so.

The national lottery relies on people willing to pay for a ticket in the hope of winning a fortune.

So around 50% must obviously be paid back to the winners, 12% is paid to the government in tax, 5% to the retailers, 4% operating costs and of what’s left is split between;

Health, Educational, Environmental and Charitable Causes - 40%

Sport - 20%

Arts - 20%

Heritage - 20%.

This seems acceptable to the ticket buyers, were the government to step in and start using the fund as their personal slush-fund - would cause outrage.

Our government is spending around $1.2 trillion each year on ‘roads, poverty programs, health care, military, you name it.’

What’s wasted alone in that sum would be the equal to about a couple of hundred thousand times the size of all the lottery sports funding.

Joe Binks wrote:

jobz wrote:

Is Farah really a millionaire?

Mo Farah hardly needs lottery funding these days, god knows how much appearance money he has received to run in track races in Britain since the Olympics, plus revenue from appearing in adverts - but he was also handed £750,000 to run just halfway! in this years London Marathon with the commitment to run the full distance in the 2014 race.

That is ridiculous. I can't wait until Bekele comes back into form.

Being a 'Lottery Funded' Athlete isn't only about the cash! (And for the very very good it isn't about cash at all)

Being on funding gives you access to 'in kind' support which for some of far more valuable than the money itself.

Only funded athletes have access to highest levels of Physio, Massage, Sports Pysch support. Plus training camps, coaching etc

(and these things are provided for by the Federation which is Government money)

Joe Binks wrote:

but he was also handed £750,000 to run just halfway! in this years London Marathon with the commitment to run the full distance in the 2014 race.

The £750k was definitely a myth. I also read a £400k number somewhere, which might also be a myth, but still believable. It's essentially 2 appearance fees for probably the second-most marketable guy in athletics, after Bolt.

el segundo wrote:

cash man wrote:

The funding is great for devloping athletes and top athletes. it allowed Faraha to get where he is. He has a family and deserves everything he can get. He also humbels himself to train in kenya for extended periods without luxuary.

Potentioally should be a time when professional raod runners leave amature sport though. same goes for tennis etc in olyimpics

But then again any athlete can run London Marathon and complete in their championships so why not top athletes.

Farah also gets NHS HEALTH CARE sure you dont have that in America

No, but we sure do have basic literary requirements.

What about dentistry?

[quote]wejo wrote:

I find it interesting how everyone is saying the money doesn't come from the taxation it comes from the lottery really trying to say the money doesn't come from the government.

If the money from the lottery wasn't going to athletes, it could be spend on roads, poverty programs, health care, military, you name it.

Just because it's a not a direct tax doesn't meant it's not government money.

-----------------------------

The lottery is a private company Camelot which makes profits how is that government money? Your gov't in the States are paying for your athletes more through the college system to use the same slant on your incorrect and oversimplified thinking.

It is not 'government' money which is actually our money raised by the tax system. It is not a direct tax or an indirect tax or 'government money' any more than footballers pay earned by people subscribing to SKY TV

The lottey is also optional for people to take part in, unlike taxes (unless you are rich of course)

would be good to see a comparison between say 5 or 10 of the top Track countries and how their funding works

The spending being optional has nothing to do with it, morons. The government taxes lottery tickets and supports athletics with part of it just like they tax gas and cigarettes and support other public services with that money.

1. Mo Farah likes thick white women.

2. I'm not black.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

The lottery is a private company Camelot which makes profits how is that government money? Your gov't in the States are paying for your athletes more through the college system to use the same slant on your incorrect and oversimplified thinking.

Brilliant comparison, much better than my stupid policeman donut example.

For goodness sake. The government does tax the Lottery however it is not this money that is then distributed. The ,Lottery was set up to provide funds for such causes and sport. The proceeds of sale of the Lottery tickets themselves, not the tax proceeds from sale is distributed. Therefore it can not be said to be government money at all. If I decide to set up a company the profits of which will fund athletes, I make profit and pay my taxes, the balance I give to atheltes, is that governmnet funding of athlete?

Dude, the money is spent as it is at the behest of the government. It's all essentially tax money, and, as wejo says, could be spent however the government wanted to spend it when the act was passed -- just like cigarette and gas taxes.

serious answer wrote:

The spending being optional has nothing to do with it, morons. The government taxes lottery tickets and supports athletics with part of it just like they tax gas and cigarettes and support other public services with that money.

The tax on lottery tickets goes straight to HMRC and is not part of the money which is distributed to sports or charities

That tax is no more funding athletics than sales tax on a bar of chocolate

Winnings are not taxed

So this private company Camelot just voluntarily gives part of its profits to sports? Certainly not, they are obliged to do so by some government law I guess. And this government law could as well be to give money for example to science and other more important things than athletics.

The tax he pays from his earnings would cover all the costs of his publicly funded support throughout his career (unless he is a tax exile). Good investment by the goverment