|
In large part poor people who win the lottery in america don't have the capacity to stay rich because they don't have the social capital that many rich people have in order to perpetuate that wealth. I'm willing to bet that no lottery winners have ever considered putting a windfall in a trust or a dozen or so of trusts managed by a LP.
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 16:48 |
|
|
Peven Stan posted:In large part poor people who win the lottery in america don't have the capacity to stay rich because they don't have the social capital that many rich people have in order to perpetuate that wealth. I'm willing to bet that no lottery winners have ever considered putting a windfall in a trust or a dozen or so of trusts managed by a LP. actually that's exactly what i would do, in my Lottery Fantasy. stick it all in a series of trusts and pay myself a quarter mil a year to gently caress around with. can't get in too much trouble. get all the money tied up and then do all my friends and family one big favor and then don't ask me for money again
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:In large part poor people who win the lottery in america don't have the capacity to stay rich because they don't have the social capital that many rich people have in order to perpetuate that wealth. I'm willing to bet that no lottery winners have ever considered putting a windfall in a trust or a dozen or so of trusts managed by a LP. I'm sure plenty do and you just don't hear about them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:actually that's exactly what i would do, in my Lottery Fantasy. stick it all in a series of trusts and pay myself a quarter mil a year to gently caress around with. can't get in too much trouble. get all the money tied up and then do all my friends and family one big favor and then don't ask me for money again Or just take the annuity that big jackpots offer you. Then you don't even have to worry about it, and you don't blow a fuckton on taxes by rocketing to the highest bracket for one year.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:I'm sure plenty do and you just don't hear about them. Yeah, it is a stupid argument that getting rich has to ruin your life. It doesn't have to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Or just take the annuity that big jackpots offer you. Then you don't even have to worry about it, and you don't blow a fuckton on taxes by rocketing to the highest bracket for one year. Those people just borrow against their future winnings and blow it on bullshit. These people are all stupid and loving dumb dumb dumb. They are all fools that will soon be parted with their money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Some people do stupid poo poo with a lot of money, some people invest it and live great lives. What does the press report? Seriously, do you guys think poor people coming into a lot of money are incapable of handling that money? Stop hating on poor people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
I'd like to see what life is like for regular millionaires and their families vs lottery winners, I bet there's quite a bit of overlap. I don't see why it isn't easy to not spend that pile of money, but I do figure there's some issue with opportunists and how your family reacts. Suddenly I realize why rich people would be such cold hearted assholes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:I'd like to see what life is like for regular millionaires and their families vs lottery winners, I bet there's quite a bit of overlap. Regular millionaires blow money just as stupidly but have built in mechanisms already in place to replenish their bank account after the impulse second wine cellar. Until they dont, and then they become po folks and their money filters up into the highest income brackets instead. Eventually like 100 people have all the money, we get sick of it and kill them once the problem has become quantifiable enough to count the number of targets on the back of a public school education and we can start anew.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:Regular millionaires blow money just as stupidly but have built in mechanisms already in place to replenish their bank account after the impulse second wine cellar. See: Donald Trump
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:I'd like to see what life is like for regular millionaires and their families vs lottery winners, I bet there's quite a bit of overlap. It's not just your family, many people want to be charitable and help the community they came from. You see the same thing with NBA/NFL players from poor communities.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:In large part poor people who win the lottery in america don't have the capacity to stay rich because they don't have the social capital that many rich people have in order to perpetuate that wealth. I'm willing to bet that no lottery winners have ever considered putting a windfall in a trust or a dozen or so of trusts managed by a LP. In states where you're not allowed to claim anonymously there are quite a few jackpot winners who are smart enough to hire a law firm to claim the prize on their behalf. Presumably at least some of them also have the wherewithal to put all or some of the money under professional stewardship. There was a guy in the late 90s who hired a financial manager for his winnings but the guy dumped it all into internet stock and wiped him out. He tried to sue the manager but I don't think he got anything out of it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
badatom posted:That picture just makes me think of April O'Neil from TMNT... Like 99% of that is because of the hair:   Pohl posted:Some people do stupid poo poo with a lot of money, some people invest it and live great lives. What does the press report? If they were capable of handling money they wouldn't be poor in the first place, checkmate.  In other politics, it sounds like the basics of the deal with Iran are pretty good from a U.S. standpoint, I'm just hoping that the broader public are willing to rally around it once it's fleshed out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:It's like grey poupon. It only costs a few bucks but if a poor person eats it then it's all the proof that someone with a yacht and a dancing horse needs that the poor are grifters who are living high off the government. Well no, actual lobster gets pretty expensive once you start getting way inland. I'm just from close enough to the fishing grounds that it's dirt cheap.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:In other politics, it sounds like the basics of the deal with Iran are pretty good from a U.S. standpoint, I'm just hoping that the broader public are willing to rally around it once it's fleshed out. How much does it actually matter what the public thinks? I'm pretty sure Iran mostly cares about the rest of the world's sanctions and if the Republicans and the public blow up our ability to keep our end of the bargain up Iran still is in a way better place. Which is what makes all this idiocy even worse, all it does is hurt future negotiations and the standing in the world the very people continually argue for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:24
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:It's still weird to me that lobster is even a luxury in most of the country. Nintendo Kid posted:Well no, actual lobster gets pretty expensive once you start getting way inland. I'm just from close enough to the fishing grounds that it's dirt cheap. It's not weird at all that expensive things are luxuries. I don't understand 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:24
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Well no, actual lobster gets pretty expensive once you start getting way inland. I'm just from close enough to the fishing grounds that it's dirt cheap. I decline your invitation to start an argument when you just reversed yourself to disagree with me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:27
|
|
|
Pyroxene Stigma posted:It's not weird at all that expensive things are luxuries. I don't understand It's weird int he same way that finding out your middle school teachers have summer jobs is weird, calm yourself. VitalSigns posted:I decline your invitation to start an argument when you just reversed yourself to disagree with me. I didn't reverse myself, you're just desperate to disagree.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
Pyroxene Stigma posted:It's not weird at all that expensive things are luxuries. I don't understand Funny thing is for the longest time it was a trash food for poors until rich pricks started vacationing in Maine. Then the yokels got the bright idea to charge an arm and a leg for bait.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:If they were capable of handling money they wouldn't be poor in the first place, checkmate. It's funny how many people in this thread are hinting at this without coming out and saying it - especially given that it's the exact argument Ayn Rand makes in Atlas Shrugged for why the mooching poor need to keep their envious eyes off the virtuous rich man's cash.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:Funny thing is for the longest time it was a trash food for poors until rich pricks started vacationing in Maine. Then the yokels got the bright idea to charge an arm and a leg for bait. Yeah, I did know that. But in the pacific northwest we have crabs coming out our ears! Share the waterbug wealth, Maine 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:56
|
|
|
I'm looking for somebody to reassure me. Today The Guardian had a big old article about how congressional Republicans are gearing up to sink Obama's deal with Iran by any means necessary. Somebody tell me they won't be able to do it. This deal is one of the best things to come out of Obama's presidency, and I'd be loving heartbroken to see it scuttled by Republicans doing the same thing they've been doing for the past six years. We need this deal, for a more peaceful world. Tell me I'm afraid of something that's not going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
How are u posted:I'm looking for somebody to reassure me. Today The Guardian had a big old article about how congressional Republicans are gearing up to sink Obama's deal with Iran by any means necessary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
Crain posted:That's 25 years worth of income for my lovely academic science career.  It's a loving crime how much people that do/teach actual science are poo poo on these days. Pohl posted:Yeah, I couldn't hope to clear that amount of money in my life. People making GBS threads on the the value of that money becuase they earn a lot have no loving idea how much money that is. Like, god drat. I wasn't trying to poo poo on it to make people feel bad, it was more that in the grand scheme of things getting something like that but having to ultimately destroy all or almost all future earnings wouldn't be worth it. I mean the median income for the us is just shy of $52k which is still less than 15 years which was the point, 15 years isn't that long at all considering I've been married to my wife already for 1/2 that and I'm only turning 34 this month.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 07:07
|
|
|
Joementum posted:This is a picture of the cake Tom Cotton's wife bought Wednesday. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kD67xphB5Yw
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 07:41
|
|
|
PhilippAchtel posted:It's funny how many people in this thread are hinting at this without coming out and saying it - especially given that it's the exact argument Ayn Rand makes in Atlas Shrugged for why the mooching poor need to keep their envious eyes off the virtuous rich man's cash. Except that the reality is the reverse. People aren't poor because they're bad with money, they're bad with money because they're poor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 07:43
|
|
|
How are u posted:I'm looking for somebody to reassure me. Today The Guardian had a big old article about how congressional Republicans are gearing up to sink Obama's deal with Iran by any means necessary. Tom Colburn can write letters about birthday cake to Iran all he wants its not going to make anyone outside his base take him seriously. The Republicans have an agenda they need to be passing because as the presidential politics get closer there's going to be more and more worbling birds they'll have to coordinate with so no one looks like the senate set them up to fail. What I'm saying is the Republican congress is spending their time between plays yelling at the spectators and the more they try to fool around with poo poo like foreign negotiations that aren't their responsibility they less regressive poo poo they'll accomplish this session. I mean they can't even get an up or down vote on a new AG.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 08:00
|
|
|
Dr Pepper posted:Except that the reality is the reverse. That's the thing. It's not some failing in the nature of the poor. It's that getting used to a sudden change of financial circumstances can be hard. When you're not used to having a lot of money and suddenly do, you're likely not going to be as comfortable with it as someone who's eased into it by wealthy upbringing or a gradual rise of circumstances. One possibility is that you binge on it, because not having the opportunity for long-term planning in the past leaves you with little idea of how to pace yourself or thought of what happens when it runs out. Or even realization of how far you are from running out. Another possibility is that you clamp down and spend as frugally as you did before, even when it's not a good idea for your circumstances. Another is that you figure out how to manage things reasonably. Again, nothing about intrinsic difference so much as sudden change and being in a new situation. Those three possibilities also have corresponding ones for people who suddenly have a sharp drop in income: they might keep spending until they're on the street, they might turn paranoid and overcompensate, or they might figure things out okay. Mind, there's only one of the three that lets you get all smug about how you're better off not even trying to get rich, so is it a wonder those ones get talked about the most?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 08:04
|
|
|
Tune in to Channel 2 for the hardest-hitting news in the region.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 08:08
|
|
|
I would argue that a lot of the social customs of surviving while poor (tm) will also bring you back to poor if you suddenly have money. Eg, you have a tight network of family and friends, all in the same poo poo, all on the edge of emergency. So you form mutual aid groups. However, this means that you are expected to share and share alike - when things are bad for you, they help, but when you are good, you help. What this means is that when you get millions of dollars, you get to make the choice of keeping your support network or keeping your money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
Dr Pepper posted:Except that the reality is the reverse. Yeah and also I'm pretty sure the discussion was about the likelihood of anti-gay christian pizza shop owners being good with their lottery winnings of christian discrimination cash. They own a buisness, they aren't the working poor (except in the sense that basically all of America is working poor). I think we all assumed they were dumb bigots when in reality they just made a million dollars and are quite possibly very clever manipulators and are good with money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 09:08
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:They own a buisness, they aren't the working poor (except in the sense that basically all of America is working poor). Is anyone in this thread opposed to a $20/hr minimum wage?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 10:29
|
|
|
LowellDND posted:What this means is that when you get millions of dollars, you get to make the choice of keeping your support network or keeping your money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
Pyroxene Stigma posted:Is anyone in this thread opposed to a $20/hr minimum wage?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 10:59
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:I think more important than any specific dollar figure is that the federal minimum wage be pegged to inflation and automatically adjusted every few years. The fact that it isn't is how it's fallen so far behind in the last few decades. Having to get the rear end in a top hat Caucus to agree to each new increase really decreases the number of increases.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 11:00
|
|
|
Pyroxene Stigma posted:Is anyone in this thread opposed to a $20/hr minimum wage? Me. It should be $25.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 11:18
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:
Most of the people I worked with in the past made less than $30K a year. Sure, the median income is higher, but that was a few people making a lot of money while the rest of us made jack poo poo. That number seems possible to you because you make a lot of money. You can't begin to understand it until you can understand the perspective that you might only earn $26,000 this year. I know a lot of people that make $100K a year, most people, however, make less than $30K. Edit: the median is a good measurement when the numbers aren't skewed. The numbers are skewed, however. Pohl fucked around with this message at 11:52 on Apr 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 11:49
|
|
|
Equine Don posted:Me. It should be $25. As someone who would directly benefit from an increased minimum wage, why so high? With $15 I can pretty much live a life that, barring major accidents, is fairly comfortable. This also comes with the caveat that future increases to that 15 is automatically pegged to inflation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 12:07
|
|
|
Pohl posted:Most of the people I worked with in the past made less than $30K a year. Sure, the median income is higher, but that was a few people making a lot of money while the rest of us made jack poo poo. Median income is resistant to being skewed by a few people making lots of money - the median income being 30k means the number of people who made more than 30k is the same as the number of people who made less than 30k.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 12:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 16:48 |
|
|
Pohl posted:Edit: the median is a good measurement when the numbers aren't skewed. The numbers are skewed, however. The median is a better measure of central tendency (than the average) specifically when the numbers are skewed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 12:19
|
|
