Check out my comment and all of the retarded comments to it.
Ignoring that the lottery is a poor investment plan to start with:
If this girl had taken the million, she would have gotten about $680k to invest, even considering taxes. The first year, she would likely earn at least $60,000 in an index fund. That would mean with an average rate of return, she would have $1.6 million by age 30. By age 35, it would be worth $2.4 million, and her annual earnings would be $220,000 a year. By age 40, it would be worth $3.8 million. Her annual return would be $343,000.
Contrast that with the $1,000 per week plan. This plan means $52,000 per year for the rest of her life. She, and the idiots who are arguing against me, arrived at this plan by saying “52k times 40 years is 2 million. She gets more by taking the 52k,” and they are morons.
When you take the payout over years, the lottery commission invests that million dollars. The investment is assumed to earn 7% per year, and the commission then pays you 70% of that. So you are actually getting 5.2% and the commission pockets the rest.
The smartest thing for her to have done would be to take the $1 million, pay the taxes, keep perhaps 5% of it as “fun money” and invest the rest. By age 35, place the $2 million or so in a lower risk fund earning 5%, she would be retired and would never need to work again. Time is on her side, she can afford to wait a bit in exchange for a huge reward later.
Most index funds based on a broad market earn 9-10% per year, ignoring inflation. (You have to ignore inflation, because that $1000 per week payout doesn’t change, let’s make the comparison fair) Either way, you are getting a million, but in the case of the “thousand per week” payout, the commission is keeping most of the returns.
Arguing so strongly against investment and not understanding the math behind the decision is why so many people stay poor. Here are a few index funds, and the average returns they have earned over the past:
| Fund | 5 year annual return | 30 year annual return |
| SPY | 21.9% | 9.15% |
| QQQ | 26.7% | 10% * |
| VTI | 21.39% | 8.16%* |
The 30 year return for QQQ is actually 26 years. The fund didn’t exist 30 years ago. The 30 year return for VTI is actually 23 years. That fund was established in 2002.
What people get tied up in, is that the market occasionally has a bad year. If you look at the prices for the funds above, you will see that there are two dips-
- 2001-2002 The index funds all lost about half of their value over that period, caused by 9/11. However, if you held on and didn’t sell in a panic, by 2005 all of your value had returned.
- 2007-2008 The funds again lost value, due to the mortgage collapse. Within 3 years, the market again recovered and gains resumed.
The important thing to remember is that a loss of stock value (or gain) only exists on paper, unless you sell, thereby making it a real loss (or gain). It’s important to stay in the game when dips occur.
Or you can let someone else earn a profit using your money because you are a retard.
3 Comments
hh475 · January 14, 2026 at 10:25 am
I was a DoD employee for a little less than 12 years — 8 years active duty Army and not-quite 4 years a DoD civilian. For my civilian years, I was enrolled in the Thrift Savings Plan (the federal version of a 401(k)). I put a little money in it, maybe 20 grand. I then moved on in my life. Somehow, in my moves, the TSP folk lost track of me and stopped sending me statements. I completely forgot about it. Finally after about another 25 years, I retired, and somehow the TSP folk found me. Out of nowhere, I got a letter saying that I had $188,000 sitting in my account. Time, compounding, and the long term stock market are amazing. The only big problem it the time part…
McChuck · January 14, 2026 at 10:45 am
Investing the money requires her to work for a living for 15 or 20 years before the interest becomes a viable income against inflation and taxes. That’s the difference. Short term versus long term planning.
With the way inflation is going, $1000 per week won’t be worth much in 20 years. Assuming the lottery authority doesn’t default on the payments.
Divemedic · January 14, 2026 at 10:59 am
But taking the $1k per week isn’t enough to retire well on, and the value of that money, as you point out, declines year over year. If you assume 3% inflation, which we all know is far lower than reality, that $1k per week will have a purchasing power of only $633 by the time she is 35. That means there is no way she can retire on that money.