Living off of winnings VS living off of interest.

Reply #53

rdgrnr — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:25:27 GMT

Sugar Britches don't drink but bring her share anyway and I'll drink it.

Just make sure you stop in Lynchburg and get genuine Tennessee Whiskey.

Don't be bringin me none o' that cheap Kentucky Bourbon, tigger.

Ah cain't drank thet friggin stuff.

Reply #52

tiggs95 — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 02:32:22 GMT

Friggen A..Now let's get friggen lucky and go out and buy some friggen lucky numbers..We friggen hit we can all go to friggen Tenn and get friggen drunk with friggen ridge and Sugar Britches..What you fruggen say??...After thie tiggs is friggen tired..

Reply #51

rukiafae — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 01:20:04 GMT

hubby said $5 million and live a modest lifestyle (that friggen japanese simplicity crap! LOL)

i say im already living a modest lifestyle and know what that is like so maybe i would like more (that friggen american materialism LOL) so I would say $50 million.

Reply #50

markp1950 — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 03:05:24 GMT

Sometimes it just becomes a competition....

Who can be the greenest kid on the block....

Last I heard, Larry Hagman had the largest home solar system at 103KW.....

*I* would want to have the biggest....

500 KW would require 2173 230W panels....

Or 7,243 FT wide of solar panels...

Stack the 7 rows high it makes it 1034 feet wide...

Divide that into 3 racks would make the rows 345 ft wide by 39 feet high.....

And $1,234,481 for just the panels alone...

Now THAT would be

Reply #49

Colt45ML — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 08:46:47 GMT

Singapore is in your neighborhood. Their dollar is backed 100% with gold. Plus, they have the fastest growing economy in the world. An extraordinary financial center in every way. If there is a downside, they don't like juviniles marking up their walls with graffiti. I'spect five good whacks on the bare backside stings a bit.

Reply #48

psykomo — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 23:48:54 GMT

12 people on dis POLL R greedy should run 4 CONGRESS

{01} person on dis POLL R a LIER should run 4 SENATE!

GO finger it OUT ???!

VOTE 4 JOB's 4 D chillion

Reply #47

psykomo — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 01:49:10 GMT

thank u 4 this^^^^^^^^^^^^^^POLL !!!!!!!POLL^^^!!!!

I voted 4 $1,000,000 POLL rrrrrrrrrwas D big ##POLL^^^!!!

1ooo,ooo,ooo $1,000,000,0000 POLL (ur not tonk'SOCIAL SECURITY}} !!

R U trying 2 INSULT UR congere$$man'$$$$$$RETIREMENT??????!

PLEASE let THEM know !!!

U will NOT settle 4 crumes

Reply #46

kapla — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 00:33:57 GMT

Great to see someone talking about solar wind power. If more 'rich' people started investing/using that technology we ALL would benefit.

This is also the kind of set up I would spend money on.

Reply #45

savagegoose — Sun, 10 Oct 2010 16:28:15 GMT

and with inflation eating away at the purchase power of cash it wouldn't be a good idea ot stash cash , letting inflation eat it away, if not taking it over seas, putting it into gold or other precious or commodities, a tip inflation linked treasury bond might be a no loss way to store the wealth.

all i can say is its a prob id happilly try to deal with

Reply #44

Colt45ML — Sun, 10 Oct 2010 05:56:32 GMT

As things stand now, there is no way I'd buy any real estate of any sort here in the US. The future's too uncertain, and our government is too powerful and dangerous. I am looking at farmland in several Latin American countries, like Panama, Chile, and Uruguay. But the best of the lot would be Mendoza province in Argentina if they shake the Juan and Evita commie wannabe couple that run the place in their elections in November; looks like they will decisively. 10 hectare tracts for between 10K an... [ More ]

Reply #43

markp1950 — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 13:20:01 GMT

Here is your big chance to buy a part of Wyoming.......

Part of Butch Cassidy's hangouts.....

92,312 acres being auctioned off in 14 tracts...... Wow!

http://www.westchester-auctions.com/2010BigWestRanch.htm

Reply #42

markp1950 — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 12:13:16 GMT

How much would I NEED?

As little as possible. Sheet, I can get a trailer for $20K, pay monthly for $200. A little bit of heat.

I've really learned how to live on a little and be happy.

All kinds of plans from winning $200K to 200 Million.

BUT first, I have to WIN. THAT is the problem!

But no matter how much I win, I won't live like a pig.

MarkP

Reply #41

mjwinsmith — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 04:55:38 GMT

Interest Income is TAXABLE (1099-INT) so they still gotcha

Reply #40

time*treat — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 21:01:24 GMT

Oh, I meant nationwide -- not limited to Wyoming.

As part of austerity measures , some other nations are adding annual luxury taxes to real estate above a certain size or valuation.

Reply #39

markp1950 — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 20:44:56 GMT

Apparently you haven't seen Wyoming property taxes....

$500,000 house $2,640

$1,150,000 house $5,940....

YOUR energy bill pays THEIR taxes....

MarkP

Reply #38

hearsetrax — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 16:57:19 GMT

well personally I don't need nore want all that much land would be perfectly happy with ethier a decent percentage of an in town lot ....

preferably @ least a 3-4 acre plot of land on the skirts of town

Reply #37

time*treat — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 16:12:01 GMT

Some nice selections there.

My concern would be future HUGE land tax increases on parcels above a certain size, because it was decided at some point, you have enough (house) .

Reply #36

hearsetrax — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:30:53 GMT

few interesting links I've found depending on how much ya had to spend and or tastes

http://farmettesforsale.net

http://unitedcountry.com

http://farmandranch.com

http://www.prairieroserealty.com/properti.htm

Reply #35

markp1950 — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 04:02:35 GMT

A nice listing of places.......

http://www.eranches.com/ranchesprice.htm

MarkP

Reply #34

markp1950 — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 03:59:56 GMT

Only detail is to win that money. THAT is the hard part!

MarkP

Reply #33

OwlCreekBridge — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 04:35:13 GMT

that's pretty well thought out. I was looking at Wyoming too. No income tax and sales tax is 4

Reply #32

markp1950 — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 03:01:33 GMT

Details that I worked out. I found a nice piece of property for residental in Wyoming, 75 acres 2 miles out of Sundance WY. Would offer convenience yet enough remoteness to make me happy. If I had millions I figure that I could afford to get 2 miles of cable layed. Otherwise, a bit slower, many areas that have telephone, also have DSL. Sattelite Internet, just plain sucks. High speed is only one way, and after you use too much bandwith they slow you down.

For power, I would probably start wit... [ More ]

Reply #31

PERDUE — Sun, 03 Oct 2010 21:42:05 GMT

If it is a one time thing then 1 Billion should get the job done. I figure as long as I make no drastic changes to my lifestyle, I should be able to live off the winnings and not have to work or earn interest from investing.

Reply #30

OwlCreekBridge — Sun, 03 Oct 2010 17:39:28 GMT

This is a very good idea. I would try to implement something like this if I won. I've already looked online a few times at Iowa farmland. Looks like I could get a farm on 150 acres for around 600 grand. Do you know how someone would generate electricity?

I was thinking maybe wind turbines or solar panels. I wonder if anyone here knows how easy or hard it would be to put a few of those up. Would I have to apply for any sort of permit from the government?

Another question I have is; how a pe... [ More ]

Reply #29

Colt45ML — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:31:32 GMT

That's right. Rich, one worlder socialists like Warren Buffet talk a good game, but when it comes to them putting their money where their mouth is their hypocracy goes dayglow. Give me a good, honest, selfish capitalist any day. More trustworthy, and more likely to not go out of his way to harm me in my quest to become rich like him.

Reply #28

Spot-UK — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 12:22:02 GMT

The perfect answer is that you can never have too much money; but if I have to put a minimum, it would be around 50M ($75M) for someone aged under 50.

However, I would also be happy to accept an annuity of 2M a year for life.

Reply #27

drhymes74 — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 03:35:54 GMT

Simply put:

Stocks represent shares of ownership in a company.

Bonds represent loans to issuers of that bond....you become the lender.

I like to describe mutual funds as a bucket where it may hold stocks, bonds or both from many different issuers. In terms of a pure stock mutual fund, a fund manager will buy and sell many different stocks. The advantage is that when you buy shares of the mutual fund, you are not buying stock in one company, but many companies.....through the mutual fund... [ More ]

Reply #26

badboy00z — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 01:49:25 GMT

I always say that the more money you have, the harder it is to manage it all. I personally don't understand mutual funds, bonds or the stock market so I will most likely just have CD accounts and a CMA.

It would be great if there is just one safe place to keep your money.

Reply #25

drhymes74 — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 00:10:12 GMT

With a large win, some winners have had to leave their jobs because overseeing the management of their money is a full time job.

If you think about it, there are several aspects of money that people don't necessarily think of when it comes to a large win:

Investments, taxes, Legal, security, insurance, charitable giving and everyday expenses (food, clothing and shelter , transportation and health care.) Where you live, what you drive will have expenses...things break and need fixed it's a... [ More ]

Reply #24

drhymes74 — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 23:58:03 GMT

I work with investments at the institutional level. I have heard from folks that I deal with that their investment advisor told them to do this or that...Funny thing is that it defies logic.....Half the time the investment advisor is a close friend that gets lucky every once in a while and the other half try to get the biggest payout from what they recommend.

I do see the importance of investing across all types of asset classes (not putting all of your eggs in one basket). Stock Mutual Fund... [ More ]

Reply #23

KY Floyd — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 05:08:49 GMT

Think of the tax benefits of not investing.

Do you also see a tax benefit of investing at 2% instead of 4%? With an income that's only half as much your taxes would be less than half as much. Do you think that really makes sense, or do you see how obviously stupid it is? Even if the income tax rate was 75% investing means you'd still have 25% of the rate of return instead of 0% of it. If you don't already have one foot in the grave and you won enough that you could live off of the principal... [ More ]

Reply #22

markp1950 — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 10:28:43 GMT

We are in a strange point in the history of this country where many are concerned if the country of the dollar can survive. I don't want to start controversy on the wisdom of it but we put in huge debt to stop the collapse of this country. I don't think that we can survive another 2008.

So they are talking some real hard assets for security. Many say gold. I would look at some great Iowa farmland if things got crazy again. I definately would get hunkerd down somewhat. I would build somewhere... [ More ]

Reply #21

Colt45ML — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 05:22:59 GMT

This is a hard question to answer because I have no idea how long my better half and I will live. Also, what about the very real possibility of hyper inflation of the dollar in the not so distant future?

In reality, I could never just live off principle anyway. There are too many ways to make safe, easy money when you have that much liquid wealth. One of them fancy adjustable rate Swiss or Litchtenstien annuities or life insurance policies seems very sensible when asset protection is taken i... [ More ]

Reply #20

badboy00z — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 21:26:49 GMT

I used to worry about the insured amount of only $250,000 too but I figured if I put the money in a bank that is big enough, it is unlikely it would go bankrupt. That is why I plan on getting a CMA at HSBC, The World's Bank . Lol.

Reply #19

savagegoose — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:48:25 GMT

yeah when i dream about winning, i often think about setting up an investment trust, and paying myself to run it, saves about %15 on the tax bill, just paying yourself a wage, and leaving most of the profits in the trust.

if you ever want to splurge and get something real nice, you can do a special dividend, getting some personal money out the trust. and pay full tax rate on it, and buy that ferrari.

its nice to dream

Reply #18

BaristaExpress — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:26:13 GMT

Markp1950 you are correct about Mr. Warren Buffet and the rest of the wealthy and what they pay in taxes. But even Mr. Buffet has said he wouldn't mind paying more in taxes than he does now. But has anyone seen where he is paying more? Nope! And the reason is he's only paying taxes on the capitol gains of his vested interest in his companies that he owns! And that rate is 15% (on capitol gains) and not the top tax rate of 38% on regular income like a pay check and of course that will depend on w... [ More ]

Reply #17

markp1950 — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:24:13 GMT

So basically all that you have to do is figure out your state max tax and figure out what you have left.

I play in both Illinois and Wisconsin so I've been figuring it this way.

In Wisconsin 57.25% left after taxes........

In illinois 62% left after taxes.

But that are what taxes are, but if you get creative with your taxes (legally) and deductions although rich people are eligible for more taxes , they historically pay a smaller percentage of taxes.

Warren Buffet took note of tha... [ More ]

Reply #16

badboy00z — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 05:36:55 GMT

Federal tax is 25% before you even get your check from the lottery comish.

California does not have lottery tax.

Income tax for anything over $373,650 is 35%

http://www.bargaineering.com/articles/federal-income-irs-tax-brackets.html

Reply #15

OwlCreekBridge — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 02:04:43 GMT

yes 38% is better. ofcourse if I was lucky enough to win big I'd have to see an accountant or maybe even two

Reply #14

HoLeeKau — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 01:46:06 GMT

California doesn't have lottery tax, so you'd just have to pay the federal taxes. The federal max is like 38% or so, isn't it? Still bad, but not 55%.

Reply #13

OwlCreekBridge — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:39:02 GMT

so a ca resident like you will have to pay 55% in taxes? that sucks, it's not like the government paid for half the ticket

Reply #12

badboy00z — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:11:59 GMT

If I want to have $150,000/yr. for the next 80 years I would need about $12 million net.

Reply #11

badboy00z — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:03:16 GMT

One should consider how much you will have after you file your income tax the following year in April.

Cash Value- 25% Federal Tax- State Tax (if applicable)- 35% income tax.

If anyone wants the interest analysis just PM me your email address.

Reply #10

birdbreath — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 17:26:18 GMT

12 million after taxes? i don't know the exact math but after penalty for cash payout and taxes, seems like lottery winners walk with about a third of the jackpot. so, to take home 12, you'd have to win 36 mill.

Reply #9

johngreek — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 17:17:24 GMT

8,5 million euros

Reply #8

OwlCreekBridge — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 17:08:36 GMT

The advertised jackpot would have to be at least 18 million for me. I'd take the lump sum about 12 million and after taxes, I'd probably get to keep 6 million. Which would be just about enough for me to live off of barring some hyperinflation/currency crisis scenario.

I know before the lotto commission even writes me a check, 25 percent will be immediately taken out for federal withholding, I live in a state where winnings aren't taxed but I bet when I file in April the government will want e... [ More ]

Reply #7

savagegoose — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:37:02 GMT

i just ussed a yahoo finace website to calculate how much jackpot i need to win to live compfrtably till im 85

errrmmmm itsa a pension calculator, but i put in i retire next year and then it works out the numbers ill post a link

way to work it is put in under current income your desired anual fund you need to live off of ,

at the income replacement at retirement put in 100% so you basically get 100% of said anual income you wanted in earloier question

it says i need $117223... [ More ]

Reply #6

markp1950 — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:30:57 GMT

I will invest no matter how much I win.

So my vote was discarded.

You almost have to invest no matter what you win.

Unless you plan to bury $5,000,000 in mason jars like Lucius Clay......

How many mason jars would it take to bury 500,000 $100 bills? ($50,000,000)

Bigger bills are out of circulation now.

MarkP

Reply #5

four4me — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:50:39 GMT

Reply #4

tiggs95 — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:38:32 GMT

When your real old like ridge you really don't need that much..Plus he married 5 rich wimin and got a big settlement when they dumped him..They said to ridge to name a price then get out!!..

Reply #3

rcbbuckeye — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 13:26:57 GMT

Funny... I was just looking in the paper yesterday for CD rates, and the best rate was 3% for a 5 yr CD. There may be other investments that can pay more, but are more risky. (I know about that on a personal level).

I have thought about what it would take to live just on principle, and not interest. It would take about 5 million for me to live comfortably the rest of my life.

But I would rather have enough to live on the interest and let the principle be the income producer.

Reply #2

Raven62 — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:49:53 GMT

What Interest Rates (0.5%, 0.75%, 1.0%) did you use, and what is the Income after Taxes

Reply #1

C0w Pi3 — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 10:52:01 GMT

I say about $20,000,000 for they way I LIVE now. Now, of course if I wanted to live a really lavish lifestyle, it probably take $100,000,000 or so.

Living off of winnings VS living off of interest.

badboy00z — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 07:11:41 GMT

So I made an Interest Analysis in Excel showing how much interest I will earn at different APRs and different initial deposits. Then I thought about how much money I would need to live off of without ever having to work or earn interest from investing.

Think of the tax benefits of not investing. You would only have to pay income tax for the initial winnings for the year you win in and nothing else after that because you won't be working or have any kind of earnings.

It would need to be a l... [ More ]