How much money per week would you consider Set for Life?

Reply #35

Stack47 — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 17:38:53 GMT

I read an article where the professional golfer Phil Mickelson pays 60% of his golf earnings in taxes because of changes made to Federal, State, and local tax rates. If the same tax rates are applied to $5000 a week, net is $2000 a week and today it could qualify as set for life . But as you pointed out, prices could drastically rise and in 10 years even $5000 a week might be enough to be set for life .

Reply #34

OldSchoolPa — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 17:37:32 GMT

Actually, my idea is not DOA. When people look at their tax bills and the time it takes to file their taxes each year going forward under Obama, the tide will shift for a simpler, fairer way to pay tax revenue the government needs to operate. The evidence is already showing that more and more people who hold dual citizenship and are living abroad are giving up their US citizenship as a result of FATCA, the income reporting requirement levied on US citizens living and working abroad.

The probl... [ More ]

Reply #33

Pita Maha — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 17:12:51 GMT

How much to be set for life? Well, given the way cost of living keeps rising and rising, $5k per week would be the minimum to be able to enjoy life now and set some aside for the day when gas is $10/gallon, a steak from the supermarket costs $50 and my favourite bottle of red is $100.

Reply #32

helpmewin — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 16:28:59 GMT

i like the way you thinkin

Reply #31

onlymoney — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 16:09:55 GMT

10 grand a week net.

Reply #30

helpmewin — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 16:04:50 GMT

don't wanna be to greedy i seen that happen on the Lottery post

it's called Karma

Reply #29

Cejaymia — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 15:50:10 GMT

$2500 would work for my family

Reply #28

Ronnie316 — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 15:46:28 GMT

I would be thinking more of a monthly figure and I dont mind being conservitive @ $5-10k

Reply #27

helpmewin — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 15:42:49 GMT

I Like $7500.00 a week

Reply #26

Jon D — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:52:08 GMT

Actually, the games are called Lucky for Life. We used to have a game called Set for Life, that was $100,000/year (about $1900/week) but that was replaced with the LFL series.

Maybe some people were upset about the word Set so they just changed it to Lucky instead. I'd be pretty happy with $1900/week additional income, but others might be half-empty mindset and want to complain about taxes and inflation, before they even won anything!? (UpSet for Life

Reply #25

weshar75 — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 03:56:13 GMT

Oregon's win for life is only $1000 a week for life and it is I think 20 years. So $52,000 a year so after taxes not that much have to keep working on that one. But if they would up it to $5000 a week for life I would play that game.-weshar75

Reply #24

Coin Toss — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 03:54:48 GMT

Good point, four4me.

In Illinos the 'set for life' payoffs have a ceiling and the time frame is usually 20 years. What sounds like a weekly forune today may sound like a whole lot less 20 years from now.

Today's new car prices used to be the price of a house. Go from there.

Reply #23

Romancandle — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 02:57:01 GMT

I like that saying Jon... Less stressed for life ... you should see if Cali will buy that slogan from you on the next set of scratchers

I saw that article too a while back. There were several takes on the data in that study too... for example how do you define happiness ... hard to quantify etc.

Also saw a range from $75,000 up to $160,000... but $75K seemed to be the sweet spot for most.

Interesting to note where other nations fell in that study... think Germany was around $80,000, Si... [ More ]

Reply #22

mikeintexas — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 02:27:34 GMT

Yep, that sounds good to me, too, although I could probably get by and live comfortably on half that or less. I don't play a lot of scratchers, but one I do like to play here in Texas is Weekly Grand , a thousand a week for 20 yrs. Most people prob. couldn't retire on that, but it would be a nice supplement to their regular income, sure make things a lot easier. Being single w/ no children, I could get by on it pretty good.

In the other thread, the one that asked how much you'd like to win... [ More ]

Reply #21

dallascowboyfan — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 01:28:28 GMT

$5,000 a week sounds good to me.....

Reply #20

MADDOG10 — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 01:17:53 GMT

I'd go for the $ 5,000 a week..

Reply #19

ThemBonez — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 01:04:21 GMT

$5,000 a week is ample. I'd be happy with that amount.

Reply #18

Jon D — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 00:35:51 GMT

It's in the link. And I believe that was single income. Sure, you can have all kinds of circumstances. I bet Octomom would not be happy with just $75,000. And if all the middle class familes out there today with less that $160,000 take home are miserable and unhappy, well, that is up for debate.

Reply #17

four4me — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 00:28:00 GMT

I don't know who did that study... back in 2000 a married couple with 2 children needed 80 grand take home to have a great year. Since everything has doubled since 2000 then that figure would be 160 grand now.

Reply #16

Jon D — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 00:13:37 GMT

There was a study a while back that said $75,000 per year was what a person need to be happy. That's at about the $1,500/week level. So with the Set for Life amounts $500, $1000, $2500 or $5000 per week, the small amounts $500 or $1000 probably won't cut it, maybe just a little less stressed for life if anything. The larger two $2500 and $5000 per week are probably what is needed to quit your day job. But that all depends on where you live and what your expenses and obligations are.

But with... [ More ]

Reply #15

billionaire2bee — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 23:57:13 GMT

I dont know...the set for life term limit of 25 years could last alot of 20 yr old the rest of their life,I think it depends on the person....we all know Dave Edwards was set for life and he was no 20 year old...So it is not really how much you have....it is what you do with it and/or take care of it

Reply #14

veganlife125 — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 22:40:44 GMT

Many are being cafeful with IRA's. Savers think they are dodging taxes getting a free bee. The congress could change the laws to tax ira's more heavily in the near future when you take it out. Worse they could confiscate it to spread the wealth around and give you worthless bonds. Politicians get desperate to stay in power when the money runs out and can't pay the voters free checks. Many are taking the early penalty to get it all out. Who can say.

Reply #13

rdgrnr — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 21:41:34 GMT

Nixon should have bombed the dikes.

And I'm not talking about Democrat wimmins.

Reply #12

noise-gate — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 20:26:38 GMT

Congress has debated your push for simplifying the tax code - Forbes when running for President tried that l believe and it got no traction. Heck there is even word of Congress trying to tax the Internet.Your idea is DOA at present.

As for the guy who won in 2008 hitting the JP- they all have hit the JP going back as far as the eye can see.

All make promises that they do not keep.Take Nixon..

Nixon did not understand the students protests against his Vietnam War. He saw himself as a m... [ More ]

Reply #11

OldSchoolPa — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 19:44:30 GMT

If I were to get elected to Congress, I would push for simplifying the tax code, a flat tax and no tax on income or lottery winnings. All tax would be on business and retail goods. Bye bye IRS. Since there would be no income taxes, there would be no need for retirement account limits or even designation of retirement accounts per se, though I would allow them to continue to exist in the event we gehappy ax and spend happy president and congress.

Reply #10

OldSchoolPa — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 19:25:23 GMT

Well, first you have to define what set for life means for you. I think one would be hard pressed to say they are set for life on $500 a week in California! Set for life means I never have to work for a living. So 5k per week would qualify but 10k per week would be even better. 20k per week would be outstanding, but I cannot see myself dropping $20 on a scratch off. If I spend $20 on a scratch off, I would be pissed if I won Nothing. I would only play if such game at least offered $10 as a minim... [ More ]

Reply #9

Stack47 — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 19:21:47 GMT

30 years ago when a decent wage was $10 an hour and $500 a week looked like a person would be set for life. Today if you make $500 a week you're close to poverty levels. 30 years from now, who knows what $5000 a week will be worth

Reply #8

mypiemaster — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 18:17:31 GMT

The biggest problem with jackpot winners, in the good ol' US of A, is that they get the living daylights, taxed out of them upfront. To be set, you will need at least $25000.00 per week, unless you consider an extra hamburger a luxury item.

Reply #7

JoshUK — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 17:55:00 GMT

We don't have many win for life tickets in the UK, I think there is only one or two not sure as I don't play them but it's tax free here so I guess it would be possible to retire if you won.

Reply #6

noise-gate — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 16:20:17 GMT

It all looks good with the $5000 a week deal- but factor in Uncle Sam and you clear a little over $12, 000 a month.Are you set for life , maybe maybe not.

Reply #5

Romancandle — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 15:29:36 GMT

Illinois has similar games too... although they recently switched from CASH FOR LIFE to the GOOD LIFE (a 20 year annuity or lump sum) which changed that whole cash for life concept in a big way IMO... liked the original concept better.

Seems to me, 5K and up are the only ones that would qualify as set for life IMO.

Anything less than that, is good for the early part of the annuity, but as time wears on, your purchasing power starts to drop quickly at the lower JP prize tiers.

$500 and

Reply #4

JoshUK — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 15:02:49 GMT

5000 would be nice. ;D

Reply #3

maringoman — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 12:53:00 GMT

Given the choice of $500 to $5,000 a week for life, which option do you think 99.9% of the people would choose? ahahaha only a monk would choose $500 for he has to choose hard life of self denial and sacrifice and abstinence. The rest of us live by the YOLO philosophy. At least I do

Reply #2

billionaire2bee — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 11:19:09 GMT

We've got that scratch-off here in NC too...5,000 a week for life 2,500 a week for life 1,000 a week for life and $500 a week for life....I'd love to win the 5,000 but there's only one left in that top prize....I also think it would be super cool to have a $20 scratch-off that was 10,000 a week for life...now I'd seriously love to win that one LOL

Reply #1

savagegoose — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 10:03:23 GMT

5k a week is sounding pretty ok, 500 a week is still looking like hard choices. i would be very happy for 5k a week.

How much money per week would you consider Set for Life?

redhot7 — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 09:53:17 GMT

The California Set for Life advertise their jackpot from $500 to $5,000 per week for 25 years.

How much money per week would you consider Set for Life? Make your own number.

For the sake of argument, just assume you would receive money per week.