|Posted: March 21, 2006, 2:52 am - IP Logged|
Yes it is good enough to pay for a house, (in my case) but personally I would rather have a lifetime of checks. At least you know you will always be getting them, and can't spend them all in one shot. I don't have a problem with winning $250,000, but cash_only is trying to make another invalid comparison simply to further express his discourse for something that has been beaten to death long ago, and is nothing more than age-old, tiring rhetoric.
I am assuming though that he is over 50 or 60, which might make a cash option more appealing in his case. But to assume that is the only viable option for everyone in the world further proves just how close-minded he truly is. 10,000 wasted posts, and the game still exists, and people are still playing. Guess boycotting is more useless than we thought.
But that is why I rarely play the cash 5, I leave it for the seniors or others who are content with a lower amount. That much money simply will not change what I need changed, although a paid off new house would be very beneficial. But if I am going to beat the odds it is going to be for a much bigger jackpot....I don't want to waste one shot in a lifetime on something so low compared to the other jackpots out there.
For me a million and up would suffice. As long as I could live off of the interest, and not have to work, all is fine and dandy. Or if I chose to work, at least it would be to work for myself, not for the "corporate waste of America." But maybe some would be content with only $250,000. It is better than nothing, but I am looking for long term financial security, and even a lucky for life annuity would give me that.
If given a choice right now between $250,000 cash, and $2250 a month for life, I would not hesitate choosing annuity. A $50 million dollar cash option is a whole other story.