Here's something I picked up in a political blog. It made me laugh, so I'm sharing it with you.
"Thought Experiment
I am a benevolent alien. I have just come to Earth and informed the people and political leaders of the United States of America that I can offer them a technology that will do the following:
1) for the next 10 years provide real GDP growth of 6% annually (more than double what an optimistic prediction would be, even absent any recession)
2) The bottom 80% of the income distribution would receive all of the gain from this income growth.
3) In addition, the top 20% would see their incomes decline by 5% per year, with all of that income going to additional gains for the bottom 80% (this is not redistribution, this is just what the magic technology box I am offering will do to the economy and income distribution).
So we have a technological change which vastly improves growth, but impacts the income the distribution which decreases both the share of and absolute incomes at the top, and increases them at the bottom. No one doubts the sincerity of my offer or its results, not even Alex Jones. No one thinks my plan "to serve man" is something other than what I claim.
How do people react to this? What does the WSJ editorial page say? The Washington Post editorial page? Tom Friedman? David Brooks? Leading economists? A Republican president (not Trump, a generic one)? A Democratic president?
Congress must pass a law to accept this technology. Does a Republican Congress pass it? Does a Democratic Congress pass it?
Does the Supreme Court declare accepting this technology to be unconstitutional, perhaps because it is an unlawful uncompensated taking from rich people?
Apropos nothing, but the large Power Ball jackpot had everyone at the office talking...
(This is a different rant than the astronomical odds against/what are you really doing with your money by buying tickets one, which is old and tiresome.)
It's sort of weird to me that people take it as an absolute written-in-stone fact that a person is better off taking the lump sum than the annuity.
Because first all of all: who says that? Where does this "common knowledge" come from? It comes from money managers who'd love to get their hands into your fucking money. NO SHIT. In other news, mattress salespeople think you need a new mattress and gym trainers think you should join a gym.
Second, the math that people present to make this point is fucking stupid. They always compare what you'd have if you invested the lump sum and got a great yearly return vs. what you'd get if you just spent the annuity every year down the last dime. But if you invested most of what came in through the annuity, you'd close a huge part of that gap. And what if you don't get a great yearly return? What if the stock market crashes? What if it turns out that 24 hours after winning the lottery wasn't long enough for you to choose the best people to manage a quarter billion dollars?
Also, if you don't take the lump sum, it's that much easier to turn down family and friends who want to get you to "invest" in their shitty ideas. Can't do it. I don't have $200 million. I only have six. (This year.)
But most importantly, who wants to win the lottery and quit their job only to have to start going to meeting after to meeting to manage an enormous portfolio? That sounds like a different, even higher stress job.
And finally, what is the difference, practically between "more money than you and your family could ever need" and 1.2x "more money than you and your family could ever need"?
Nah. I'm never going to win the lottery, of course, so it doesn't matter. But if I did, I'd take the annuity and never think about money again.
I also tend to think of it like drugs in a way. A person is better off with a steady supply of a potentially-addictive and destructive drug stretched out over a long period of time than with a giant fucking suitcase worth they take home one weekend. That's how you die.
It's not like it's a hypothetical people really need a good handle on, but even so, it's nuts that people love to pat themselves on the back because they have a "plan", even when their plan is something they heard somewhere once that they've never personally thought about.
Wifey knows people who won 2 millions canuckistani rubbles playing the loto. She told me they blew it on bullshit, and now they're having trouble paying the bills. Eh.
Yeah, but I'm making an epic sci-fi film with my winnings and I can tell you right now.. we are going OVER BUDGET. So, I have a perfectly solid reason to take the lump sum.
I'd like to win the lottery, but Powerball tickets are expensive and I always forget to buy them anyway. I usually buy some sort of lottery ticket when I'm hating work. A few years ago I bought them pretty often, but not so much the last couple of years. It's a ridiculous thing to spend money on.
What appears to be the Facebook page of the alleged shooter is packed with every conceivable liberal FB 'like' (from Daily Show, Rachel Maddow, John Oliver, Elizabeth Warren, Keith Olbermann, Bernie Or Bust, etc.) ...so I can imagine the response to this will be measured and reasonable.
I have a friend/former co-worker whose page is right wing nutjob these days.
Did you know one of the current right wing memes is "Tokyo doesn't allow immigration, doesn't have terrorist attacks"?
I'm going to skip enumerating all of the things wrong with that, though I will say I was tempted to reply that they also outlawed guns and have little if any gun crime and no mass shootings. Mostly so that I could copy and paste his reply about the price we have to pay for our freedoms and ideals and paste it right under the Tokyo bullshit.
I still have one episode left. I've enjoyed all three seasons and I think it's all high quality stuff with great writing and great acting. I was surprised when I read that HBO was 'disappointed' with it after the second season, and that there was some debate about whether there would be a third.
It's been a freakin' awesome series. What the fuck do people want from a TV show?
It's really gross that after a year or so of increasing hate crime, of attacks on Muslims and mosques, against people mistaken for Muslim, mass shootings at black churches, arsons of black churches, and all of the rest, a single crime against white republicans and now we have to listen to a bunch of lectures about hateful rhetoric and a divided America.
Comments
"Thought Experiment
I am a benevolent alien. I have just come to Earth and informed the people and political leaders of the United States of America that I can offer them a technology that will do the following:
1) for the next 10 years provide real GDP growth of 6% annually (more than double what an optimistic prediction would be, even absent any recession)
2) The bottom 80% of the income distribution would receive all of the gain from this income growth.
3) In addition, the top 20% would see their incomes decline by 5% per year, with all of that income going to additional gains for the bottom 80% (this is not redistribution, this is just what the magic technology box I am offering will do to the economy and income distribution).
So we have a technological change which vastly improves growth, but impacts the income the distribution which decreases both the share of and absolute incomes at the top, and increases them at the bottom. No one doubts the sincerity of my offer or its results, not even Alex Jones. No one thinks my plan "to serve man" is something other than what I claim.
How do people react to this? What does the WSJ editorial page say? The Washington Post editorial page? Tom Friedman? David Brooks? Leading economists? A Republican president (not Trump, a generic one)? A Democratic president?
Congress must pass a law to accept this technology. Does a Republican Congress pass it? Does a Democratic Congress pass it?
Does the Supreme Court declare accepting this technology to be unconstitutional, perhaps because it is an unlawful uncompensated taking from rich people?
I'm genuinely curious."
(This is a different rant than the astronomical odds against/what are you really doing with your money by buying tickets one, which is old and tiresome.)
It's sort of weird to me that people take it as an absolute written-in-stone fact that a person is better off taking the lump sum than the annuity.
Because first all of all: who says that? Where does this "common knowledge" come from? It comes from money managers who'd love to get their hands into your fucking money. NO SHIT. In other news, mattress salespeople think you need a new mattress and gym trainers think you should join a gym.
Second, the math that people present to make this point is fucking stupid. They always compare what you'd have if you invested the lump sum and got a great yearly return vs. what you'd get if you just spent the annuity every year down the last dime. But if you invested most of what came in through the annuity, you'd close a huge part of that gap. And what if you don't get a great yearly return? What if the stock market crashes? What if it turns out that 24 hours after winning the lottery wasn't long enough for you to choose the best people to manage a quarter billion dollars?
Also, if you don't take the lump sum, it's that much easier to turn down family and friends who want to get you to "invest" in their shitty ideas. Can't do it. I don't have $200 million. I only have six. (This year.)
But most importantly, who wants to win the lottery and quit their job only to have to start going to meeting after to meeting to manage an enormous portfolio? That sounds like a different, even higher stress job.
And finally, what is the difference, practically between "more money than you and your family could ever need" and 1.2x "more money than you and your family could ever need"?
Nah. I'm never going to win the lottery, of course, so it doesn't matter. But if I did, I'd take the annuity and never think about money again.
https://www.facebook.com/jthodgkinson/likes_all?lst=593262316:1350932325:1497452289
Did you know one of the current right wing memes is "Tokyo doesn't allow immigration, doesn't have terrorist attacks"?
I'm going to skip enumerating all of the things wrong with that, though I will say I was tempted to reply that they also outlawed guns and have little if any gun crime and no mass shootings. Mostly so that I could copy and paste his reply about the price we have to pay for our freedoms and ideals and paste it right under the Tokyo bullshit.
But I'm in sales, so this complicates my day a lot when that happens.
I still have one episode left. I've enjoyed all three seasons and I think it's all high quality stuff with great writing and great acting. I was surprised when I read that HBO was 'disappointed' with it after the second season, and that there was some debate about whether there would be a third.
It's been a freakin' awesome series. What the fuck do people want from a TV show?
deadlockedfantastically fucking stupid.Fixed that headline.