Question #141 from "The Book of Questions" by Gregory Stock, PH.D.
Would you accept a guaranteed, lifetime allowance of $75,000 per year (adjusted annually for inflation) if accepting that money meant that you could never again earn money from either work or investments?
Explain ....
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Just things I wonder about ... and some people are nice enough to answer. You are welcome to answer, too ... just click on "Comments" and off you go! IF you don't want to be Anonymous, use the Name/URL option and just put in your name ... no URL required .... Starting Jan 28th, 2009, I am using questions from "Table Topics: Right or Wrong?"
14 comments:
NO - you never know when a hyperinflationary scenario will reduce the $75K to nothing more than a lousy pension. There fore by accepting the deal you could potentially place yourself in a situation where you are on a fixed LOW income with no recourse to earn more.
I agree with Hugh. It sounds wonderful just to look at it but you never know what will happen in the future. You need to depend on yourself and your own knowledge to make your own financial decisions, not have others dictate to you.
I will keep my work that saved my sanity while in my bubble the last few years and keep my investments (most are secure - I hope) LOL
I would personally have to say YES to this question. As a Teacher, I would never have gotten to the place where I was earining $75,000/year and my retirement would have never reached that mark, either .... so this would be a better deal than teaching to retirement and then drawing retirement pay ....
The real question is ... would I quit working if I were to suddenly have this $75,000 a year land in my lap?? I'd have to say the answer to that is NO!! I think it would be very freeing. I could go out there and teach to my heart's content .... do right by the kids ... without worrying about all the political hassles and who's toes I stepped on and who might cost me my job, because I was doing it all for FREE!! ...
I also think that Tom would say NO to this question and would continue to invest and make money for us, too .... so we could have the best of both worlds!!
Hell No - I can earn a lot more than that, and have fun doing it.
No...with the future outcome unknown, and no way to grow and save the income, it would only reduce in value over time. Besides, it takes away my freedome of choice and restricts my well-being. no thanks.
No.....that's not enough for the living costs in Southern California.
However, if it was just me and I had no attachments, family or otherwise...I would consider moving somewhere where cheaper where that annual amount would be sufficient for my needs.
I could then contribute to the universe by doing loads of non-profit work...
Yes,that is a lot of money for me.
Yes, but I would do almost anything at this point to not work. Assuming that it would be adjusted for inflation I could live on that and would quickly jump on that kind of deal. (if only it were real. sigh)
What an interesting question...my perspective is a bit colored by the fact that I accepted an early-out package and am currently living without having to work. And my answer is still no...it's been a great break for me to not have to work. I've taken advantage of my time to do things I never had time to do before (work out, vacation, play!) However, I've noticed that life is a little boring without the constant challenges of a work life. It's stimulating to be a problem solver and to interact with different sorts of people. Lately, I've felt like my brain is on vacation...I kinda miss the adrenaline rush and the ability to act decisively under time restraints.
While never having to worry about money sounds great...it's not about the money. It's about the mental aerobics of being good at what you do!
I'd have to say no - but put another zero in there and we'll talk!
yes, it's adjusted for inflation, so as long as I can live on $75,000 now, and I can certainly move somewhere so that this is doable. Then, I can focus on working for the joy of it and to give something back to the community. Not staying in a job that is stressful, frustrating, and sometimes demeaning just for the security
I would have to say yes, I would take it. There are so many things I'd like to do, but haven't the energy to do them on my time off. Neither my husband nor I live large, and my kids are fixed for their futures. With wise spending and saving, I could live on an adjusted income of $75,000. I'd also be able to volunteer, read, learn to play piano, learn to quilt, join clubs, go to museums, and all the other things I'd like to do on a regular basis.
Hell Yes! I have lots of projects of my own that I could devote, well a lifetime to. I don't need to work to be satisfied, I have enough side projects, and goals to keep me busy for a lifetime.
Absolutely. It's adjusted annually! We live quite comfortably, the 4 of us, on about 30K now. 75K sounds like a dream.
Enough to get us into some nice land that is totally off the grid. Enough to persue our simple interests and have a fabulous, enriching life for our children.
If I felt the need to work - there are always chores and volunteering to be done!
Post a Comment