Ask

570 readers

60 users here now

Rules

Be nice
Posts must be legitimate questions (no rage bait or sea lioning)
No spam
NSFW allowed if tagged
No politics
For support questions, please go to [email protected]

Icon by Hilmy Abiyyu A.

founded 2 months ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Would you rather have 2 million dollars now or 100k a year for the rest of your life? All tax free (lazysoci.al)

submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The lump sum has the better expected return over time, provided that you don't spend a large amount of it up front.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Or you could invest the $100K a year. You have to compare apples to apples.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Sure, but the expected return of the $2M is greater than $100k yearly, so you're not really going to be able to get ahead with the $100k/year. Compounding then further tips the scales in favour of the lump sum.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

For sure, assuming that the annual amount isn't indexed to inflation. But the question is just simple math if it isn't. See my longer answer.

Indexed, $100K/yr wins hands down if you're young.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

I could live comfortably on a small fraction of that, so it would pile up really fast if I had long to live. Not going to be billionaire money, but easily in the "think about pouring that somewhere good" money.