300 million dollar lotto winner in NY. What would you give up unlimited money?

Nope. If I couldn't do something useful with it, 300 million would be wasted on me, let alone 10 billion.

 

What about loopholes around these? #1 isn't really a constraint if you don't have children. What about adopted children? #2 would be an impossible constraint for me... I just like being active too much. #3 isn't necessarily a draw back... not all charity is money donations. Since you'd be self sufficient, you could instead spend your time working with charities (food banks, meals on wheels, habitat for humanity, whatever is available in your area) in an area where man power is more rare than financial backing.

 

The human capacity to rationalize anything would render all scenarios moot in that with those kinds of funds some workaround could be arranged. And what would be the enforcing mechanism anyway? How would you enforce your children not doing certain things? Impossible.

It sounds like you're trying to plumb resistance to sloth & greed: how much would it take for you to abandon conscientiousness. I think for most of us the question isn't how much but how little. We commit incalculable mischief for trifling rewards.

 

What about the real effects. You would be giving up:

1) Freedom from Con Men (and Women). There are a whole lot of experts at separating a lottery winner from their winnings.

2) You present friends. They will either want in on it or decide that you now belong to a different crowd.

3) Your present problems will not go away. Have an addiction....be prepared for it to get a lot worse. You get the idea.


These alone are good enough for me not to pursue any lottery.

 

With both unlimited time and unlimited money, how could you *not* develop an addiction - or several? Combine this with zero responsibility, and you get Hollywood.

No, wait. That's a different scenario. I'd put the first couple of million away for a rainy day, but the rest goes into doing something worthwhile.

 

1) I have no kids so no problem.
2) Can't do most of those things now so sure why not?
3) I ain't living forever so in the end I'd just will it away without the stipulations, or if I can't do that there are many ways around this charity stipulation. Such as buying huge tracts of land and opening them up to the public or investment into all sorts of useful endeavors that aren't charitable but benefit mankind.

I'm good to go. :thumb:

Besides with that much money I'd tie the dingbat that thought this up in court forever disputing those stupid precondition's. I'd own you burritos you'd give up eventually cause I'd have more money than you! ound: Barring that I'd take the opposite and let friends and charites sue me and just pay them off. There's more than one way to skin a cat.


p.s. jumped the gun and didn't read ahead eagle beat me to most of these. :nod:

 

Much more concise description of the fate that awaits.

I'm not sure about that. Those millions are just like potato chips, nobody can consume just one.....

 

The list would include paying off the mortgage, hiring somebody to finish the house and yard, a tropical vacation, a really fancy bicycle, nicer camping equipment, and a cozy little sailboat. That's about half a million so far. The rest of the 'couple million for me' would be retirement money. Apt analogy in my case - I don't eat potato chips.

 

1. No kids, no problems.
2. This is the nasty one, as it is an early death sentence.
3. Where does this deal draw the line between charity vs. targeted economic stimulus?

 

I want kids and i want them to learn the value of a dollar so I can't give up #1. #2, hmmm who would want to be a millionaire vegetable? #3 sounds more feasible due to its built in loophole. Give up the right to give charitably is not the same as spending unwisely. Acquiring a very unprofitable business can quickly drain one's wealth, look at CompUSA. They bought The Good Guys for 58 million dollars and ran it to the ground.

 

Let me reword the question to make it more interesting.

Would you accept $300 million dollars under these conditions:

1) You could never listen to Michael Bolton again.
2) You are not allowed to ever watch a VHS tape of The Love Boat.
3) You are explicitly forbidden from being kicked in the groin for the rest of your life.
4) You are forbidden from knowingly using Windows Vista.

Would you accept the money under those conditions?

 

Ohhh, that's a tough question. I don't know Stev0, I'll have to think about it.

Hmmm....OK.

 

Do you mean NOT permitted?