Testy Copy Editors

Our new website is up and running at testycopyeditors.org. This board will be maintained as an archive. Please visit the new site and register. Direct questions to the proprietor, blanp@testycopyeditors.org
It is currently Mon Nov 30, 2020 3:31 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2002 1:01 am
Posts: 8342
Location: Bethesda, Md.
RICHMOND, Va. - Retired truck driver J.R. Triplett is on Easy Street: He stepped forward Thursday to claim a $239 million lottery prize, the second-biggest undivided jackpot in U.S. history. (AP)<p>***No, he didn't.***<p>The Tripletts took their winnings in a pre-tax lump sum of $141.5 million, instead of $239 million in 26 annual installments.<p>***They won $141.5 million. The only way they could have won $239 million would have been if they got a check for $239 million. Getting $9.2 million for 26 years isn't the same thing.***<p>[ April 01, 2004: Message edited by: blanp ]</p>


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 12:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 12:01 am
Posts: 887
Location: U.S.A.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by blanp:
***They won $141.5 million. The only way they could have won $239 million would have been if they got a check for $239 million. Getting $9.2 million for 26 years isn't the same thing.***<hr></blockquote><p>Well, now, wait a minute there, blanp. They did win $239 million, even if they don't get it all at once. If they're going to get $239 million for having the winning ticket, how can you say they didn't win the jackpot?<p>That aside, if you don't want to say "they won $239 million," then what would you say?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 12:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2002 1:01 am
Posts: 8342
Location: Bethesda, Md.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gary Kirchherr:
<p>Well, now, wait a minute there, blanp. They did win $239 million, even if they don't get it all at once. If they're going to get $239 million for having the winning ticket, how can you say they didn't win the jackpot?<p>That aside, if you don't want to say "they won $239 million," then what would you say?<hr></blockquote><p>They didn't win $239 million, they won $141.5 million, because they chose the lump-sum option. I would say they won $141.5 million if that's what the lottery people give them.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 4:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 12:01 am
Posts: 887
Location: U.S.A.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by blanp:
<p>They didn't win $239 million, they won $141.5 million, because they chose the lump-sum option. I would say they won $141.5 million if that's what the lottery people give them.<hr></blockquote><p>You misunderstood me, although I'll concede I could have phrased my question better.<p>You originally said: "The only way they could have won $239 million would have been if they got a check for $239 million. Getting $9.2 million for 26 years isn't the same thing." OK, but suppose the couple had opted for the $239 million over 26 years. If I understand your original post, you wouldn't have said they won $239 million because they didn't get it all at once. That's what I'm questioning.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 6:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2002 1:01 am
Posts: 8342
Location: Bethesda, Md.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gary Kirchherr:
<p>You misunderstood me, although I'll concede I could have phrased my question better.<p>You originally said: "The only way they could have won $239 million would have been if they got a check for $239 million. Getting $9.2 million for 26 years isn't the same thing." OK, but suppose the couple had opted for the $239 million over 26 years. If I understand your original post, you wouldn't have said they won $239 million because they didn't get it all at once. That's what I'm questioning.<hr></blockquote><p>That's exactly what I'm saying. Calling that person a $239 million winner is like calling me a $2 million copy editor.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Sat Apr 03, 2004 1:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 12:01 am
Posts: 887
Location: U.S.A.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by blanp:
That's exactly what I'm saying. Calling that person a $239 million winner is like calling me a $2 million copy editor.<hr></blockquote><p>I believe your analogy is flawed. By your reasoning, I could say, for example, that my new car isn't really a $20,000 car because I've made only the $1,000 down payment.<p>But I'm willing to be persuaded differently. If you don't want to call the hypothetical winner of $9.2 million over 26 years "a $239 million winner," what do you call him?<p>[ April 03, 2004: Message edited by: Gary Kirchherr ]</p>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Sat Apr 03, 2004 2:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 1:01 am
Posts: 356
Location: Everett, Wash.
Lucky bastard.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Sat Apr 03, 2004 2:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2002 1:01 am
Posts: 8342
Location: Bethesda, Md.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gary Kirchherr:
<p>But I'm willing to be persuaded differently. If you don't want to call the hypothetical winner of $9.2 million over 26 years "a $239 million winner," what do you call him?<p>[ April 03, 2004: Message edited by: Gary Kirchherr ]<hr></blockquote><p>I call him the winner of $9.2 million a year for 26 years. If it's all the same to you, I'll take the $239 million upfront.<p>[ April 03, 2004: Message edited by: blanp ]</p>


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Sat Apr 03, 2004 11:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2003 1:01 am
Posts: 1324
Location: N 36° 57' 9", W 121° 24' 2"
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gary Kirchherr:
If you don't want to call the hypothetical winner of $9.2 million over 26 years "a $239 million winner," what do you call him?<hr></blockquote>How about "the winner of a jackpot valued at $239 million over 26 years"?<p>Aside, I can't understand why anyone would take the lump sum, since $9.2 million per year for 26 years is a helluva lot of security. Then again, I don't know which way you'd end up paying more in tax.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Sun Apr 04, 2004 12:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:01 am
Posts: 281
Location: Dallas
And to link this to another thread, who knows what $9.2 million will be worth in 26 years?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Sun Apr 04, 2004 3:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2002 1:01 am
Posts: 8342
Location: Bethesda, Md.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Oeditpus Rex:

Aside, I can't understand why anyone would take the lump sum, since $9.2 million per year for 26 years is a helluva lot of security. Then again, I don't know which way you'd end up paying more in tax.
<hr></blockquote><p>The lump sums offered to winner are far less than "jackpots" because given the choice, anyone would take it all at once, and not just because of inflation. That would either bankrupt the lottery or force it to use honest numbers. Conservative investment of such a vast sum would make the notion of $9.2 million a year laughable.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It's a ruse
PostPosted: Sun Apr 04, 2004 9:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2002 12:01 am
Posts: 1286
Location: Saranac Lake, N.Y.
<blockquote><font size="1" face="TImes, TimesNR, serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by blanp:
<p>The lump sums offered to winner are far less than "jackpots" because given the choice, anyone would take it all at once, and not just because of inflation. That would either bankrupt the lottery or force it to use honest numbers. Conservative investment of such a vast sum would make the notion of $9.2 million a year laughable.<hr></blockquote><p>This is the best advice I've seen on this board yet. I've been wondering what to do when I win the lottery.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

What They're Saying




Useful Links