Stay away from the bums baby and you’ll be ok.
Posted on 12/20/2025 9:50:46 AM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
Would you rather be a millionaire or have safe, reliable passive income for life? That’s the difficult choice that many lucky lottery winners are frequently faced with. While the prospect of a seven-figure payout is tempting, 20-year-old Brenda Aubin-Vega from Quebec, Canada recently decided to take the recurring payment option instead.
After scratching off three piggy bank symbols on her Gagnant à Vie ticket, Aubin-Vega was stunned to discover she had just bagged the game’s top prize. “I couldn’t believe my eyes! I checked my ticket over and over again,” she told Yahoo News Canada (1).
After calling her dad and taking time off work, Aubin-Vega reached out to Loto-Québec to let them know she would be claiming her prize in the form of a $1,000 weekly annuity instead of the $1 million lump sum that was also available.
The decision prompted ridicule across social media, with Reddit commenters insisting the upfront payout was the rational move. The reaction underscores a broader debate about whether large windfalls are superior to guaranteed income.
Here are some of the pros and cons of Aubin-Vega’s annuity approach.
Pros
Taxes are, perhaps, the most important factor to consider if you’re ever faced with a choice between a sizable windfall or annuity. Income from gambling is fully taxable, according to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (2). Many American winners also face state and local taxes on lottery winnings.....
Cons
One of the downsides of picking a weekly payment instead of an upfront jackpot is the lack of flexibility. An annuity is permanent, but $1 million in cash can be freely invested in a wide range of asset classes, some of which could have delivered better growth opportunities.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
However, one problem with an annuity is that you don't get cost of living adjustments so it gets worth less and less every year.
obviously cash upfront because inflation will eat away payments it over time.
NPV... Always take lump sum....
she’s 20, she’s probably not very fiscally savvy. The most she can blow thru is $1k at a time versus blowing the whole lot over a very short time. Good call for her situation.
Still at the end of the day, it's all free money, minus the initial purchase price of the lottery ticket.
And perhaps she was self-aware towards her own spending habits and knew that if she took the lump sum, she'd just blow through it.
My biggest concern is my lack of confidence that there's even going to be a lottery around in 25 years to dole out her checks.
to the winner, get off the friggn internet!
Take the money now. Invest wisely.
Imagine a game where the state is betting against you.
Corrupt politicians will never give up the opportunity to tax lottery or casinos. It's just too lucrative.
Anyone hear about Publishers Clearinghouse. They went bankrupt leaving everyone screwed.
When you take taxes into account, her decision may have been rational. Also makes it hard to blow the nest egg on some crazy scheme. Also useful in fending off friends and family who want a slice.
At her age that’s the right move. She now has a base income, that’s pretty good, especially for a 20 year old. Any job she gets is bonus cash, if she loses her job no big deal. And come retirement time that base is still there.
There is also the variable of the time value of money.
IF she were to take the lump sum she'd net about $500-$600k....depending on taxes and such.
Invest that money now for 40 years and she'd possible have $22,629,627 at age 60...that's real money right there.
That's IF she put that money in and left it alone.
If she invests, at a $1000/week, she will definitely get a lot more
if only!
🎯💯
🎄 Merry Christmas🎄
Stay away from the bums baby and you’ll be ok.
The scammers will hate her because they can only scam her in small increments instead of a lump sum.
Except for J.D. Wentworth. They can scam her out of her entire future income stream in return for a much, much lower lump sum than was previously on the table.
She wouldn’t have the full $1k....probably closer to $700k. Still.....not bad money.
She will have totaled a million in 19.23 years. Everything after that is gravy!
Taxes on the grand a week will undoubtedly be a much smaller percentage than on the lump sum, too...even in Canada.
inflation is a huge issue in the context of the payout and the fiscal condition of most western countries (including canada). I think this is the most valid criticism of her choice. I also think 500k cash would provide opportunies now that could pay off the rest of her life, but not everyone getting thta post-tax lump sum would do useful or wise things.
There may not be a Canadá in 25 years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.