Win lotto, lose husband



GLENN: Denise is a woman who went into a convenience store and just got a -- she buys a lotto ticket. The next morning she gets up, she's looking through the newspaper and she sees the lotto numbers. She thinks to herself, it's got to be a misprint, it can't be right. It was right. Number 1, 10, 22, 24, 29, 39, overnight. She won $28.52 million. Next she wanted to jump for joy and say I'm rich, but she was estranged from her husband. They were separated. She takes her lotto ticket and puts it right in the safety deposit box. She puts it in the safety deposit box. On her way home she calls an attorney: Hey, I need a quick divorce. Well, how fast do you need it? Right away. The lawyer calls the husband. "Want a divorce?" Yes. We can do this right away. You want to do it right away? Yes. They get a divorce. And two weeks go by. Two weeks and one day, she goes into the safety deposit box, opens it up, goes up to Tallahassee and she claims her $28 million. She tells the kids, we're rich, kids; mom just won the lottery. They move into a house. $650,000 house, gated community but you got $28 million. $652,000 house isn't all that. She moves the kids into the house; they're great. Two years go by; nothing, not a problem. Until two guys are sitting in a bar and another man is sitting down at a school, down a couple of stools and he's just listening to the two guys talk. The one guy says, did you hear about that woman who screwed her husband out of $28 million? Then the guy says, no, what are you talking about? He says, $28 million. She got a lottery ticket. She put it into the safety deposit box and she divorced her husband. "I love you, best friend I've ever had. I'd never do that if I... (mumbling)." Meanwhile the guy down a couple of schools says, can you tell me this story again? Well, the guy sitting a couple of stools down decides he's going to look into this. He finds the ex-husband. Story's true. And you didn't get a dime? No. Never offered it to you? No. You know you're owed half of that money. "I love you, man." So he takes out a piece of paper and he says, here, I tell you what, I need you to sign this. What is it? You sign it and it means I get 35% of everything you get. Well, that sounds like a deal because I ain't got nothing now." Take the wife to court; he wins. Take the wife to court and he's taking a butt load of money home. She still has a lot of money. Husband's got a lot of money. The guy sitting down, a couple of stools down just listening to the two guys talking in the bar, he's got a butt load of money, too.


Wife hides lottery win, divorces husband quickly

'Case has money, greed, betrayal. All the elements of a soap opera'

Normally I would say, this kind of stinks. The guy -- I mean, she shouldn't have done that. She should have split it with the husband. You don't get a quickly divorce so you don't have to split it with the husband. That's shady. She knew what she was doing. Legally it belongs, half belongs to the husband. Even though that kills me to say it, that's the way it should be. That's the way the law is.

The second part is it kills me that a guy who's just hearing the story gets 35% of it, but here's the worst part of the story. The husband, do you know why he wanted a divorce so quickly? Because he had separated from his wife two weeks after they were divorced, he married his girlfriend -- I'm not kidding you -- her name is Toots. I don't think I'm all for Toots getting the, you know, $14 million. I don't know about you. Is it just me? Stu?

STU: I mean, I think I agree with you morally that she doesn't deserve it and I mean, I don't know if there's a great person in this story but, like, the guy, he's a dirtbag. So I would root against him in every case. But legally, I mean, when you have -- she had the ticket in her possession, it becomes communal property of the marriage. So whether -- I mean, you can't -- that's like she's lying when they get divorced by claiming she doesn't have $28 million. I mean, she really could be charged with that, couldn't she? I'm no lawyer, Glenn.

DAN: She didn't have $28 million.

STU: It's really worth $750,000. You'd have to claim, I would think, some sort of value to that, what the actual value is in the divorce.

GLENN: The great thing is, the great thing is he didn't win a lot of money. She gets $1.4 million every year, lump sum. She's got to pay taxes on that. So under Hillary Clinton she'll get about $14.

STU: Check your rates, Glenn. It's a little less than that.

GLENN: A little less than that?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: All right. So she's getting it $1.4 million for the next 20 years. She had to pay a lump sum of $300,000 to him and then $57,000 a year for the next 15 years, one for every year of their marriage. So it's pretty much alimony. The guy sitting at the bar gets $19,500 a year. That's $20,000 a year just for sitting and listening to a story in the bar.

STU: Yeah, the only guy who you really like in the store is the guy at the bar because it's just American ingenuity. He tracks the guy down, he files the lawsuit, does all the research, gets all that crap done and then gets a nice big fat commission, or $35,000 and he did no legitimate --

GLENN: I don't think I like him, either.

STU: I like him.

GLENN: That's not earning it.

STU: Yes, it is.

GLENN: No, it's not.

STU: He provided a service to this guy. He got this guy --

GLENN: That's not creation of wealth. That is shifting of wealth.

STU: Stop the crap.

GLENN: That's a lawsuit.

STU: What do you mean stop with lawsuits? This woman lied about how much money she had in a divorce. He deserved the money.

GLENN: Here you go.

STU: She helped facilitate that. That's a transaction that is worth money to the guy and this guy makes money for it.

GLENN: Here's the next. It's transfer of wealth. It's not creating wealth.

STU: Oh, stop it. Oh, stop it. Oh, God, that's just irritating.

DAN: So power brokers shouldn't make any money, these guys that broker these big deals?

STU: No, there's no value there. They didn't create a widget. Oh, no. Oh, God, do we live in a capitalist system. Oh, God. Oh, stop with that stuff. That's a valuable service he provided.

GLENN: I wish you'd stop taking the Lord's name in vain.

STU: Did I?

GLENN: Now here's -- like 600 times. Here's the next thing.

STU: Sorry.


The themes of healing and redemption appear throughout the Bible.

Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength. — 1 Corinthians 15:43
It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners. — Mark 2:17.

So, for many Christians, it's no surprise to hear that people of faith live longer lives.

Heal me, O Lord, and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall be saved, for you are my praise. — Jeremiah 17:14.

But it is certainly lovely to hear, and a recent study by a doctoral student at Ohio State University is just one more example of empirical evidence confirming the healing benefits of faith and religious belief.

RELATED: MEDIA BIGOTRY: The New Yorker hates on Chick-fil-A over 'pervasive Christian traditionalism'

Moreover, the study finds that religious belief can lengthen a person's life.

A joyful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones. — Proverbs 17:22
Lord, your discipline is good, for it leads to life and health. You restore my health and allow me to live! — Isaiah 38:16

The study analyzed over 1,000 obituaries nationwide and found that people of faith lived longer than people who were not religious. Laura Wallace, lead author of the study, noted that "religious affiliation had nearly as strong an effect on longevity as gender does, which is a matter of years of life."

The study notes that, "people whose obits mentioned a religious affiliation lived an average of 5.64 years longer than those whose obits did not, which shrunk to 3.82 years after gender and marital status were considered."

And He called to Him His twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every affliction. — Matthew 10:1

"The researchers found that part of the reason for the boost in longevity came from the fact that many religiously affiliated people also volunteered and belonged to social organizations, which previous research has linked to living longer. The study provides persuasive evidence that there is a relationship between religious participation and how long a person lives," said Baldwin Way, co-author of the study and associate professor of psychology at Ohio State.

Prayer is good medicine, and faith is a good protector.

In addition, the study showed how the effects of religion on longevity might depend in part on the personality and average religiosity of the cities where people live, Way said.

Prayer is good medicine, and faith is a good protector.

And the power of the Lord was with him to heal. — Luke 5:17
Heal the sick in it and say to them, The kingdom of God has come near to you. — Luke 10:9.

In early June, the Social Security and Medicare trustees released their annual report on the fiscal health of these programs, and the situation looks dire. Medicare is scheduled to run out of money in 2026 (three years sooner than anticipated), while Social Security is expected to run out in 2034. The rising national debt is only one of the well-known financial struggles the millennial generation faces. The burdens of student loan debt, high housing prices (thanks to zoning restrictions), stagnant wage growth, the rising cost of healthcare and lingering aftershocks of the Great Recession are among the biggest sources of economic anxiety millennials feel.

Progressive politicians have been very successful at courting the youth vote, partly because they actually promote policy ideas that address many of these concerns. As unrealistic or counterproductive as Senator Bernie Sanders' proposals for single-payer health care or a $15 an hour minimum wage might be, they feel in theory like they would provide the economic stability and prosperity millennials want.

RELATED: Time to reverse course: America is being corrupted by its own power

Republicans, on the other hand, have struggled to craft a message to address these concerns. Fiscal conservatives recognize, correctly, that the burden of the $20 trillion national debt and over $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities will fall on millennials. Some conservatives have even written books about that fact. But the need to reform entitlements hasn't exactly caught millennials' attention. Pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson, in her book The Selfie Vote, notes that millennials generally view protecting the safety net as more important than reducing the deficit.

Clearly, Republicans have a problem. They need to craft solutions that address the millennial generation's struggles, but they can't seem to sell entitlement reform, their biggest policy preference that addresses those problems. The Republican approach to wooing millennials on policy is failing because talking about stopping the debt from reaching an unsustainable level is long-term and abstract, and offers few immediate tangible benefits. A new approach to both pave the way for entitlement reform and give millennials an immediate financial boost is to first reform not entitlement spending, but the payroll tax: specifically, by partially (or wholly) replacing it with a value-added tax.

Under the current Social Security model, workers pay for the benefits of current retirees through the payroll tax. This system creates the illusion of a pension program, in which what you put in is what you get out, but in reality Social Security is a universal safety net program for the elderly paid for by taxes. The payroll tax falls on workers and is a tax on labor, while the value-added tax (VAT) is a tax on consumption imposed at every part of the production process. Assuming that this policy change is revenue-neutral, switching to a VAT will shift the responsibility for funding Social Security and Medicare away from workers, disproportionately poorer and younger, and onto everyone participating in the economy as a whole. Furthermore, uncoupling Social Security funding from payroll taxes would pave the way for fiscal reforms to transform the program from a universal benefit program to one geared specifically to eliminating old-age poverty, such as means-testing benefits for high-income beneficiaries, indexing benefits to prices rather than wages or changing the retirement age.

Switching from the payroll tax to the VAT would address both conservative and liberal tax policy preferences.

Switching from the payroll tax to the VAT would address both conservative and liberal tax policy preferences. As the Tax Policy Center notes, the change would actually make the tax system more progressive. The current payroll tax is regressive, meaning that people with lower incomes tend to pay a higher effective tax rate than people with higher incomes. On the other hand, the value-added tax is much closer to proportional than the payroll tax, meaning that each income group pays closer to the same effective tax rate.

For Republicans, such a change would fit conservative economic ideas about the long-run causes of economic growth. A value-added tax has a much broader base than the payroll tax, and therefore would allow for much lower marginal tax rates, and lower marginal tax rates mean smaller disincentives to economic activity. According to the Tax Foundation's analysis of a value-added tax, the VAT would be a more economically efficient revenue source than most other taxes currently in the tax code.

Not only would replacing part or all of the payroll tax provide an immediate benefit to millennial taxpayers, it would also open the door for the much-needed entitlement reforms that have been so politically elusive. Furthermore, it would make the tax code both more pro-growth and less regressive. In order to even begin to address the entitlement crisis, win millennial support and stimulate the economy in a fiscally responsible manner, Republicans must propose moving from the payroll tax to the VAT.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate. His writing has appeared in Townhall and The Federalist. He is a federal policy intern at the Tax Foundation. Opinions expressed here are his only and not the views of the Tax Foundation. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Glenn was joined by Alanna Sarabia from "Good Morning Texas" at Mercury Studios on Thursday for an exclusive look at Mercury Museum's new "Rights & Responsibilities" exhibit. Open through Father's Day, the temporary museum features artifacts from pop culture, America's founding, World Ward II and more, focusing on the rights and responsibilities America's citizens.

Get tickets and more information here.

Watch as Glenn gives a sneak peek at some of the unique artifacts on display below.

History at the Mercury Museum

Alanna Sarabia interviews Glenn Beck for "Good Morning Texas" at Mercury Studios.

Several months ago, at the Miss Universe competition, two women took a selfie, then posted it on Instagram. The caption read, "Peace and love." As a result of that selfie, both women faced death threats, and one of the women, along with her entire family, had to flee her home country. The occasion was the 2017 Miss Universe competition, and the women were Miss Iraq and Miss Israel. Miss Iraq is no longer welcome in her own country. The government threatened to strip her of her crown. Of course, she was also badgered for wearing a bikini during the competition.

RELATED: Media's anti-Israel, pro-Islam bias sweeps THIS fact under the rug

In an interview, Miss Iraq, Sarah Idan, said:

When I posted the picture I didn't think for a second there would be blowback. I woke up to calls from my family and the Miss Iraq Organization going insane. The death threats I got online were so scary. The director of the Miss Iraq Organization called me and said they're getting heat from the ministry. He said I have to take the picture down or they will strip me of my title.

Yesterday, Miss Iraq, Sarah Idan, posted another selfie with Miss Israel, during a visit to Jerusalem.

In an interview, she said that:

I don't think Iraq and Israel are enemies; I think maybe the governments are enemies with each other. There's a lot of Iraqi people that don't have a problem with Israelis.

This is, of course, quite an understatement: Iraq, home to roughly 15,000 Palestinians, refuses to acknowledge Israel as a legitimate country, as it is technically at war with Israel. The adages says that a picture is worth a thousand words. What are we to do when many of those words are hateful or deadly? And how can we find the goodness in such bad situations?