If you don’t need the money, banks will happily lend it to you.
Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam's Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.NO. 17: OUR MOST valuable asset is often our human capital—our income-earning ability. A regular paycheck can be like collecting interest from a bond, which then frees us up to invest in stocks.
NO. 3: WE LACK self-control. Prudent money management is simple enough: We should spend less than we earn, build a globally diversified portfolio, hold down investment costs, minimize taxes, buy the right insurance and take on debt judiciously. Yet folks struggle with such basic steps—because they can’t bring themselves to do what they know is right.
SET UP A HOME equity line of credit. These have lost some of their allure under 2017's tax law, because you can only deduct the interest if it's used to buy, build or substantially improve your home. Still, a HELOC is one of the cheaper ways to borrow, and it could come in handy if you have a financial emergency or as an alternative to education and car loans.
ULTIMATUM GAME. A player is given a pot of money and must offer a share to a second player. If the second player rejects the offer, neither gets anything. If the sole litmus test is financial gain, the second player should always accept, because at least he or she gets something. But players often reject small offers—a sign of how much we value fairness.
NO. 17: OUR MOST valuable asset is often our human capital—our income-earning ability. A regular paycheck can be like collecting interest from a bond, which then frees us up to invest in stocks.
I was having breakfast recently in a small cafe when three people were seated at the next table. The server handed out menus and a woman asked her, “Between the pancakes, waffles and French toast, which is the best?”
I felt like saying, what a dumb question, but the quiet, reserved me said nothing. They are three different things and the “best” is highly dependent on personal taste.
I was waiting for the customer to say,
My friend is an independent IT Systems Integrator. She essentially pitches for tenders from large corporations and government departments for help with new software integration. It’s a very well-paid job, but there can be lulls between contracts. This requires a good deal of business savvy to manage not only the workload and tendering process, but also her intermittent financial situation and the need for constant training to stay relevant.
A woman who has her life together you would think.
I was sitting on the deck of my holiday home, enjoying the morning sunshine and breakfast, when a deep rumble announced the arrival of an expensive, sporty car. It was my neighbour. He’s a very nice man in his 40s who always dresses impeccably, with two well-turned-out kids and an immaculate wife – to all intents and purposes, a family living the dream.
Contrast that with me: I drive a seven-year-old SUV with 70,000 miles on the clock,
I’ve always been a minimalist – even as a teenager I had no interest in having lots of clothes, shoes, or other trappings of high school life in the 80s. That pull toward minimalism was reinforced during the 2 years I spent teaching English in Japan after college. No dedicated bedroom that sits empty and unused all day? My bed folds up and is stored in the closet? A tiny fridge forcing me to buy fresh fruit and vegetables every other day?
Five years ago I wrote a HD article titled Food for Thought. It was about all the food we waste and, of course the money as a result.
Yesterday I mentioned to Connie that we have things in our pantry and fridge we don’t even know we have. She was sure that was not the case. Today I pulled out a bag of candy and other goodies we had forgotten from Christmas. I’m assuming it’s from last Christmas but that is not a certainty.
My wife, Suzie, is currently visiting her dad in Spain. This means I’m fending for myself, and I’ve found myself venturing into the local supermarket for essential supplies – like fruit and nut chocolate, my little indulgence! While wandering the aisles, I made an observation that got me thinking….. again!
Morning shopping, I’ve discovered, is a real delight. There are no crowds, just a quiet hum, and I even had time to chat with the checkout operator,
Social Security Spousal Benefits
James McGlynn CFA RICP® | Mar 26, 2026
Keeping up with the Jonses— at least it looks that way.
R Quinn | Mar 29, 2026
Wrapping It Up
Ken Cutler | Mar 26, 2026
Time to Be Fearful
William Housley | Mar 27, 2026
Prepping to Pull the Trigger
Mark Crothers | Mar 28, 2026
Doubt the Forecast
Adam M. Grossman | Mar 28, 2026
- No one can see around corners, and we shouldn’t believe anyone who can claim to be able to. Presumably, there was some scientific basis for Ehrlich’s predictions. The problem, though, was that all of his predictions were based on extrapolation, and he could only extrapolate from the facts available at the time. For example, he had no idea how advances in agriculture would outpace population growth, made possible by technologies like LED bulbs for indoor farming, something that hadn’t yet been invented at the time.
- We should be inherently skeptical of extreme predictions. Extreme views aren’t necessarily wrong. After all, extreme things can and have happened. The reason we should be skeptical is because the world is complex. As I noted a few weeks back, it’s possible for an observation to be correct but incomplete. And that was a key flaw in Ehrlich’s thinking.
The formula at the center of his research considered just three variables (population, affluence and technology). But when it comes to most things in the world, the ultimate outcome is dependent on many more variables than that. So someone like Ehrlich might have been accurate with one, or even more than one, of his observations. But at the same time, he was ignoring innumerable other factors, such as public policy decisions.- In a similar vein, we should be wary of stories that sound convincing only because of the way they’re presented. I’ve discussed before the phenomenon of the “single story”—when an overly simplified, one-dimensional version of the facts takes on a life of its own. Later in life, Ehrlich acknowledged that he had benefited from this sort of thing: “The publisher’s choice of The Population Bomb was perfect from a marketing perspective…,” he wrote.
- We shouldn’t be too easily impressed by credentials. Despite being almost entirely wrong with his “population bomb” arguments, Ehrlich was a tenured professor at Stanford and received numerous awards. This carries an important lesson: Smart people can veer off course just as much as anyone else. As I’ve noted before, the scientist who invented the lobotomy received the Nobel Prize for his work. We should never blindly accept an argument based solely on its source.
- We should be careful of confirmation bias. That’s the emotional tendency to look for evidence that confirms pre-existing beliefs. In Ehrlich’s case, despite all the disconfirming evidence, he never backed down from his views.
In 1980, economist Julian Simon challenged Ehrlich to a bet. Simon let Ehrlich pick a basket of commodities and wagered that each of them would be less expensive by 1990. For his part, Ehrlich was sure they’d all increase in price due to population pressure. Ten years later, every one of the commodities in the basket turned out to be cheaper, despite the population having grown by 800 million people over the course of the bet. Ehrlich held up his end of the bet, sending Simon a check for $567 in 1990, but he had his wife sign it, and he never acknowledged that he might have been wrong. Indeed, he doubled down. In 2009, Ehrlich commented that, “perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future.” The bottom line: Prognosticators can be convincing and are often entertaining. As investors, our job is to listen with a critical ear.Something to Think About
David Lancaster | Mar 24, 2026
Private Credit Stress?
Mark Crothers | Mar 25, 2026
Debreifing
Dan Smith | Mar 27, 2026
Any concern?
R Quinn | Mar 26, 2026
Treasury Tax Reporting
Bogdan Sheremeta | Mar 28, 2026
IF YOU HAVE a Money Market Fund (e.g. VUSXX, VMFXX), Treasury fund (e.g. SGOV), or any other Treasury ETF (e.g. VBIL), you need to know how to report it on your taxes correctly. If you don’t, you are overpaying on your state taxes unknowingly.
How and why?
These funds hold U.S. Treasury Bills. Treasuries are exempt from state and local taxes. Of course, this only matters if you hold these funds in a taxable brokerage account, which most people do.
The broker sends you a 1099-DIV form, but it’s your responsibility to figure out how to report it on your taxes correctly. By the way, bad tax preparers can miss this sometimes, or if you self-prepare, this may be something you aren't aware of (I hope most of you reading HumbleDollar are familiar with this!)
This is one of those areas where the reporting rules are technically simple, but the execution is where people mess up. The IRS gets their share regardless (since interest is fully taxable at the federal level), but if you don’t adjust properly, your state will too, even when it shouldn’t.
The 1099-DIV doesn’t break out how much of the dividend was allocated to Treasuries. The software also wouldn’t know how much based on the 1099-DIV. This means that you generally have to figure out how to report it (or ensure your CPA does it correctly).
Now, the 1099-DIV will have a breakdown of every single stock/ETF you have, but you have to find out the percentage of a fund that holds Treasuries.
This percentage is not on your brokerage statement. It comes directly from the fund provider (Vanguard, iShares, Schwab, etc), usually buried in their “tax center” or “year-end tax supplement” pages.
Let me give you an actual example.
Say, in 2025, you received $5,000 of dividends from two funds.
Then, if you scroll down, you will see a “Detail Information” of your dividends:
We can see that $2,456.78 came from Vanguard Federal Money Market fund.
The entire $2,456.78 will be taxed at the federal level, but how do we figure out what’s taxed at the state level?
This is where the extra step comes is.
During the end of the year, the fund manager (e.g Vanguard for VMFXX) will post a “US government source income information” on their Tax page.
This report tells you what portion of the fund’s income is derived from U.S. government obligations (Treasuries), which is the key to the state tax exemption.
We can see that 66.61% of VMFXX holdings for the 2025 tax year were income derived from the U.S. government and, therefore, are not taxable at the state level.
So, we would take $2,456.78 * 0.6661 = $1,636. Of the total, $1,636 is derived from U.S. obligations, and you would only pay state taxes on the remaining ~$819.
That $2,456.78 is still fully taxable federally. This is strictly a state adjustment.
It’s also important to note that some states say "if less than 50% of the fund is from the U.S. government (like Treasury Bills), you can treat it as 0%.”
For example, California, Connecticut, and New York are some of these states. So, if the fund has only 35% coming from the Treasury, you shouldn’t even calculate the exempt amount for these states.
Now, if you buy Treasuries directly from TreasuryDirect, they will send you a 1099-INT, and you can just enter that information directly into the tax software. No extra calculations are needed. That’s because the income is already clearly identified as U.S. government interest, no allocation required.
So, how do you report that dividend interest calculation?
In most tax softwares, after entering the 1099-DIV, it will ask: "Did a portion of dividends came from a U.S. Government interest?'
So, you would just check it off/select and enter the amount from Treasuries ($1,636 in our example).
Behind the scenes, this flows into your state return as a subtraction or adjustment, depending on the state.
Some software might ask for the percentage of dividends that are state tax exempt. However, this is a bit tricky because you might receive other dividends in your brokerage account.
In that case, calculate the amount from the Treasury, say $1,636, and divide it by your total dividend amount (e.g. $5,000)
If you have someone do your taxes and you have some of these Money Market Funds or other Treasury ETFs, double-check your state tax return and see the amounts reported. This will save you some money. It's also not too late to amend your tax return if this was missed.
Specifically, look for a “U.S. government interest subtraction” or similarly labeled line item on your state return. If it’s zero and you held these funds, that’s a red flag.
If you live in a no tax state, this would not apply to you, but still good to know in case you move!
I hope you found this one valuable.
Don’t Leave a Mess
Richard Connor | Jun 23, 2020