You missed the phrase "and would be unpopular with the current administration". Personally, I would like to see some funds going to vanity projects, slush funds, foreign wars with no imminent threats, and containment facilities for humans going to items that help low and middle income people, as well as restoration of the foreign aid that Elon/Doge/AI arbitrarily cancelled. To address your last sentence, without an income exclusion for lower levels of unearned income, taxing unearned income would hurt the middle class, and those at lower income levels who are trying to save money for the future. And if you meant unrealized unearned income, that introduces even more issues. Jmo.
According to the analysis in the Trustees of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds report dated June 9, 2026: "The projected long-term finances of the combined OASDI fund worsened this year primarily due to three factors. First, the assumed ultimate total fertility rate was lowered from 1.90 children per woman to 1.75 children per woman. Second, estimated historical and assumed near-term and ultimate net total immigration are lower this year. These two demographic changes lowered the projected number of workers, projected taxable payroll, and projected GDP over the long range. Third, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), as enacted on July 4, 2025, makes permanent the lower ordinary income tax rates and adjusted tax brackets originally passed under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and both increases and makes permanent the larger standard deduction of the 2017 Act. The OBBBA also adds a temporary additional standard deduction for taxpayers over age 65. As a result of these provisions, the OASI and DI Trust Funds will receive lower levels of revenue in the future from income taxation of Social Security benefits." The CRFB calculator mentioned in the comments doesn't allow "what ifs" that would require new legislation be passed, and would be unpopular with the current administration. It is more focused on 1) changing the benefit formula to make it less favorable to beneficiaries and 2) tweaking revenue. Reference:
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/
https://www.crfb.org/socialsecurityreformer/
"Bank deposits are insured only up to $250,000." This is not always the case. For example, there are different rules for accounts in the name of a trust. According to FDIC: "A deposit owner's trust deposits will be insured in an amount up to $250,000 for each of the trust
beneficiaries, not to exceed five, regard less of whether a trust is revocable or irrevocable, and regardless of contingencies or the allocation of funds among the beneficiaries. This will provide for a maximum amount of deposit insurance coverage of $1,250,000 per owner, per insured depository institution for trust deposits." NCUA has similar rules for accounts in the name of a trust. There are also different rules for other types of accounts, for example joint owner accounts. I enjoyed reading Mr. Saha's post, and felt additional clarification was needed. Reference:
https://www.fdic.gov/news/fact-sheets/final-rule-trust-mortgage-accounts-01-21-22.pdf https://ncua.gov/consumers/share-insurance-coverage
I agree with the author's observations regarding the detrimental effects of corporate mergers and acquisitions. Another thing the executive decision makers fail to recognize is how disruptive the "blending" process will be, in terms of time and money wasted, distractions, and decreased morale. Many years ago I witnessed this on three separate occasions, and they all had the same outcome:
The owner(s) and investors wanted to cash out.
The advisory company oversold the benefits.
The buyer spent a lot of time rationalizing the acquisition, and subsequently overpaid.
Employees were let go; decisions were made by things like negotiated pre-sale acquisition terms, the org. chart, and garden-variety politics, rather than competence, (irreplaceable) institutional knowledge, and/or functional value.
Surviving employees in both companies were distracted by additional demands, the elimination of key employees and resources, endless meetings, endless speculation, and uncertainty as to whether they would be laid off as well. Trust was completely broken.
Budgets were cut, R&D slowed, projects were cancelled.
Long-term productive relationships with vendors were cancelled, starting an expensive cycle of training (corporate and vendor employees) and often disenchantment with the new vendors.
Branding was merged or replaced, leading to confusion in the marketplace.
Accounts had to be reassigned and relationships were broken. Clients/customers suffered.
The target company's original value-add proposition (product and/or service) was shelved or sold 2 - 3 years post-acquisition, resulting in more distraction, more wasted time and more layoffs. (Yes, sometimes an M&A deal is done to eliminate competition, and the negative effects are similarly underestimated and brushed off by management.)
Can't name names, but most of the companies are well-known. As an aside, the current corporate and governmental FOMO "jump-on-the-bandwagon" approach with regard to the acquisition and deployment of AI/LLM technology seems to be following a similar path. Time will tell.... Jmo.
From a study by the University of Massachusetts Center for Social and Demographic Research on Aging: "... the Social Security COLA most typically results in a modest increase in benefits, leaving beneficiaries less covered over time, especially in states
where increases in the COLA fail to catch up with sizable increases in the cost of living." https://scholarworks.umb.edu/demographyofaging/59/
There have been a few times on HD where I've agreed with Mr. Quinn. However, it is apparent from this comment thread and others that any discussion about the meaning of the word "budget", or the perceived value of said "budget", would not be productive. I believe that Mr. Clements created Humble Dollar in part to provide a safe place to ask questions, share insights/knowledge, and participate in friendly and helpful discussions. In situations like these, I think the best way to show appreciation for his legacy is to continue to honor his values and founding principles with our posts and comments. In other words, ask yourself, "WWJC do"?
According to the TSCL analysis "Loss of Buying Power 2024" at the link below, in 2024:
"... average Social Security payments [were] worth only about 80 cents on the dollar compared to 2010. In other words, Social Security recipients have lost about 20 percent of their buying power." The authors of the report and others have suggested that this is because COLA is currently calculated using the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), a metric that is thought to be a mismatch vs. typical expenditures by older adults. For those planning ahead, the projected 30% haircut in social security payments if Congress does nothing, mentioned in the original post above, would thus be even worse in terms of a loss in purchasing power because of the continued use of CPI-W in calculating COLA. That being said, Congress will likely procrastinate until waiting is no longer a viable option and then do something. https://seniorsleague.org/assets/TSCL-LOBP-Report-2024.pdf
Comments
You missed the phrase "and would be unpopular with the current administration". Personally, I would like to see some funds going to vanity projects, slush funds, foreign wars with no imminent threats, and containment facilities for humans going to items that help low and middle income people, as well as restoration of the foreign aid that Elon/Doge/AI arbitrarily cancelled. To address your last sentence, without an income exclusion for lower levels of unearned income, taxing unearned income would hurt the middle class, and those at lower income levels who are trying to save money for the future. And if you meant unrealized unearned income, that introduces even more issues. Jmo.
Post: Just the facts about Social Security
Link to comment from June 14, 2026
According to the analysis in the Trustees of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds report dated June 9, 2026: "The projected long-term finances of the combined OASDI fund worsened this year primarily due to three factors. First, the assumed ultimate total fertility rate was lowered from 1.90 children per woman to 1.75 children per woman. Second, estimated historical and assumed near-term and ultimate net total immigration are lower this year. These two demographic changes lowered the projected number of workers, projected taxable payroll, and projected GDP over the long range. Third, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), as enacted on July 4, 2025, makes permanent the lower ordinary income tax rates and adjusted tax brackets originally passed under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and both increases and makes permanent the larger standard deduction of the 2017 Act. The OBBBA also adds a temporary additional standard deduction for taxpayers over age 65. As a result of these provisions, the OASI and DI Trust Funds will receive lower levels of revenue in the future from income taxation of Social Security benefits." The CRFB calculator mentioned in the comments doesn't allow "what ifs" that would require new legislation be passed, and would be unpopular with the current administration. It is more focused on 1) changing the benefit formula to make it less favorable to beneficiaries and 2) tweaking revenue. Reference: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/ https://www.crfb.org/socialsecurityreformer/
Post: Just the facts about Social Security
Link to comment from June 13, 2026
"Bank deposits are insured only up to $250,000." This is not always the case. For example, there are different rules for accounts in the name of a trust. According to FDIC: "A deposit owner's trust deposits will be insured in an amount up to $250,000 for each of the trust beneficiaries, not to exceed five, regard less of whether a trust is revocable or irrevocable, and regardless of contingencies or the allocation of funds among the beneficiaries. This will provide for a maximum amount of deposit insurance coverage of $1,250,000 per owner, per insured depository institution for trust deposits." NCUA has similar rules for accounts in the name of a trust. There are also different rules for other types of accounts, for example joint owner accounts. I enjoyed reading Mr. Saha's post, and felt additional clarification was needed. Reference: https://www.fdic.gov/news/fact-sheets/final-rule-trust-mortgage-accounts-01-21-22.pdf https://ncua.gov/consumers/share-insurance-coverage
Post: Beyond Bank Accounts
Link to comment from June 13, 2026
I agree with the author's observations regarding the detrimental effects of corporate mergers and acquisitions. Another thing the executive decision makers fail to recognize is how disruptive the "blending" process will be, in terms of time and money wasted, distractions, and decreased morale. Many years ago I witnessed this on three separate occasions, and they all had the same outcome:
- The owner(s) and investors wanted to cash out.
- The advisory company oversold the benefits.
- The buyer spent a lot of time rationalizing the acquisition, and subsequently overpaid.
- Employees were let go; decisions were made by things like negotiated pre-sale acquisition terms, the org. chart, and garden-variety politics, rather than competence, (irreplaceable) institutional knowledge, and/or functional value.
- Surviving employees in both companies were distracted by additional demands, the elimination of key employees and resources, endless meetings, endless speculation, and uncertainty as to whether they would be laid off as well. Trust was completely broken.
- Budgets were cut, R&D slowed, projects were cancelled.
- Long-term productive relationships with vendors were cancelled, starting an expensive cycle of training (corporate and vendor employees) and often disenchantment with the new vendors.
- Branding was merged or replaced, leading to confusion in the marketplace.
- Accounts had to be reassigned and relationships were broken. Clients/customers suffered.
- The target company's original value-add proposition (product and/or service) was shelved or sold 2 - 3 years post-acquisition, resulting in more distraction, more wasted time and more layoffs. (Yes, sometimes an M&A deal is done to eliminate competition, and the negative effects are similarly underestimated and brushed off by management.)
Can't name names, but most of the companies are well-known. As an aside, the current corporate and governmental FOMO "jump-on-the-bandwagon" approach with regard to the acquisition and deployment of AI/LLM technology seems to be following a similar path. Time will tell.... Jmo.Post: How Deals Hurt Returns
Link to comment from April 4, 2026
Perhaps he was tipping his hand.
Post: AI, Bubbles, and Markets
Link to comment from March 21, 2026
From a study by the University of Massachusetts Center for Social and Demographic Research on Aging: "... the Social Security COLA most typically results in a modest increase in benefits, leaving beneficiaries less covered over time, especially in states where increases in the COLA fail to catch up with sizable increases in the cost of living." https://scholarworks.umb.edu/demographyofaging/59/
Post: Plan for a Pay Cut
Link to comment from January 13, 2026
There have been a few times on HD where I've agreed with Mr. Quinn. However, it is apparent from this comment thread and others that any discussion about the meaning of the word "budget", or the perceived value of said "budget", would not be productive. I believe that Mr. Clements created Humble Dollar in part to provide a safe place to ask questions, share insights/knowledge, and participate in friendly and helpful discussions. In situations like these, I think the best way to show appreciation for his legacy is to continue to honor his values and founding principles with our posts and comments. In other words, ask yourself, "WWJC do"?
Post: Can a budget do all that?
Link to comment from January 3, 2026
According to the TSCL analysis "Loss of Buying Power 2024" at the link below, in 2024: "... average Social Security payments [were] worth only about 80 cents on the dollar compared to 2010. In other words, Social Security recipients have lost about 20 percent of their buying power." The authors of the report and others have suggested that this is because COLA is currently calculated using the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), a metric that is thought to be a mismatch vs. typical expenditures by older adults. For those planning ahead, the projected 30% haircut in social security payments if Congress does nothing, mentioned in the original post above, would thus be even worse in terms of a loss in purchasing power because of the continued use of CPI-W in calculating COLA. That being said, Congress will likely procrastinate until waiting is no longer a viable option and then do something. https://seniorsleague.org/assets/TSCL-LOBP-Report-2024.pdf
Post: Plan for a Pay Cut
Link to comment from December 27, 2025
Very clear, helpful explanation.
Post: Tax Loss Harvesting
Link to comment from December 27, 2025
Yes.
Post: 27 Months
Link to comment from December 15, 2025