People who choose cars wisely and maintain and keep them for 20 years and 200,000 miles or far more can splurge on all kinds of things just from those savings alone.
It's all up to personal preference on what is or is not deemed "excessive" for any given category of expenditure.
....and therein lies part of the problem with S.S. While those were the rules of the game when most of us contributed to the system ( therefore you were due that lifetime "income assurance", no issue there); it is not sustainable to have future high lifetime income retirees become a drain on the system beyond what they have contributed.
A lifetime cap needs to be placed on benefits for people at or near the maximum S.S. recipient levels in the future. Naturally the cap should have some time value of money factored in vs just the number of dollars contributed over the years. If that future cap or some "opt out" diminished payout is in place by the time I turn 70 fine by me, I'll sleep better.
Things need to be restructured so that in the future, those with the means should be fountains, not drains to help sustain the system.
Let’s hope the “ all on line” model gains more traction. It seems to be, albeit slowly. The dealer model we are largely forced to use is archaic and not in the best interest of consumers who would otherwise choose to avoid it- key word “ choose”.
On a positive note, many people keep their cars much longer just to avoid the unsavory process of buying a car.
There have been some very good thoughts on how to at least minimize the interface with the dealers in the comments below. This includes but is not limited to buying cars that last for 300K plus miles with a basic maintenance program best done at non dealership, independent shops or better yet in your own garage!
David, Thanks for the detailed trip down memory lane. Ahh good times.
It's been like watching a train wreck in slow motion hasn't it?
In all those years Amtrak was always supposed to be fixed too.
I guess the lesson is stay off government trains. Flying whether literally for travel or figuratively for retirement by investing in capital markets for years is a much better way to get to one's destination.
I would have to agree that in my experience with Medicare some years ago on my parent's behalf, I found it surprisingly easy to deal with. On a more limited basis same with Social Security for them.
That does not automatically make them efficient by default however in order to provide that level of service.
All that said, your article is not about Social Security or Medicare, it is about taxes and only one (federal) portion of the broader tax load picture at that. When you focus an article on taxes, all aspects of government efficiency with the public's funds are fair game when contemplating more taxes. S.S. and Medicare are but two pixels in a much broader picture of morbid mediocrity. Reference corporations: you highlight two positives: 1) the ability to right size private sector organizations to changing business conditions or enhanced technology or LEAN based efficiencies (or maybe correct inefficiency that set in through poor management and needs to be cleaned up) ....without having to go to the Supreme Court to do it. 2) For businesses that fail due to inefficiency or not evolving fast enough, natural selection culls the herd- healthy for the overall economy. Not so with government agencies.....unfortunately- unhealthy for the overall economy.
When you say "there is no more inefficiency in government than in any large organization" that clarifies where you are coming from.
We'll just have to disagree.
If the average corporation in America was run like a government entity, we'd all be in the poor house and have no appreciable wealth from the capital markets.
It comes down not to the workers being any different, they are all human. The fault rests where it always does: bad management. There is not enough energy, intellect or integrity being put into efficiency or accountability in government. Low government management standards (all levels) to prevent waste and fraud etc. are NOT widely accepted in the private sector, full stop. There is more natural economic accountability for poorly run corporations and their executives over time. Some state level incompetence may arguably rival the Federal level these days. That waste adds up for average citizens bearing the tax burdens in aggregate.
The government (at any level) can't tax its way out of this morass.
Dick, not sure if you were trying to be funny with this response. I did get a good laugh so well done if so. If not, you countered your own argument in your second sentence when you cite the spending levels. Makes Costco spending look pretty good eh?
Now pile on the waste, fraud, abuse and let's add ineptitude for good measure at the state and municipal levels....well, nothing else needs to be said here.
Dick, I applaud your proposal or some variation thereof. COLA seems like a logical first place to start nibbling away at benefits for those who can absorb it.
I’ll even go further: provide an “ opt out” lump sum payment ( or a few staggered payments) similar to what corporations do when freezing pensions for those who could qualify.
I’m dragging my feet until 70 to even contemplate collecting S.S. I hope by then the benefit is reduced in a logical way perhaps as you propose - for starters at least.
Add a reasonably fair way to opt out for those who are already retired, secure and at least in my case, loathe the whole idea of receiving money monthly from the government especially when knowing the government can’t afford it…. that will be real progress.
Comments
People who choose cars wisely and maintain and keep them for 20 years and 200,000 miles or far more can splurge on all kinds of things just from those savings alone. It's all up to personal preference on what is or is not deemed "excessive" for any given category of expenditure.
Post: FIFA Financials
Link to comment from July 20, 2026
....and therein lies part of the problem with S.S. While those were the rules of the game when most of us contributed to the system ( therefore you were due that lifetime "income assurance", no issue there); it is not sustainable to have future high lifetime income retirees become a drain on the system beyond what they have contributed. A lifetime cap needs to be placed on benefits for people at or near the maximum S.S. recipient levels in the future. Naturally the cap should have some time value of money factored in vs just the number of dollars contributed over the years. If that future cap or some "opt out" diminished payout is in place by the time I turn 70 fine by me, I'll sleep better. Things need to be restructured so that in the future, those with the means should be fountains, not drains to help sustain the system.
Post: Many seniors think we paid for our Social Security benefits based on the FICA taxes we paid. Let’s dispel that myth- we didn’t
Link to comment from July 18, 2026
Mark, Once again you made my day over my morning coffee. Thanks for helping keep Humble Dollar content fresh.
Post: The Paradox of Wealth
Link to comment from July 17, 2026
Let’s hope the “ all on line” model gains more traction. It seems to be, albeit slowly. The dealer model we are largely forced to use is archaic and not in the best interest of consumers who would otherwise choose to avoid it- key word “ choose”. On a positive note, many people keep their cars much longer just to avoid the unsavory process of buying a car. There have been some very good thoughts on how to at least minimize the interface with the dealers in the comments below. This includes but is not limited to buying cars that last for 300K plus miles with a basic maintenance program best done at non dealership, independent shops or better yet in your own garage!
Post: Buying a car in retirement
Link to comment from July 15, 2026
David, Thanks for the detailed trip down memory lane. Ahh good times. It's been like watching a train wreck in slow motion hasn't it? In all those years Amtrak was always supposed to be fixed too. I guess the lesson is stay off government trains. Flying whether literally for travel or figuratively for retirement by investing in capital markets for years is a much better way to get to one's destination.
Post: About that inflation in retirement
Link to comment from July 13, 2026
I would have to agree that in my experience with Medicare some years ago on my parent's behalf, I found it surprisingly easy to deal with. On a more limited basis same with Social Security for them. That does not automatically make them efficient by default however in order to provide that level of service. All that said, your article is not about Social Security or Medicare, it is about taxes and only one (federal) portion of the broader tax load picture at that. When you focus an article on taxes, all aspects of government efficiency with the public's funds are fair game when contemplating more taxes. S.S. and Medicare are but two pixels in a much broader picture of morbid mediocrity. Reference corporations: you highlight two positives: 1) the ability to right size private sector organizations to changing business conditions or enhanced technology or LEAN based efficiencies (or maybe correct inefficiency that set in through poor management and needs to be cleaned up) ....without having to go to the Supreme Court to do it. 2) For businesses that fail due to inefficiency or not evolving fast enough, natural selection culls the herd- healthy for the overall economy. Not so with government agencies.....unfortunately- unhealthy for the overall economy.
Post: A taxing situation, but is it reality?
Link to comment from July 12, 2026
When you say "there is no more inefficiency in government than in any large organization" that clarifies where you are coming from. We'll just have to disagree. If the average corporation in America was run like a government entity, we'd all be in the poor house and have no appreciable wealth from the capital markets. It comes down not to the workers being any different, they are all human. The fault rests where it always does: bad management. There is not enough energy, intellect or integrity being put into efficiency or accountability in government. Low government management standards (all levels) to prevent waste and fraud etc. are NOT widely accepted in the private sector, full stop. There is more natural economic accountability for poorly run corporations and their executives over time. Some state level incompetence may arguably rival the Federal level these days. That waste adds up for average citizens bearing the tax burdens in aggregate. The government (at any level) can't tax its way out of this morass.
Post: A taxing situation, but is it reality?
Link to comment from July 12, 2026
Mark, Reading this was a great way to start my day with my first cup of coffee. You made my day!
Post: So Maybe That’s What It’s All About
Link to comment from July 12, 2026
Dick, not sure if you were trying to be funny with this response. I did get a good laugh so well done if so. If not, you countered your own argument in your second sentence when you cite the spending levels. Makes Costco spending look pretty good eh? Now pile on the waste, fraud, abuse and let's add ineptitude for good measure at the state and municipal levels....well, nothing else needs to be said here.
Post: A taxing situation, but is it reality?
Link to comment from July 12, 2026
Dick, I applaud your proposal or some variation thereof. COLA seems like a logical first place to start nibbling away at benefits for those who can absorb it. I’ll even go further: provide an “ opt out” lump sum payment ( or a few staggered payments) similar to what corporations do when freezing pensions for those who could qualify. I’m dragging my feet until 70 to even contemplate collecting S.S. I hope by then the benefit is reduced in a logical way perhaps as you propose - for starters at least. Add a reasonably fair way to opt out for those who are already retired, secure and at least in my case, loathe the whole idea of receiving money monthly from the government especially when knowing the government can’t afford it…. that will be real progress.
Post: About that inflation in retirement
Link to comment from July 11, 2026