FREE NEWSLETTER
Go to main Forum page »
Social media is loaded with videos, posts and memes with a common theme- seniors deserve to pay little or no taxes and they deserve higher Social Security and Medicare benefits. Neither are generous enough for retirees they say. And then there is the standard living on a “fixed income”rhetoric- which virtually nobody does.
Many of the posts claim that Social Security is not enough to pay the bills and does not keep up with inflation.
I am not opposed to assisting anyone in need regardless of age, but to lump seniors in a group deserving more simply because they were fortunate to attain age 65 is wrong IMO.
As you may imagine, my comments on these posts – you had forty years to prepare, why is inflation unexpected and Social Security was never intended as sole retirement income – are not very popular.
Most disturbing to me is the selfishness displayed by this point of view. Both SS and Medicare trusts are headed toward insolvency, national deficits are still with us, local education must be supported and the financial burden for “more” creates a greater burden on younger generations. That’s not fair.
Jonathan Clements was known for clear, practical, evidence-based financial writing that emphasized low costs, broad diversification, disciplined asset allocation, and long-term patience. He devoted as much attention to investor behavior as to investment selection, cautioning against overconfidence, market timing, and emotionally driven decisions. In his later work at HumbleDollar, his voice grew more reflective, reminding readers that the aim is not simply to maximize wealth, but to use money wisely in building a thoughtful and balanced life.
Dear Mr. Quinn,
Please consider shaping your submissions in a style more in keeping with Jonathan’s — clear, disciplined, evidence-grounded, and mindful of the larger purpose money serves.
You don’t see any of that in what I write. Not clear, no evidence, no large view of money and its purpose? None of that? One thing is certain then. I have failed.
I’m sorry, but this reads more like a rant than a constructive argument. It centers on something none of us can control, which makes it difficult to see the practical value.
The question of who “deserves” more public support is complicated. But the data show that K–12 education and seniors have followed very different financial paths over the past two decades.
Some argue that seniors failed to prepare adequately for retirement. But even those who saved diligently are losing ground. Social Security is indexed only to general inflation (CPI). Meanwhile, the specific expenses seniors face—especially healthcare and long-term care—often rise much faster than the overall inflation rate. So even with cost-of-living adjustments, purchasing power can erode in practice.
Regarding the need to support local education, K–12 education has seen a substantial real increase in funding. Nationally, inflation-adjusted per-student spending rose from roughly $15,000 in 2002 to more than $20,000 in 2024—a real increase of about 36% above inflation. In other words, education funding has grown meaningfully in real terms, while Social Security benefits have seen essentially zero real growth.
That national average, however, masks enormous regional variation. In New Jersey, for example, inflation-adjusted per-student spending rose from about $21,000 to more than $30,000. In Idaho, by contrast, it barely increased, moving from roughly $11,000 to $12,000. Broad calls for “more spending” on K–12 education often overlook these disparities.
In many states, education funding has already grown substantially relative to support for seniors.
None of this makes the budget math simple. Social Security’s long-term shortfall will likely be addressed either through reduced future benefits or higher taxes. Current seniors are likely to be largely protected, or “grandfathered,” meaning the adjustments would primarily affect younger workers and future retirees. But large increases in teacher pensions also fall on younger taxpayers, so that is to be considered as well.
How do we allocate limited resources? And who ultimately bears the cost of policy decisions?
If retirees who saved diligently are losing ground then I suggest they did not prepare or plan correctly.
I have been lambasted for my views many times, but what I suggest is serious and realistic planning many people don’t want to hear. Yes, and quite financially conservative.
Retiring in your 50s has risks, longevity among them. Replacing 70% or 80% of pre retirement earnings may be adequate upon retirement, but not 10-15 years later.
Don’t retire at 55 and then at 65 call for higher SS benefits.
A good retirement plan includes specific planning to deal with inflation, (not just building it into a budget, but a specific backup plan) and key known significant expenses specifically health care premiums and property taxes.
It’s no secret these and other costs will increase, guaranteed. Our HOA fee was $700 when we bought our condo in 2018 now it is $950. That isn’t a surprise, it’s a given and yet we have residents who complain loudly every year.
I live on a fixed pension plus SS, but I have several backup plans to deal with increasing expenses and inflation. I worked until age 67 to increase both those incomes. My income may be above average, but so are our expenses, I did my best to assure both were aligned and can stay that way. I made no assumptions that our living costs would decline which some planning advice assumes.
As I said, people of any age who need assistance should receive it.
But to create a class called seniors assuming they should have an advantage fueled by their children and grandchildren is just unfair in my view.
Forty or so years to prepare should lead to better results for the majority of people who did not experience serious vicissitudes along the way, including being forced to retire early.
I’m sorry, but I reject the sweeping suggestion in your first line that financial failure despite diligent saving is due to incorrect planning or preparation.
I’d like to take you just once on my Meals on Wheels route and introduce you to the seniors who depend on the meals we deliver. You would meet, perhaps for the first time, people who did everything right in terms of saving and planning and were blown out of the water by medical or other tragic circumstances for which no one could properly prepare. I suspect hearing their stories might make you less eager to generalize about their failures.
If your town lacks an MOW outlet, spend a day at a community center that serves free meals to the elderly. Talk to people. Find out for yourself how common these circumstances really are.
That was not my suggestion at all. Did you read the last paragraph above. Did you read where i said people who need help should receive it? Just in case.
“Forty or so years to prepare should lead to better results for the majority of people who did not experience serious vicissitudes along the way, including being forced to retire early.”
Social media has democratized the ability for the ignorant to communicate on any topic.
The beauty is we still have the choice to largely avoid what they write and not empower them by engaging and or propagating.
Life is too short.
Ignoring such nonsense has its risks if it gets to the point politicians feel they must respond and act for short term benefits. We are good at ignoring consequences and long-term impacts of what we do.
Hasn’t this topic been addressed here multiple times already?
I’ve lost count long ago. However, i can guarantee you that, as always, Quinn will have a reason why he thinks this thread is sufficiently different from his other forum threads. Nevertheless, his Forum posts continue to generate likes which makes me think it is time to join the many others who no longer participate on HD.
Why would you say that?
Is this not so worth thinking about, worth discussing and consideration. So, my posts generate likes and that’s a reason not to participate in HD.
Are you saying “many others” have left HD because of me?
In some ways such as taxes, as have many, many other topics over the years on HD from different points of view.
I know I’m a little off topic with this reply, still, I think it ties in with wanting more for less., A fella I know ‘liked’ a Facebook post, calling for an end to property tax in Ohio. I looked his house up on the county auditors web site. His property taxes are all of $3000 per year. He enjoys a comfortable low six figure income.
I think people don’t consider what comes next if these taxes are abolished. I feel the same way about ‘flat’ taxes, as they could result in higher taxes for many.
We have to be careful about what we wish for.
Yes we do and that is one of my key points.
Those of us in NJ pay more in property taxes than half of Americans pay in income taxes, maybe all taxes.
Generally, Americans do not understand what their taxes provide and certainty don’t appreciate, but take for granted, the benefits and services.
Rather than facts, it’s easier to fall back on the fraud and waste mythology and complain about taxes.
It’s the American way.