FREE NEWSLETTER
If there were red down arrows on Facebook I would have received so many in the last week, their system would have crashed. I have taken on the seniors who failed to plan for their retirement and now blame the system for their situation along with those who think they should not pay property taxes for schools or any taxes at all once they reach age 65 – because they paid their dues plus those
Many say without a mortgage you should not pay property taxes, that with a mortgage you don’t own your home – not true of course. You own your house, but with a lien on it for the loan amount. If you didn’t own your house, how could you sell? You own your car too, even if you have a loan.
It’s not so much the warped views on paying taxes that drives me nuts, but that so many of these people seem to think no planning or saving was required during the 40 years between starting work and retirement. Don’t believe me?
“I have done the math and I will lose my house when I retire in 5 years.”
Needless to say, this person needs to adjust his spreadsheet assumptions. 😁
I suggested he not retire in 5 years. I can’t repeat the reply, but I think he meant mind your own business. Is there such a thing on Facebook? I should have suggested a remedial math class. Yeah, ok, it’s true, I have little patience for people like this.
One reply to my comments called me an idiot, another said I don’t understand and asked how old I was. I told them I understood very well and was 82. “ You should know better,” was the reply. That’s the problem I do know better.
I point out to these complaining folks they had those 40 years to prepare. That comment does not go well. I don’t understand why, it’s a fact, right?
“ Lost mine (house) when my husband passed. For SS you have to choose one income to collect on. Now tell me that’s not robbery!!!!”
Robbery? Choose? I asked if her husband had life insurance? Was that an unfair question? Hey, the way I see it if you are going to put your ignorance on display for the world to see, a question is justified.
There is nothing to suggest among the thousands of post that these are poor people or even very low income. There is much to suggest they have been clueless for a long time. Since many comments are from women, it also seems they were not involved in family finances or had irresponsible husbands leaving them in a poor financial position.
Some of these supposed seniors now complain “they” changed the retirement age to 67. I point out there is not a fixed retirement age, retire whenever you like. The comments add up on that one.
What bothers me more than anything else is that these seniors are so willing to shift the tax burden (and perhaps the income burden) to younger people and to think getting old is a free pass on responsibility. 😢
Maybe we should expand The Villages into a state of its own where all seniors live and think about their lifelong mistakes and are required to read HumbleDollar each morning before heading off on their (pretty expensive) golf cart.
🛺🛺🛺🛺🛺🛺🛺🛺🛺🛺🛺🛺🛺
This is a symptom of what I suspect is a larger problem. Some feel disenfranchised while others see no immediate benefit from the taxes paid. Some hate the tax man, period. Some have the position that if it isn’t of immediate, personal benefit it shouldn’t exist.
Here’s an example of the latter. I live in a walled, gated community with a human at a controlled entry. A while back there was a political conversation about the wall on our southern border which is about 50 miles distant. There were those pro and con. I suggested that in fairness and for consistency our community should not have a wall or security. That was not received well, by anyone!
Here’s another example. I lived in the southeast for a time. There were large, unincorporated areas and “fire protection districts”. Each business or home owner was supposed to pay a fee to the district to support the fire department. But enforcement was difficult and owners figured it out, so some rolled the dice and didn’t pay.
One day, I was driving down the road and I was amazed to see firefighters pouring water on a building, while the one next door, which was ablaze was ignored. I enquired about this. The owner of the building that was being attended to and protected had paid the fee. The other did not. A few days later as I passed by, I noticed that one building was burned to the ground, the other next door was pristine.
There was, of course, a discussion about this and a few declared how unfair it was. However, I was also told that after that policy was instituted the collections increased dramatically, and such fires were an effective advertisement.
I currently live in a similar area. Pay the annual fee and ambulance and fire is included. If you don’t, ambulance service and fire abatement is carte blanch and expensive. For those who aren’t enrolled, each vehicle and fireman or ambulance attendant is billed. Fires aren’t ignored, but are costly for scofflaw owners. This is considered to be “unfair” by some.
I think you are correct. Studies have shown that Europeans generally accept high taxes because they perceive the value they receive from those taxes, many of which are very visible like health and child care and education, even leave time off with pay.
In the US people don’t make the connection because they can’t feel the benefits and just take many services and programs for granted.
For example, ask people if teachers are underpaid and deserve higher pay and benefits and typically the answer is yes. They earn less than jobs in the private sector.
At the same time these people complain about their property taxes.
Dick, you’re free to do as you please. But of all things that a human being can do, is getting frustrated by people on the internet the very best use of our time?