Tree Down In Yard

[Tax Counsel]

Thanks, Big Bossman, for allowing me to call it many things. Until you authorized me to call it many things, I was timid in doing so.

LOL, you're not familiar then with the use of the phrase "you can call it many things"? Perhaps down in the ROT (Republic of Texas) you all have never heard the way it's used in some parts of this great land. It's not a phrase that is directly targeted to you, which is what you seem to think. But I'm not surprised you took the dig at me anyway.

 

[adjusterjack]

TC, perhaps it would have come across better if you had written it this way:

"No. Social Security is no Ponzi scheme. People can call it a lot of things, but it's not that. There is no promised return on the taxes people paid into the system, unlike a Ponzi scheme that promises the mark a (usually really good) return on the money he/she puts into it. The benefits for Social Security are not tied to the taxes people paid in. They are set at whatever level Congress wants to set, and Congress could increase or decrease the benefits at any time, subject only to whatever wrath they'd incur with the voters. The program could even be terminated at any time. It is, in short, nothing more or less than any other government benefits program. Anyone thinking it is some kind retirement program in the style of private pensions/§ 401(k) plans is misguided."

 

[Tax Counsel]

TC, perhaps it would have come across better if you had written it this way:

Perhaps it would, although I suspect with ArmyJudge it would not have made any difference.

 

[adjusterjack]

Probably not.

 

[welkin]

The collision and comprehensive coverage can be quite useful when buying a car that is worth a significant amount of money. And if you buy a car with a loan, the lender will insist on that coverage. Sure, if you buy a used car with cash and that doesn't cost you much to begin with then ditching the collision/comprehensive insurance may indeed make the most sense.

I don't disagree but it is not always true.

I bought a new 1995 Chevy truck. Paid it off the loan in short order (ahead of time). I kept that truck in pristine condition. In 2010 there was a significant jump in my insurance rates. I called my agent and was advised to drop my collision and comprehensive coverage to cover the increase because the truck being 15 years old it wasn't worth having the coverage. So I did. That was a big mistake on my part.

In the same year (2010) I had to replace the engine because the heads were warped (aluminum) and I was advised (by the mechanic and dealer) that even if they resurfaced the heads it may not fix the problem. So I paid close to 5K to put in a rebuilt Jasper engine and a new radiator because much of the radiator was blocked and couldn't be repaired. It was an aluminum core and plastic tanks.

Then I had to put in a new battery and get 4 new tires. Another $700 or $800.

All of this was in the fall of 2010. Four months later, after a snow event, I was forced off the road on a sharp turn and thrown into a rock outcropping that totaled the truck.

So while spending almost $6000 a few months earlier the insurance company paid me $360 because I gave up my collision and comprehensive. Copart sold it for under $200 with an undamaged engine, a new battery and 4 new tires..