“Being on the wrong side of history carries consequences. V lives that truth every day. If you’ve done terrible things, lived a terrible way, profited from pain in the face of history’s power to judge, then guilt and loss accrue. Redemption becomes an abstract idea receding before you. Even if your sin — like dirt farmers in Sherman’s path — had been simply to live in the wrong place, you suffered. Didn’t matter whether you owned slaves or which way you voted or how good your intentions had been. Or how bad. You might suffer as much as the family of a great plantation, which was maybe not completely just. But if you were the family with the great plantation, you had it coming. Those were times that required choosing a side — and then, sooner or later, history asks, which side were you on?”
— Charles Frazier, writing in “VARINA”
“A part of her believed this one moment — Carolina woods, a wagonload of children, lights of heaven blazing on a clear spring night — was sufficient. An eternity in itself. A perfect instant if you erased guilt of the past and dread of the future.”
— Charles Frazier writing in “VARINA”
Via Facebook, I see that the question of where to live in retirement strikes a chord.
A friend from high school and college (he’s definitely a retirement-eligible Baby Boomer) provides some interesting info. He reports that the best five states to live in, if you want to stretch $1 million in retirement savings, are Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kansas, and Oklahoma. I can see how they’d all probably be among the low cost-of-living states. And Tennessee is picturesque, plus it has Nashville. I don’t know that I’d be interested in the other four. ($1 million in retirement savings? Only in my dreams!)
Long as we’re on the subject, my friend reports the five worst states to spend your $1 million are Hawaii, Washington, D.C., California, Oregon, and New York. Or maybe they’re the best places to spend a million real fast. They all sound plenty pricey. Hawaii is probably worth it. And the other four all have some advantages to recommend them, depending on your individual preferences.
An excellent source for all kinds of U.S. geographical information is Bob Wells, famous for his Santa Claus beard and his YouTube channel, CheapRVLiving. Bob goes into the question of home states in some detail, including four long videos on YouTube and posts on his website, CheapRVLiving.com.
After listening to Bob, you’ll understand that choosing a state to call home is not an inconsequential matter. Far from it! It’s a lot more than cost of living, although that is important. First, he sets us straight about legal issues. You can own or rent a home in more than one state, if you can afford it. But Bob says only one state is your legal domicile. You can only have a driver’s license or vote in ONE state. “Domicile Sweet Domicile.” Doesn’t sound poetic, but it has serious implications.
I’m not going to repeat everything Bob Wells explains. Go to his YouTube channel or Website. Some of the most important domicile considerations for retirees who aren’t old enough to qualify for Medicare are medical. Does your health insurance cover you wherever you roll in the USA, or only in your home state?
Bob approaches the question of legal domicile from the perspective of folks who live on wheels, in their recreational vehicle (RV). It could be a travel trailer, a Class A, B, or C motor home, a van or pickup truck, or even a car. Whew! Come to think of it, more than a few retired folks choose exactly that lifestyle. Once they were tied to jobs, now they’re free to take to the open road.
Bob Wells identifies some of the best states for RVers to consider as a domicile, even if they’re rarely in that state. They are: South Dakota, Florida, Texas, and Nevada. A major item of interest to RVers is how easy the state makes it to become a legal resident, get a driver’s license and register your vehicles. In SD, FL, TX, and NV it’s pretty easy. South Dakota is easiest of all. And all four states offer the advantage of no state income tax, a major attraction for many retirees.
Other states with no income tax are Washington state, Wyoming, New Hampshire and Alaska. I’m not sure about Tennessee.
I think the Middle Atlantic states are generally among the higher cost of living and taxes. My state of Maryland has an income tax, plus a county income tax that piggybacks on the state tax.
Many people from Maryland move to Delaware for retirement. Far as I know, Delaware has income tax, but no sales tax. My Uncle Joe owns a home in southern Delaware, and besides no sales tax, he brags about his low annual property tax. Uncle Joe just turned 90 and he’s sharp as a tack.
Remember, it’s not all about money. Low cost of living and low taxes are not the only considerations, and maybe not the most important. Please don’t make any decisions based on the information in this post, or anything else you see on the Internet. Do your due diligence and make decisions based on verified correct info.
In a day or three, I’ll get back to why I chose Florida. Hint: It’s not about the income tax.
Income insecurity is not an important problem for retired Americans. Not at present. In fact, it’s just the opposite. Retired Americans probably enjoy more income security than the vast majority of people around the world and throughout history.
I’m a retired American on the brink of 70. I’m not wealthy or even affluent, but neither am I poor or insecure. I’m very grateful for the life and security I enjoy at this point.
The most privileged people in the world today are the following:
- The top one percent or five percent of Americans. I don’t know exactly where to draw the line. Maybe it’s the top 20 percent or 40 percent.
- Most elderly and retired Americans. (However, it must also be acknowledged that too many Americans, including elderly Americans, remain trapped in poverty.)
Just my opinion.
Some people reportedly believe that older Americans are a wealthy class, living the high life at the expense of impoverished children and struggling younger adults. That’s because we enjoy remarkable income security, thanks to Social Security and Medicare. Many of us also have some pension benefits and even some savings. Younger and middle-aged Americans are rightly skeptical that they will enjoy similar benefits. The stage is set for intergenerational contention. The future is impossible to predict. The income security of younger generations is a matter of politics and economics, and I don’t want to go there. At least not today.
What I want is to present an honest picture about the realities of retired life. It’s not all about money. It’s true that many will need to cut back spending and lifestyle to be in balance with our retirement income. But my previous post about income and spending may have left an incorrect impression linking income and spending issues entirely with retirement. In fact, people can suffer a sudden loss of income at any time in life, and for myriad reasons. Loss of job, divorce, recession, business failure, and illness, to name a few.
Most of the natural world and human life run in cycles. It’s Biblical. Seven wet years and seven dry years. And so forth. The business cycle of expansion and recession is notorious and causes much misery. Financial consequences can be cumulative. An adjustment of income and spending at retirement is simply a part of the much larger cycle of human life. It may be that we are at the peak of the Social Security and Medicare cycle. I hope not.
I will turn soon to lighter subject matter.
Didn’t President Eisenhower warn us about this?
Eisenhower coined the term Military-Industrial Complex in his 1961 farewell address. In 2017, maybe the Military-Industrial Complex will rule America.
President-elect Donald Trump’s most notable Cabinet appointments so far divide about equally into military leaders and captains of industry and finance. Does a general outrank a captain of industry, or vice versa? Continue reading
I think the number of children living in poverty in the U.S. is about the same as in Britain. In the richest countries of the world, including the U.S. and Britain, it is immoral to have so many children living below the poverty line. In fact, I believe the child poverty stats indicate that rich countries like us are morally bankrupt! As the artist who created a nifty and instructive poster said, Zero children should be living in poverty. “We need change.”
Indeed. We as a society (and as an electorate) have both the means and the power to reduce child poverty nearly to zero. But do 51 percent of us want to really do that? Do 51 percent of us even care?
I’m afraid to say the answer.
(You can see the poster by clicking on the Abba1blog post below.)
— John Hayden
This started of as a little sketch of a table and chairs in a coffee shop, which evolved in to a mini poverty poster!
I have been reading so much lately about the hidden and unspoken inequality and hardship that goes on in Britain that no one speaks about, and most probably don’t even know about, for example these insane poverty statistics.I think when your’e eating a cinnamon swirl with a soy latte you realise how lucky you actually are? and that a cinnamon swirl probably isn’t a life necessity (no its definitely not). So all of us in that coffee shop that day who were spending too much money on cake, are lucky people to even be able to have that as a opportunity to us, and i completely recognize that.
The fact that 1 in 4 kids live in poverty I think is really really sad, as like…
View original post 181 more words
Wednesday evening, and into the wee hours of Thursday morning, I watched the news from Charlotte, mostly on MSNBC, occasionally clicking over to CNN.
A couple of criticisms of the cable TV news coverage come to mind: Continue reading
2018 Note: this post, which seemed so right at the time, only proves that I am often wrong.
Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia has just removed all doubt about the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.
I watched and listened to Donald Trump’s acceptance speech at the Republican convention Thursday night. Continue reading
Give Justice A Chance
Bernie Sanders made it clear last night in California that he’s no longer running against Hillary Clinton. He’s running against Trump.
But more importantly, Bernie continues to run because he hopes to imprint his values and issues indelibly on American politics.
Bernie wants to establish a left-of-center political movement that will live on long after the 2016 primary season is over. Continue reading
Let’s try to apply a little historical perspective to the 2016 election.
When Nelson Rockefeller, governor of New York, ran for the Republican nomination in 1964, his divorce and remarriage were considered to be disqualifying, in the eyes of many voters, especially Republican women.
Today, the presumptive Republican nominee for the highest office in the land is . . . Donald Trump? How many times has he been divorced? I forget. It doesn’t matter.
How America has changed in half a century! We were an intolerant society with overly rigid standards. We’ve become a society with no standards at all. We tolerate anything.
For Donald Trump, the charismatic chameleon, no standards apply. Nothing is too crude or too reckless. There are no limits to what the crowds will cheer for.
I wonder, what would President Eisenhower think of Donald Trump as commander-in-chief?
— John Hayden