More Tolls but should we be now looking to change the way road usage is charged.

gandalf

According to reports in todays media the Government are looking to increase the Tolls on our countries roads to grab much needed funds for the exchequer. Personally I feel this goes against the whole Green idea of paying for what you actually use. What this will do is increase traffic on roads that are not tolled, increase car journeys and fuel usage and obviously create traffic issues in places whose issues should have been sorted by these main roads being opened.

The most galling demonstration of this short sighted "planning" is the plan to toll the M50 in four places now. What is the point in having a ring road to alleviate traffic on the city centre if it is charged. Again the main product of this idea will be to funnel more traffic throught the suburbs and add to the gridlock that the M50 was supposed to address.

The time has to abolish tolls and car tax and replace it with a fairer tax on fuel. Therefore the more fuel you burn the more tax you pay.

Here is the original story on the Indo today http://www.independent.ie/national-news/motorists-face-blitz-of-new-tolls-on-main-roads-2366410.html

zuroph

gandalf wrote: »

The most galling demonstration of this short sighted "planning" is the plan to toll the M50 in four places now. What is the point in having a ring road to alleviate traffic on the city centre if it is charged. Again the main product of this idea will be to funnel more traffic throught the suburbs and add to the gridlock that the M50 was supposed to address.

You missed the point of the four tolls on the M50

The M50 has just one toll at the Westlink. A toll can cost up to €3 for a car. Under the new system, there could be as many as four sections and a charge, for example, of 75c applied to each section

seems a much fairer system, which will charge those coming from the southside as far as the red cow, and will end up costing most people less. You are charged for how MUCH of the M50 you use, so actually it complements your idea to charge for proportional road usage.

gandalf

zuroph wrote: »

You missed the point of the four tolls on the M50


seems a much fairer system, which will charge those coming from the southside as far as the red cow, and will end up costing most people less. You are charged for how MUCH of the M50 you use, so actually it complements your idea to charge for proportional road usage.

And you have missed my point that people will avoid using the M50 altogether now, especially at a time when nearly everyone is trying to economise turning areas that the M50 was supposed to take traffic from into gridlocked hell holes.

It may be a fairer system but my arguement is that the system should not exist at all. If they truly want to change peoples behaviour they should be taxing at source ie fuel tax and scrapping all other taxes like car tax and tolls.

zuroph

gandalf wrote: »

And you have missed my point that people will avoid using the M50 altogether now, especially at a time when nearly everyone is trying to economise turning areas that the M50 was supposed to take traffic from into gridlocked hell holes.

It may be a fairer system but my arguement is that the system should not exist at all. If they truly want to change peoples behaviour they should be taxing at source ie fuel tax and scrapping all other taxes like car tax and tolls.

no they won't. take for example someone coming from nothside to tallaght. before they may have gone the cheaper longer route to avoid the €3. now it would only cost them €0.75/€1.50.

a progressive charge like this would encourage more users, especially around the busy central section, and would allow you to economise your journey, instead of a €3 or nothing charge.
I think its a fantastic idea, and more motorways should be tolled in this way, than a single gate charge at a random point.

gandalf

zuroph wrote: »

no they won't. take for example someone coming from nothside to tallaght. before they may have gone the cheaper longer route to avoid the €3. now it would only cost them €0.75/€1.50.

a progressive charge like this would encourage more users, especially around the busy central section, and would allow you to economise your journey, instead of a €3 or nothing charge.
I think its a fantastic idea, and more motorways should be tolled in this way, than a single gate charge at a random point.

And then look at those who are travelling from Tallaght to Dundrum/Sandyford for work for example. They will now have to pay a charge that they weren't levied with before. Obviously a percentage will choose not to pay the tolls and areas where the motorway was supposed to take traffic from will be revisited with traffic problems.

Apart from this debate why have tolls on a ring road anyway, it defeats the purpose of having one.

zuroph

gandalf wrote: »

And then look at those who are travelling from Tallaght to Dundrum/Sandyford for work for example. They will now have to pay a charge that they weren't levied with before. Obviously a percentage will choose not to pay the tolls and areas where the motorway was supposed to take traffic from will be revisited with traffic problems.

Apart from this debate why have tolls on a ring road anyway, it defeats the purpose of having one.

so, the person from tallaght to sandyford, instead of paying 75cent, will sit in heavy traffic for how long, thus wasting way more on petrol??? People won't be long working out which option is cheaper.

Dymo

I've taken to avoiding toll roads where I can, and I save about €50 per month. Its only when I'm stuck for time will I use them and with this new proposal it looks like I will be avoiding more.

gandalf

No comment on the sense of tolling a ring road around a major city then. Avoiding that one are we?

Also with regard to our current Governments Green partners I cannot see how they can stand behind this when it does not address one of their principles which is to tax to change behaviour. Taxing fuel so the more you use the more you pay addresses this and what's more it is simple to administer without associated collection costs.How much would the State save if the mechanisms of Toll collection and Motor Tax administration were removed.

zuroph

The road is an optional alleviation from heavier traffic, a small toll is perfectly fair IMO if it saves you time and effort. Many many cities have a tolled outer ring. It doesnt have to be free to alleviate traffic, as the M50 has proven. People are willing to pay the €3 to save themselves time, so I can't see how you can argue that they won't pay 75c instead.

Lapin

zuroph wrote: »

a progressive charge like this would encourage more users, especially around the busy central section, and would allow you to economise your journey, instead of a €3 or nothing charge.
I think its a fantastic idea, and more motorways should be tolled in this way, than a single gate charge at a random point.

While I wouldn't go so far as to describe it as "fantastic", I do think it is a good idea and certainly a more equitable one.

For example - Travelling by car on the M6 from Ballinasloe to Kinnegad incurs no toll charges.

However a journey from Loughrea to Enfield using the same strech of road involves passing through two toll booths and paying a total of €5.80.

This makes no sense to me.

seamus

zuroph wrote: »

People are willing to pay the €3 to save themselves time, so I can't see how you can argue that they won't pay 75c instead.

Because it's a new toll on people who never paid it before. Ignoring the correctness of dividing up the €3 toll and making people pay for motorway bridge even though they're not using it, people who use the toll bridge every day have that factored into their commute. They pay it already, they've accepted that.
People who don't pay the toll at present haven't accepted that as part of their running costs and are unlikely to accept it. Let's say that some drives from Lucan to Sandyford daily. The "divided" toll will likely cost them €1.50 each way. €3 per day, €15 per week, €780 per year. Of course, they will be using the motorway for other purposes too, so let's round that up to an additional €1,000 per year that this guy has to pay and which he has never factored into his commuting costs. That's (another) 4% pay cut for the average earner.
Would you be happy with that? Do you think that the vast majority of people using the M50 can afford that? No. You've already paid for the M50 through your income taxes and motor taxes.

So most people will use alternate routes to get to their destination. If this inolves leaving 30 minutes earlier to avoid the rush and save €1,000 per year, people will do that. Because they have no other choice.

However, using the old "give with the right-hand, take with the left" trick will likely work much better and gather much more acceptance. That is, remove motor tax from all vehicles, stick tolls on motorways and increase fuel tax slightly. This means that choosing to use the more direct motorways should work out cheaper than using other roads regardless of what time you leave at. It also means that the average tax take per motorist will increase. In the above example, if the guy is currently paying €600/year motor tax, then the government stands to get 66% more from that guy even after abolishing motor tax.

He will realise this, but will also be quite elated at no longer having to pay a huge lump sum in tax every 3, 6 or 12 months.

gandalf

zuroph wrote: »

People are willing to pay the €3 to save themselves time, so I can't see how you can argue that they won't pay 75c instead.

Seamus has answered this opinion of yours quite eloquently and it mirrors what my feelings would be. An additional cost of between €500-€1000 per year may not be a large burden on you zurooph but on families already struggling to make ends meet facing into the most severe budget on record (if the hype is to be believed) it certainly is a large chunk to take out of their household funds especially when they were not expecting it.

dan_d

HOW are they proposing to collect these tolls?

Build toll gates like on other motorways? In other words, undo all the work they've done to take the original one out?

Use the current system of barrier free tolling? Okay, so build more gantries along the M50, digging up the literally just laid road to get cabling to where it needs to go to feed these gantries....?

We have JUST completed the roadworks on that godforsaken motorway. Doesn't ANYBODY in this country do joined up thinking? ANYBODY??????

jpb1974

I just hope this doesn't mean I'll be getting 4 letters in the post telling me I owe toll payments for journeys I never actually made...

seamus

I should also note that the primary reason why people will pay €3 to use the M50 toll bridge at present is because it affords massive time savings over the alternate routes. It is the only direct crossing over the liffey valley between South and North Dublin. All other routes are small roads, indirect routes, littered with traffic lights and junctions.

The same cannot be said for most of the rest of the M50. There are numerous alternate routes. Lucan to Dundrum via the M50 takes about 20 minutes. Through normal roads takes about 40 minutes. Sandyford to Firhouse over the back roads takes 20 minutes. 10 over the M50.

No, people won't pay extra money for that kind of time saving.

bijapos

More tolls on the M50 is nonsense and will drive shorter journeys off the M50 and onto smaller roads.

I was against the barrier free tolling when it was set up as it simply laid down the basic infrastructure for introducing more barrier free tolls anywhere in the country, and I would dearly like to know what percentage of future revenue will go to the state and how much will go to the companies who developed, built and operate the system.

dan_d : The system was develpoed so that new gantries can be built with virtually no disruption.

A simplification of the system is, as has been mentioned above, to drop motor tax and put an extra levy on fuel.

Btw there are a lot of people who will gladly sit in traffic on a parallel road for a lot longer to save a euro or so. As seamus pointed out, people use the Lifffey Valley Toll because the alternative is exceptionally awkward.

charlemont

we let them away with it so they know the irish are too docile to do anything about it..

zuroph

so the reason you are against the toll is because it would personally affect you, even though it would improve others situations, and be a fairer system.

enough said really.

gandalf

zuroph wrote: »

so the reason you are against the toll is because it would personally affect you, even though it would improve others situations, and be a fairer system.

enough said really.

You did read my first post didn't you?

I have a problem with the way we are being taxed for road use and this is just another example of the stupidity of the Government one which contains a Green partner who are supposed to be committed to bringing in taxes to make people think about their consumption.

I have also stated that I believe the taxation should be simplified to abolishing road tax & tolls and replacing it was a tax on fuel thereby directly taxing use.

With regard to the specific issue of the M50 bringing in tolls as described will only have the effect of diverting traffic through the very urban areas that the M50 was supposed to be taking traffic from. It's an idiotic idea but one that I am not surprised has come from the vacuum that exists from our so called leaders.

View

The solution is to introduce congestion charges for all major urban areas in addition to new motorway tolls.

As with other countries, electric vehicles and/or high-occupancy vehicles (i.e. 2/3+ passengers) should probably be exempt from these charges and tolls to encourage people to switch over.

View

gandalf wrote: »

I have also stated that I believe the taxation should be simplified to abolishing road tax & tolls and replacing it was a tax on fuel thereby directly taxing use.

I have some sympathy with this but someone in a non-congested area (e.g. rural Offaly) driving a Bentley would pay more tax on a Cost/Km basis than someone driving a Yaris in a congested area (e.g. M50 at rush-hour and/or Dublin City).

And congestion is a problem which costs the state (i.e. the tax-payer) money to (try and) sort out...

wetling

zuroph wrote: »

so the reason you are against the toll is because it would personally affect you, even though it would improve others situations, and be a fairer system.

enough said really.

Its extortion, and damaging to the economy - unfortunately for them and for us, heavy taxing will further decrease economic output, till eventually there will be nothing left to tax, when they say 'we'v raised 20 million for the exchequer' it really means they've taken 20 million from the economy,

The real reasons business's closing is costs, a decrease in fuel tax would save far more businesses and still bring in more tax. they say businesses are closing down because they can't get any credit from the banks.

Why do supposedly sustainable business's need constant credit anyway, the truth is, THEY DON'T.

but go ahead blindly follow the rules like you clearly have been your whole life.

'€40 fine for 2 weeks late, that seems fair'
'€120 fine for going 60kph on wide straight road seems fair'
'€1000 fine for not paying my subscription to entertainment I don't watch or want, seems fair'
'€10% of my tax given to Africa? seems fair - theyre disabled arnt they or something? not able to take care of themselves, you know its our duty to support other human beings'

Overheal

Had a few drives through Massachussetts on my holidays. And New York. And the Jersey Turnpike. You think you know about tolls? It costs the average motorist $40-50 to make it through Mass, NY and NJ.

I have to say though that for the *ridiculous* number of tolling stations traffic flow never seemed to be a problem. The Jersey turnpike is set up in such a way that you get a ticket when you get on and submit it for payment when you get off, depending on how many exits you drove through. NH is much the same way. So you see 2 major tolling stations at the start and end of the turnpike and then smaller stations at ons and offs.

Sounds obscene, I know. But their stretches of interstate were immaculate. And you aren't funneling all of your traffic into just 1-2 tolling stops: traffic control/flow is evenly distributed.

You can always of course avoid toll roads, but they do tend on most occasions to be the fastest route, by and far.

galwayrush

A fuel tax to replace tolls and VRT, Car Tax would be a fairer option and way cheaper to collect, not sure of the figures, but i remember reading somewhere that it would mean something like 2.5 cent per litre.

zuroph

wetling wrote: »

Its extortion,

bollox it is. IF they wanted to extort maximum money, they'd go the petrol levy route, as its a minimal cost activity, as opposed to enforcing tolls. This way shows a bit of thought has gone into the process, instead of going for the quick buck.

Manic Moran

galwayrush wrote: »

A fuel tax to replace tolls and VRT, Car Tax would be a fairer option and way cheaper to collect, not sure of the figures, but i remember reading somewhere that it would mean something like 2.5 cent per litre.

Problem with the fuel tax is that it tends to bankrupt governments that want to encourage environmentalism. "Yes, we will give grants for people who buy fuel efficient hybrids and electric vehicles!!!" (One year later) "Why have all our revenues shot down? We need to come up with something else... How about tolls per distance travelled?" Washington State has already hit that point.

CalTrans has just opened up this month a 'dynamic toll', for lack of a better word, on one of the freeways over here. They basically built an 'express lane' for I-680, one's being built for 580.

http://www.680expresslane.org/

The freeway is notorious for traffic jams at rush hour, so as a revenue stream and to give the driver some options, they opened up the carpool lane to everyone, if they're willing to pay the toll via electronic tag. How much you pay depends not only on how far you travel, but what time of day you are travelling. Thus, if you're travelling counter-commute at 6pm, you'll be charged about $0.30 no matter how far you're going. Then again, you're also not saving a hell of a lot of time as most of the other lanes are also moving plenty quickly. On the other hand, if you're travelling during rush hour, and traffic on the 'normal' lanes is stagnant, you could be charged several dollars just to get half-way down the road. Supposedly the toll is constantly changing so as to encourage people to take the lane (and gain revenue) but to discourage so many people that the average speed on the lane remains 55mph. One passes big electronic signs just before each entrance which say how much you'll be charged to go how far.

There is, in theory, no reason this dynamic pricing can't be used on the M50. If you've got to go to the airport at 5am on a Sunday Morning, have the toll all of about E0.50 to go all the way from Dundrum to the M1. If you're trying to get into Blanch at 0730 on a Monday Morning, have it E1 just to cross the bridge.

NTM

wetling

zuroph wrote: »

bollox it is. IF they wanted to extort maximum money, they'd go the petrol levy route, as its a minimal cost activity, as opposed to enforcing tolls. This way shows a bit of thought has gone into the process, instead of going for the quick buck.

Wait there, does your esb double if you take longer then a day to pay it? and what about 2 weeks longer? does it increase 10 fold,

Don't tell me they are administration costs, its a bill and the rates are extortion, especially since we've all paid for the bridge again and again

zuroph

wetling wrote: »

Wait there, does your esb double if you take longer then a day to pay it? and what about 2 weeks longer? does it increase 10 fold,

Don't tell me they are administration costs, its a bill and the rates are extortion, especially since we've all paid for the bridge again and again

so far you've given out about getting charged for breaking the speed limit, for not paying your toll in time etc...

rules are rules. play by them and avoid all these extra charges.

wetling

zuroph wrote: »

so far you've given out about getting charged for breaking the speed limit, for not paying your toll in time etc...

rules are rules. play by them and avoid all these extra charges.

The fines arnt there to discourage people from breaking the laws, they really really want you to break them, because they make INSANE money of them, its theft. Gardai are tax collectors nothing else, to fund the court system

zuroph

wetling wrote: »

The fines arnt there to discourage people from breaking the laws, they really really want you to break them, because they make INSANE money of them, its theft. Gardai are tax collectors nothing else, to fund the court system

sure why not just introduce a "speeding licence" so.

What a load of rubbish. The fines are high to make it hurt you if you DO get fined.

Liam Byrne

zuroph wrote: »

sure why not just introduce a "speeding licence" so.

What a load of rubbish. The fines are high to make it hurt you if you DO get fined.

It is absolutely ridiculous that you can't go do Dublin for a weekend and pay both tolls when you get home.

A 100% fine for 24 hours is extortion.

zuroph

Liam Byrne wrote: »

It is absolutely ridiculous that you can't go do Dublin for a weekend and pay both tolls when you get home.

A 100% fine for 24 hours is extortion.

why not pay it when there? you can pay it in any shop.

Liam Byrne

zuroph wrote: »

why not pay it when there? you can pay it in any shop.

My point is that you shouldn't have to. They decided to remove the booths so they should have a system whereby you can text to pay, or else they should only charge extra after 4 - 5 days, thereby covering long weekends.

There is NO other payment that I know of that increases by 100% in 24 hours.

Well there is, but I don't associate with types like that and I value my kneecaps.

All I'm saying is that a bit of cop-on wouldn't go astray.

nesf

I'm bemused by the idea of putting a toll on the South Link in Cork. People will just jam the city streets in an effort to avoid it putting back the problem that the city faced before the South Link was built.

While it is generally preferable to tax usage rather than taxing everyone equally this is just going to put more cars on the narrow side streets creating more problems again. Not to mention the resistance that any new tolls on roads that were originally free to use will create.

zuroph

a text to pay system would be awesome alright.

the groutch

what they don't realise is that multiple tolls aren't cost effective, the administrative costs of running it are not worth it for 75c a time.

they collected €95m last year, lets say at a average of €2.38 (more people than not have the tags and pay €2.10 odd). that makes it 40 million crossings of the toll area, which cost €20m to collect.

so it cost them on average 50c to collect each toll, and then the new toll areas will have major set-up costs to recoup, are they really going to make any money off someone going through a single toll area?

and then they're charging less to people who were only going through a small part of the motorway, but through the west link, so they'll probably end up losing money

jmayo

zuroph wrote: »

The road is an optional alleviation from heavier traffic, a small toll is perfectly fair IMO if it saves you time and effort. Many many cities have a tolled outer ring.

I just love your phrase "an optional alleviation from heavier traffic".
It's function was and is to take traffic out of suburbs and the city.
It is NOT OPTIONAL for most people if they want to get across the bloody city.
Is it really optional for heavy trucks ?
Care to name some of the cities with tolled ring roads ?
I know Mellbourne has a tolled road, but can't think of another one.

zuroph wrote: »

It doesnt have to be free to alleviate traffic, as the M50 has proven. People are willing to pay the €3 to save themselves time, so I can't see how you can argue that they won't pay 75c instead.

Ah yes the old Irish thing of lets screw as much out of them as we can because they are willing to pay it.
Remember the phrase "RIP off Ireland" ?
All the €0.75 add up.
Are they syaing they will drop the bridge toll ?

dan_d wrote: »

HOW are they proposing to collect these tolls?

Build toll gates like on other motorways? In other words, undo all the work they've done to take the original one out?

Use the current system of barrier free tolling? Okay, so build more gantries along the M50, digging up the literally just laid road to get cabling to where it needs to go to feed these gantries....?

We have JUST completed the roadworks on that godforsaken motorway. Doesn't ANYBODY in this country do joined up thinking? ANYBODY??????

Planning in this country is non existent.
Before the Tallaght to Sandyford section was started with two lanes, it was aready obvious that it needed three lanes.

View wrote: »

The solution is to introduce congestion charges for all major urban areas in addition to new motorway tolls.

As with other countries, electric vehicles and/or high-occupancy vehicles (i.e. 2/3+ passengers) should probably be exempt from these charges and tolls to encourage people to switch over.

Right so we toll people for going on M50 ring road and we mhit them with congestion charges for going through city centre so hey lets drive everyone through the suburbs.

Overheal wrote: »

Had a few drives through Massachussetts on my holidays. And New York. And the Jersey Turnpike. You think you know about tolls? It costs the average motorist $40-50 to make it through Mass, NY and NJ.

I have to say though that for the *ridiculous* number of tolling stations traffic flow never seemed to be a problem. The Jersey turnpike is set up in such a way that you get a ticket when you get on and submit it for payment when you get off, depending on how many exits you drove through. NH is much the same way. So you see 2 major tolling stations at the start and end of the turnpike and then smaller stations at ons and offs.

Sounds obscene, I know. But their stretches of interstate were immaculate. And you aren't funneling all of your traffic into just 1-2 tolling stops: traffic control/flow is evenly distributed.

You can always of course avoid toll roads, but they do tend on most occasions to be the fastest route, by and far.

I have spent last few summers in Western/Northern Spain and Northern Portugal.
I travelled on lots of recently completed toll roads, but by God were they good and none of them from recollection were actual ring roads around cities.
They might be classed as outer ring roads in one or two cases, but that was it.
Also when you got to see where the motorways were often built and how much effort had been involved (multiple extended bridges over gorges, rivers, tunnels through mountains, etc), it made our flat roads through flat countryside and over the odd river seem pathetic and our charges appear extortionate.

zuroph wrote: »

sure why not just introduce a "speeding licence" so.

What a load of rubbish. The fines are high to make it hurt you if you DO get fined.

Yes and no.
If the Gardaí, or more coorrectly the state, were truly interested in just stopping speeding and dangerous driving they would be out in force at night and much more visible rather than hiding in bushes/phoneboxes/behind signs/in bus shelters on straight stretches of road/dual carriageway.

I will remember travelling from Mayo to Dublin day of football quarter final number of years ago.
On one of the first bends on the Mullingar bypass (the first stretch of dual carriageway on that journey) the Gardaí had placed a van with speed camera. That was not there to persuade people not to speed, but to just earn revenue on that particular day.
If they want to stop people why not place traffic car at start of dual carriageway as reminder, but no they hid the van around a bend.

Floppybits

Just heard on Newstalk there that we the taxpayers are to pay the toll road folks compentsation when traffic levels fall below a certain level on the roads. I dont know why I am shocked at this but I am.

Seemingly Labour asked the question of the Minister yesterday and the reply he gave was this was a question for the NRA. Today Gilmore asked the same question and Tainiste said that this was a question for the minister of transport.

The more that comes out about this government the worse it gets. I cant believe that 24% of the population would vote for them. Makes ya want to cry.

Lenny Lovett

galwayrush wrote: »

A fuel tax to replace tolls and VRT, Car Tax would be a fairer option and way cheaper to collect, not sure of the figures, but i remember reading somewhere that it would mean something like 2.5 cent per litre.

They have an excellent system in South Africa whereby the cost of road tax, tolls and motor insurance are added on as a tax on petrol. So they eliminate the need for insurance checks as everyone is automatically insured and a central road accident insurance fund operates. No car tax either so much less work for the cops to do tracking evaders.

Floppybits wrote: »

Just heard on Newstalk there that we the taxpayers are to pay the toll road folks compentsation when traffic levels fall below a certain level on the roads. I dont know why I am shocked at this but I am.

Seemingly Labour asked the question of the Minister yesterday and the reply he gave was this was a question for the NRA. Today Gilmore asked the same question and Tainiste said that this was a question for the minister of transport.

The more that comes out about this government the worse it gets. I cant believe that 24% of the population would vote for them. Makes ya want to cry.

Yes that's true. We're going to compensate the road toll companies if their revenue is below a certain figure... Well done Greens and FF... Just when you think these morons couldn't get any more stupid they show us they can!

Manic Moran

They have an excellent system in South Africa whereby the cost of road tax, tolls and motor insurance are added on as a tax on petrol.

So what's the plan for 2035 when we're all driving electric vehicles?

NTM

Lenny Lovett

Manic Moran wrote: »

So what's the plan for 2035 when we're all driving electric vehicles?

NTM

We can worry about that in twenty years or so!

BKtje

Why not just pay a motorwar tax once a year (like the system they have here in switzerland). You want to use the motorway? Buy the permit and stick it to your windshield. Once off cost. Then you don't need toll booth's or those sensor things on every motorway costing you x amount of money nor the same administration headache. All motorways are then tolled around the country in one go.

That said they aren't very expensive here for the year (30euro or so) so I guess they'd lose out on a lot of revenue unless they raised the price a bit. That said the swiss road network is quite good so you getting value for money.

Overheal

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

We can worry about that in twenty years or so!

Don't be that guy. Generation after generation of That Guy created the Social Security mess.