One way that this is off base is that you don't need to replace the portion of your income that you've been saving. For example, if you save 15% (pretty modest), you only have to replace 85% in retirement.

There's an obvious problem, here. You don't have to replace your entire income, because you don't have to replace retirement savings. The more you save, the less you have to replace.

Alternately, we could work to reduce our use and thereby export more of our own oil, driving down cost by reducing US demand. Oil is a commodity, so it doesn't matter that we don't buy it from Russia, it only matters that more is available. This is possible (if anyone ever listens) and would increase US exports.

That's a good starting point, but you could also look at it from an expense point of view. For example, if it takes a day for you to earn $200, but you spend about $100 a day, a $30000 purchase is 150 days of working or almost a year of living cost. It's the same principle, but it provides additional incentive to…

I want to agree with you because this has worked for me for over 10 years, but I think that it works for couples who communicate well and regularly. It does create the risk that one person could be creating debt. Some people might have just as happy a marriage with completely joint accounts.

I believe that the delay this year is due to the gov't shutdown

Sounds like you're getting a 100% return on your investment! I'd suggest going in for the full $30. It's really about $5 out of your pocket, because it's pretax, but it probably means years added to your retirement (I'm not exaggerating here)

I did this with Comcast and they gave me a "Valued Customer Discount" of $15/month. Not the best, but better than nothing. I really wanted to have my bill go down a lot more...

It was from the movie Tampopo, mostly about a noodle shop, all about food. He also has a carrot around his neck