My experience is based on the difference between playing X1 and XCOM2 and in fairness probably is in part ranting about X1. If I had to guess I would say I am probably on my 40th playthrough of Veteran Ironman by now - I get a little further each time.
I agree that XCOM2 was too forgiving, particularly in the late-game when there was an abundance of money. But I think a halfway-house between both would be good.
I don't mind the player being punished to the point where they lose, but at the moment the player could lose even if they are playing a brilliant game on the strategic layer, just because of one or two bad decisions.
As an example, in my last game it was early Feb when my Shrike was downed (I stupidly decided to play out the engagement between my condor and a heavy fighter, something I usually win) on the way to an alien base. I then couldn't defeat the alien base with what was left of my A-team and B-team. In retrospect, I should have extracted the bodies of the second squad from the base before getting completely wiped in order to keep the weapons, but seeing as all my best soldiers were dead I could no longer be bothered.
So I gave up even though I had ~$1 million, all continents and ~full coverage. I didn't really see how I could win with only pvts left. To me, that penalty feels too harsh for what was essentially a very small number of poor decisions. I know it's Veteran and it should be hard, but there is still a harder difficulty...
Edit: I would also point out that this isn't a rant based on a single playthrough. It seems like every time I fail it isn't because of general bad play over a sustained period, but a single, cataclysmic event that is very difficult to recover from. E.g. my first terror mission, base randomly attacked etc.
I guess it would make more sense to savescum the game first rather than play blind, but it just doesn't seem right.