Facebook
Google
GitHub
Linkedin
visionofast
- Joined Oct 17, 2018
- 106
Thought for the day...
- Thread starter Wendy
- Start date
My current design did not work so I had to draw a new circuit that would draw more current.
How did you draw that conclusion?
visionofast
- Joined Oct 17, 2018
- 106
Looks like illuminati words...
Someone brings my Assassin's Creed outfit
https://nwoobserver.wordpress.com/2...g-predictions-of-three-world-wars-with-video/
davissgurban
- Joined Nov 3, 2023
- 2
Today I thought about the fact that I want to live in a house. I am tired of living in an apartment and I dream that one day we will move closer to nature, plant a garden, go for walks in the forest, pick mushrooms and live a leisurely life.
Or buy a tent in Portland.
How's this for callous:
This is what happens when you depend on your gov't (and, ultimately, force your broke grandchildren) to take care of you.
Fools.
I cash my monthly SS check because I earned it. I'm still working and have my own savings because I don't want to depend on that SS check.
Your SS "investment" was already spent...long ago.
You're now taking money from your kids.
Sure, I know that but so what, it changes nothing to me as I paid for my mom and dad, gladly. If you don't want the money, donate the check.
Philosophical arguments for or against social security, either as a concept or how it is implemented, are really neither here nor there with regards to this issue.
The underlying issue is that one party in a transaction made an error. What responsibility and/or burden should the other party have to fix that error when (and if) it is discovered?
You can take one of several positions that have strong logical arguments.
You can argue that if one party mistakenly overpays another party, that the recipient of the overpayment now has a debt to the other party that endures until it is settled, or (in the U.S. at least) until the person's estate is probated. If the debt isn't claimed against the estate's assets as part of the probate process, then the debt becomes null and void -- exactly the same as most other debts.
You can argue that a fixed statute of limitations applies in which the party that overpaid has to discover and claim a refund of the overpayment within a fixed amount of time and, if they don't, then they forfeit the right to ever do so.
You can argue that the party that made the overpayment should simply have been more careful and, since they weren't, once they've made the overpayment, it's done and the overpayment, at most, can be reclassified as a gift.
You can probably argue a few other reasonable positions.
Personally, I can live with any of them -- provided they are symmetric. So if the SSA can come after someone twenty years after an overpayment was made and demand a refund, then recipients better have the right to discover underpayments made twenty years ago and demand payment, too. If interest gets charged in the first case, then interest better be paid in the second.
Personally, I would push for a reasonable statute of limitations, say three to five years, that applies in both directions. I'd probably also recommend that any payment made by the party that didn't made the mistake can be made, interest and penalty free, over a period of time proportional to how long the mistake went undetected. If they pay me $1000 too much this month and ask me to repay it two months from now, then I should have two months to repay it. If I went wild as spent money that I should have known wasn't mine so fast that I can't make good on it in short order soon after it's discovered, that's bad on me. But if they overpay me $100/mo for a year and then don't discover the mistake for another four years, I should have five years to pay it back.
By having the statute of limitations, it means that I can maintain records for a known length of time to support my position and refute theirs, but I don't have to maintain them indefinitely.
This is something that, I have to admit, the IRS is pretty good about in terms of living by the same rules they impose on us. I can't claim money due me once three years have gone by (it's actually 37 months), but they also can't come after me for money owed them once that same three years has passed (once they claim I owe it, they can keep coming after me, but that's true the other direction, too). If they claim fraud, they can extend that to seven years, which is not an option for me, so there is certain an asymmetry. If they owe me money, they have to pay me interest starting on the 45th day after the claim is made and it's at the same interest rate that I would have to pay them in the other direction. My interest starts on the day it is due, and they can hit me with penalties which I can't claim the other direction. So, again, there's asymmetry, but it's not nearly as bad as most people think.
I actually had a return that had an error that they corrected, but it turns out the error had no effect on the tax that was actually paid -- I accidentally included a form that calculated a tax credit that I wasn't eligible for. I didn't actually claim the credit, but I included the form with the return. I also filed the return nearly three years after it was due. They took several months to process it, but did catch the mismatch and assumed I meant to claim the credit, so they "fixed" my return and did a direct deposit of my refund for $600 more than it should have been. So I checked my return and saw what had happened. I then sent them a letter with a personal check for $600 to refund the overpayment. They sent the check back informing me that the return was now past the statute of limitations and that they had no legal right to claim any recourse on the overpayment. This surprised me, because I would have thought that the clock on THEIR recourse would have started when they received my return, since the late filing was 100% my fault.
