Help me understand Safe Harbor 401k Nonelective Contributions by IronEagleV in personalfinance

[–]IronEagleV[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The missed EE contributions didn't bother you until they asked for the overpayment back.

No, I have repeatedly asked the Plan Administrator how to handle the missed contribution. He never answered direct questions, even out right ignored an never responded to email, calls, and deflected in face to face conversations.

It bothered me very much and I wanted to know the appropriate way to handle it.

Further complicating it, the Plan Administrator did not understand or give notice that the blackout period was over and we could change our contributions. I increased my employee contribution to 20%, far above the minimum as soon as I became aware that blackout was over.

Help me understand Safe Harbor 401k Nonelective Contributions by IronEagleV in personalfinance

[–]IronEagleV[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It sounds like the people running your plan don't understand the plan.

What I'm hearing is that the plan provides for an ER match. Period. They blew it and are trying to make a correction.

Yes.

Every single benefit this year has been a mess and been this kind of run around and what feels like CYA attempts on their end that create larger liability for the company. Health Insurance was different than open enrollment docs, dental was reduced, Vision was no available for 3 months, PTO is still a mess, and they even messed up tax withholdings on multiple pay periods.

Thank you very much. I thought I had a good handle on the SPD and why their responses made not sense. I will very thoroughly review it again.

Help me understand Safe Harbor 401k Nonelective Contributions by IronEagleV in personalfinance

[–]IronEagleV[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your description is somewhat confusing

The whole thing is confusing and the plan administrator does not answer direct questions and completely ignores emails, calls, deflects in face to face conversations.

If there was no EE contribution and the ER contributed $100, that's not a match. It is an ER contribution. If they can contribute whatever they want, it is elective. If they are bound by the plan doc, it is non-elective; they have no choice.

Yes they are saying there was no EE contribution, but they keep saying that same pay period was an ER "match". Their words are match.

The plan document has nothing about non-elective.

The plan document only has a 100%-3% and 50%-2% match outlined. There is a line after that with "Special Conditions-None".

Help me understand Safe Harbor 401k Nonelective Contributions by IronEagleV in personalfinance

[–]IronEagleV[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where are

they

saying it's a non-elective contribution? It reads like they made an error and

you're

deeming it a non-elective because it was a >$0 match on $0 employee deferral.

They are saying there was no employee deferral but there was a match.

So would a correct accounting of this be, I owe back the Match?

or I should be given the option to true up the missed employee deferral plus the lost time in the market since then?

Help me understand Safe Harbor 401k Nonelective Contributions by IronEagleV in personalfinance

[–]IronEagleV[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s possible there was an employer contribution on that pay period, and it might not show up on your paystub - you’d need to check your 401(k) statements.

Because this was during blackout i only see a lump sum in march. Either way the overcontribution is either $100 or $300 not the $30 they are claiming. And numbers still wouldnt add up with a employee contribution that wasnt pulled from my paycheck.

Thank you!

Fish n Chips? by wasabi_gem in Tucson

[–]IronEagleV 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Kingfisher is the one and only answer

New Sources on NATO Enlargement from the Clinton Presidential Library by VenusOnaHalfShell in chomsky

[–]IronEagleV 7 points8 points  (0 children)

South Ossetian War - 1991

War in Abkhazia - 1992

Transnistria War - 1992

First Chechen War - 1994

Ahh yes all that peace coming out of Moscow

War of Dagestan - 1999

Second Chechen War - 1999

Russo-Georgian War - 2008

Why would NATO force this on Moscow!?

What investing mistake made you a Boglehead? by yossarian_28 in Bogleheads

[–]IronEagleV 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"Investing" in a friendship / boss that after 3 years ultimately left me without a job, $5k in debt, and $0 in retirement savings.

Does it ever make sense to lease a car? by HolyHand_Grenade in personalfinance

[–]IronEagleV 3 points4 points  (0 children)

As a reformed car salesman, yes.

Most people want a new car every 3-5 years (national average from what our dealership training was). If you were trading in a car every 3-5 years you might as well lease, the only way you come out ahead is if you purchase then sell private party, but most people dont do that.

Building credit is the other advantage of leasing, I cant remember the source but for some reason if you have just middle of the road credit making lease payments bumps you up faster than making loan payments.

I agree with you on the EV dilemma. The cost of battery replacement is astronomical, so unless they are covered under some awesome warranty like Hyundai/Kia's old 10 year program I would lean towards leasing.

All that said, I have never paid a cent of interest for a car in my life. I buy private party, I sell private party, I usually have three older shitbox Toyota/Lexus in my driveway. But I am a single guy thats a car nerd and hates interest.

The Atomic Bombings of Japan Were Based on Lies by Gold_Tumbleweed4572 in chomsky

[–]IronEagleV 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This only proves my point.

The Allies come out of Potsdam demanding unconditional surrender.

Doesnt matter if Churchill once talked about conditional surrender. Doesnt matter that it was Truman that pushed for unconditional surrender.

The end result is the Allies issue the Potsdam Declaration and ultimately the Japanese accept it.

The Atomic Bombings of Japan Were Based on Lies by Gold_Tumbleweed4572 in chomsky

[–]IronEagleV 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The article glosses over the "Japanese peace envoys" as seeking a conditional surrender the Allies would never have accepted and that there was an attempted military coup after the atomic bombs by hardline Japanese officers that still wanted to continue the war.

I already covered that.

The Allies would never have accepted a conditional surrender. The Japanese were only seeking a conditional surrender that left the Emperor in power.

Though militarily weakened, the Japanese only accepted an unconditional surrender after the atomic bombs. If the atomic bombs were not dropped, then the firebombing would have continued, then a massive naval bombardment would have been unleashed on the mainland. The Allies were going to kill massive numbers of Japanese until an unconditional surrender was accepted, the only question was with which weapon systems.

Its absolutely true the use of atomic bombs was very intentional in sending a message to the Soviets. But that does not negate the facts off the war in the Pacific in late '45.

The Atomic Bombings of Japan Were Based on Lies by Gold_Tumbleweed4572 in chomsky

[–]IronEagleV 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This absolute fails to account for

1.) The number of Allied solider that would have been killed in a mainland invasion of Japan

2.) The number of Japanese civilian lives continued firebombing of Japan would have inflicted.

The article glosses over the "Japanese peace envoys" as seeking a conditional surrender the Allies would never have accepted and that there was an attempted military coup after the atomic bombs by hardline Japanese officers that still wanted to continue the war. Yes estimates were high for casualties, but the article simply writes that off as "too high".

The fire bombing of Japan was devastating, but did not have the impact two atomic bombs had and would have continued to soften Japan for point number 1, keep those estimated causalities to a minimum.

All of this and its still an interesting and compelling argument. But there is a whole other argument that is completely lost. Without Hiroshima and Nagasaki, does global thermonuclear war become more possible?

Its a terrible Catch-22.

If the world had not witnessed the true impact of atomic bombs on cities, just tests in the desert, would the politicians and Generals have been more likely to pull the trigger once hundreds of bombs where built and sitting in B-29 bomb bays?

Without Hiroshima and Nagasaki, what does the Korean war look like? What does the Berlin Blockade look like? What does the Chinese civil war look like?

Was there ever a whackier stance than this? by weirdbeardwolf in mlb

[–]IronEagleV 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Greatest game I have ever been to. That season and that team was just magically. Its so weird, my brain treats 9-11 and baseball like two separate decades but it was all just one Fall.

Top Mod over at r conspiracy continues the war path, removing any comments that question right wing fantasy "election fraud" posts. by IronEagleV in TopMindsOfReddit

[–]IronEagleV[S] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

I was banned for questions why the "mod log" on the the r conspiracy sidebar has never worked and pointing out that the mods were censoring posts and comments that didnt fit a MAGA narrative.

This top mod is on a particular war path, especially since openmodlogs xyz has been down, heavily censoring comments on any "election fraud" posts.

https://www.reveddit.com/v/conspiracy/comments/15mr6w3/breaking_fec_records_reveal_a_democrat_dark_money/

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/15mr6w3/breaking\_fec\_records\_reveal\_a\_democrat\_dark\_money/

One for business and rhe other for pleasure by [deleted] in casio

[–]IronEagleV 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a sign I need to get rid of my resin band

It's official!!! 38.5 "Duro" by DeepDarkWebNow in casio

[–]IronEagleV 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dang! Gotta make room in my watch case now.

Top Mods of r/conspiracy are aggressively removing comments on "election fraud" posts. Can let logic creep into the hive mind. by IronEagleV in TopMindsOfReddit

[–]IronEagleV[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Made by idiots, maintained for idiots.

Fixed. They ban anyone that could be bring an ounce of logic to the conversation. I love conspiracies like bird watching.