this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
859 points (96.7% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

33067 readers
3259 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Surprise surprise, you only inherit a bunch of debt because that generation lived by "you can't take it with you".

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

As someone who’s dealing with the estate process right now, I don’t think anyone inherits debt. It’s paid out of the estate and nobody else is responsible for those debts.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

but if theres enough debt the other assets go towards that rather than the inheritors.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (2 children)

That’s literally what I just said. Debts are paid out of the estate. The estate assets will always be used to pay off remaining debts before the inheritors get anything.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not sure the whole "debts aren't inherited" part applies everywhere.

Certainly does in my country. Although like in the rare instance there was something you absolutely wanted to inherit, but there was also a mountain of debt, you couldn't decide to inherit without also taking on the debt. Even if that inherited thing was literally worthless and would not yield anything when sold.

Although such an object would probably be able to gifted, but like technically, that's how it'd go.

But here's the bit that actually made me write my comment:

https://youtube.com/shorts/_pkNndF6O_M

Idk how it works where that guy lives, but it's clip from an American standup, talking about inherited debt. Might just be made up, obviously, but according to this article more than half the states still have "filial responsibility" laws.

These laws are holdovers from a time when debtors prisons existed, says McDowell, and are rarely enforced. Their use has faded since the 1965 creation of Medicare — the health coverage program for people 65 and over — and Medicaid, the health coverage program for the poor.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

I suppose it’s possible but like the article says it’s not enforced.

Edit: I watched the clip: it’s a funny joke, but that’s it. Lots of implausible scenarios in there.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I don't see how that explains the story in the clip?

I don't think the article covers all the state-level filial responsibility laws. There's a ton of state level legislation after all.

Or it might be that the debt the guy is talking about in the clip isn't legally enforceable, but it sounds like debt to the state, which is why he seemed to inherit it in the first place, it wasn't just like a regular credit line.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Yeah, no that whole clip is just a joke. That’s not at all how it works. You don’t inherit debt unless you cosigned a loan or it’s spousal debt in one of those common property states.

When someone dies, you tally it all up, debtors get paid out of the estate in a certain order of precedence, if the money runs out, the money runs out. If there’s money over, it gets divvied up according to inheritance laws of that state.

Also, importantly, debtors cannot touch things like life insurance payouts or retirement accounts that have beneficiaries named. Those are not part of the estate and they can’t touch them.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Forgive me for not taking the word of a random Lemming.

When someone dies, you tally it all up, people get paid out of the estate in a certain order of precedence, if the money runs out, the money runs out. If there’s money over, it gets divvied up according to inheritance laws of that state.

Yes, that's basically how the process works. I've read inheritance law. (As in actually an official, graded course, albeit I'm no lawyer obviously. Just elective.) I've just not read ALL the inheritance law, EVERYWHERE. Have you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_responsibility_laws

#Filial responsibility laws (filial support laws, filial piety laws) are laws in the United States that impose a duty, usually upon adult children, for the support of their impoverished parents or other relatives.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 0 points 51 minutes ago* (last edited 50 minutes ago) (1 children)

Alright man, all I can say is you can talk to a lawyer when the time comes.

The Wikipedia article you just linked has nothing to do with debt in general. The debt referred to in that article refers specifically to caring for your parents, not assuming their debt for other things (medical bills for previous procedures, credit cards, loans, etc.)

What it’s saying is that you can’t put them in a nursing home, rack up a bunch of debt in their name specifically related to their care, and then not pay it when they die.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 42 minutes ago* (last edited 40 minutes ago) (1 children)

Literally just buried my grandma this year and dad a few years ago.

Here... In FINLAND. Where the laws of the United States of America do NOT apply.

Yes, it refers to taking care of your parents. Ie for instance being responsible for them, fiscally. For instance, having responsibility over the debt they've accumulated to the state.

When someone dies they and theyre declares insolvent, you imagine it just applies to all fiscal responsibility of that person.

It doesn't. The filial responsibility laws exempt that debt to the state from being able to be dissolved through insolvency.

And tbh, that guy with his own face and own name, despite being it being a bit from standup, is more credible than you are.

But despite that being generally the case, because the standup brought up the absurdity of the scenario, it wasn't enforced and the debt was dissolved.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 points 39 minutes ago* (last edited 33 minutes ago) (1 children)

Well, I can tell you that comedian is just making up a funny story and that’s not how it works in real life. You absolutely would not be responsible for paying your own child support, that is ridiculous. The comedian is clearly talking about the United States, not Finland.

Filial responsibility laws have nothing to do with debt to the state. If that’s how Finland works, I think it’s pretty fucked up. That’s pretty weird because it’s usually the United States with backwards laws. Filial responsibility means you have to care for them - not assume their credit card debt, or debt to the state, like unpaid taxes. That comes out of their estate. You are not fiscally responsible for your parents, at least here in the states.

I don’t give a shit how credible I seem, you should talk to a lawyer regardless if you’re dealing with an estate. What I can say, is that in the United States, you do not inherit debt outside of a few niche scenarios.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 31 minutes ago* (last edited 31 minutes ago) (1 children)

And you're still not as credible.

I've read similar insane things like that from the States, from credible sources.

You know for a fact it didn't happen?

Filial responsibility laws have nothing to do with debt to the state. If that’s how Finland works, I think it’s pretty fucked up.

Finland doesn't have filial responsibility laws.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_responsibility_laws

Filial responsibility laws (filial support laws, filial piety laws) are laws in the United States

#"... in the United States"

You don't seem to understand what I've explained to you about insolvency and debt. Guess you're just one of those "I can't be wrong" people.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 0 points 29 minutes ago* (last edited 27 minutes ago) (1 children)

Honestly dude, I don’t give a shit what someone from Finland thinks about filial responsibility laws in the United States. You’re basing your opinions on a Wikipedia article and a standup segment. You don’t seem to understand that those aren’t good sources for legal matters. Get the fuck out, lol.

Hit me with those credible sources homie, cause I don’t think you have them.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 21 minutes ago* (last edited 20 minutes ago) (1 children)

Why would it matter where I'm from?

Facts are facts. Or are you saying that you're allowed to just say "nuh-uh, facts don't matter, I'm American and thus I'm right about everything remotely American"?

Because... that's quite childish.

"Filial responsibility laws have nothing to do with debt!"

How about you actually try reading my replies to you, with thought? Do you think you're capable of that? Eh, I'll simplify, just to be safe.

USUALLY, when a person dies and they don't have enough funds to pay off everything, the debts are dissolved. That's how it works in the civilised world.

In the US, the bastion of capitalism, however, some debts aren't dissolved despite insolvency because these American filial responsibility laws make it so certain debt, like medical debt or not having paid child support, isn't dissolved.

collapsed inline media

https://www.investopedia.com/can-you-inherit-debt-from-your-parents-11723748

Like I said I assume you already know how little you know about this subject and instead of gracefully bowing out you're going all in. Then you'll get personal while absolutely not being able to address the actual subject, which you're clearly wrong about. Then you'll devolve into one word replies like "k" or something and then in a few weeks when the thread is hundreds of replies deep, you'll just give up and make a new account because of your post history.

So perhaps let's just skip all that and you just say "ye, right, my bad. TIL, thanks"?

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 0 points 18 minutes ago* (last edited 10 minutes ago) (1 children)

I’m saying you’re wrong, full stop. You know nothing about the laws here, that much is obvious. You’re citing articles I read before I met with the lawyer. None of them contradict what I’ve been saying.

Do you care to point out anything specific from that article, because it supports my point, not yours. It specifically says that you can inherit: property debt (outstanding mortgage on a property); co-signed debt; and medical debt ie caring for your parent, which I’ve already acknowledged earlier.

Outstanding mortgage isn’t “inheriting debt” unless they’re upside down. If you inherit a $400k property with $200k remaining on the mortgage, you just inherited +$200k of assets. Your net worth went up, not down.

Where do you get the idea child support is somehow under filial responsibility laws, which apply to the care of your parents, ie medical costs?

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 11 minutes ago (1 children)

Do you care to point out anything specific from that article

I do. The part which I screencapped and linked, which states:

You may inherit a parent’s medical debt if you live in a state with filial responsibility laws. “These laws may require children of a deceased parent to pay back medical bills if the deceased’s assets are insufficient,” says Tayne. “Filial laws exist in 30 states and vary in their protocols and processes.”

Seeing how you're saying you're not wrong, while also just a couple of replies earlier you said:

The Wikipedia article you just linked has nothing to do with debt in general. The debt referred to in that article refers specifically to caring for your parents, not assuming their debt for other things (medical bills for previous procedures, credit cards, loans, etc.)

Where you SPECIFY medical bills. When in fact medical debt is literally said to be an exception which you can inherit from your parents BECAUSE OF FILIAL RESPONSIBILITY LAWS.

What is it that you're not understanding, honestly, do tell? The answer is "nothing", I know. You know you're wrong and you know you're pulling arguments from your arse with someone who actually has experience and literal education on the subject. That's why you can't actually discuss this with someone, even when were having the discussion in your language.

Not all debt is dissolved through insolvency SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE of filial responsibility laws.

You're trying to disprove the comedian's bit never happened. You can't prove a negative, silly, but we can definitely show that it's a plausible scenario, because of those filial responsibility laws YOU CLAIM HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 minutes ago* (last edited 1 minute ago)

You don’t have experience though, lol. You’ve never dealt with an estate in the US, have you?

Medical debt != child support debt, genius.

Also, I specifically said previous procedures. If they had medical debt from a procedure 10 years ago, that’s not part of it. The filial responsibility laws - rarely enforced - have to do with things like nursing home care or hospice, it’s not a blanket “all medical debt”.

Credible sources man, I’m waiting for them. Not Wikipedia, not another -pedia. Legal sources. You said you have read all kinds of stories.

Comedian story isn’t plausible because child support debt doesn’t fall under filial responsibility laws. The end.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

My point was that if you have too much debt your inheritors aren't going to get anything when you die so just saying that debt doesn't get passed on like it's nothing is kind of disingenuous. I guess if you don't care about leaving anything to your family you don't need to worry about it but personally I want mine to get as much as possible.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

It’s not disingenuous in the slightest. Debt does not get passed on, full stop. You cannot inherit debt except for a few niche scenarios.

I’m not saying it like it’s nothing, I’m saying it like the law is written. I am in the thick of the estate process right now.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

You can inherit nothing because all the assets went to cover the debt though. That's my point.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

I don’t disagree. Do people not realize that you can’t inherit the assets of someone who has a negative net worth? That seems pretty common sense to me, and I knew that before I ever dealt with an estate.

You still gotta pay your bills even if you’re dead, or rather the executor has to pay your bills for you.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 4 hours ago

I think a lot of people don't really think about it. A lot of the people I know are really bad with money and make a lot of short sighted financial decisions

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Not really, but there's not much being left for the children of boomers to inherit.

edit: And in the broader sense, yes. Millennial and younger are inheriting the debt from Bush II's wars. We didn't have any vote on that matter, but we're the ones who are paying that off. 2.8 trillion. After the shitshow of a covid response, I never want to hear someone mention the 3000 dead.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I hear the opposite, boomer’s kids stand to inherit quite a bit. Anecdotally this seems true; granted I am an only child.

My father is likely to leave me with a few hundred thousand of his retirement account (he doesn’t know what to spend it on, his union pension is more than enough for his needs) and I’ll inherit both his house as well as my grandmothers house, which is now my uncle’s house. My mom’s house will be sold and split between my half brother and my cousin who my mother raised.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Bush's war debts.

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 2 points 10 hours ago

Child of a boomer here and honestly, the socioeconomic strata i grew up in? I never expected anything

[–] SonOfAntenora@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's actually expensive, and the property is taxed as usual. If you don't monetise the area you're going to lose. It depends.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

What’s expensive, and what area are you referring to?

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I was under the impression that was not the case. If the estate has no money to pay out, the collectors are gonna come knocking, no?

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I don’t believe so. I was explicitly told by my lawyer not to pay any estate debts with my own money.

I believe there are a few niche scenarios where somebody else can be responsible for the debt (eg joint account, co-signed loan), but in general, you should never pay somebody else’s estate debts.

[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

They can come knocking all they want, but you are not legally required as an heir to pay that debt. Surely there are a few exceptions like mortgage payments (if u wanna keep the house), but personal debts like credit cards? Not your problem.

[–] Pacattack57@lemmy.world -1 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

That is arguing semantics. When people inherit things it is their understanding that it is theirs. If my grandma left me the house but owed 1 million in unpaid debt, you effectively inherit the debt. Regardless of the fact that you could opt out of inheriting it.

People often go into personal debt to retain inheritance.

On a separate note inheritance/estate tax is robbery by the federal government.

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 2 points 57 minutes ago* (last edited 41 minutes ago)

That is incorrect. If your grandmother left you the house, as in she put your name on the deed as transfer on death, it is not part of the estate and you would get it outright. It would not be affected by the debt.

If you’re saying there’s a million dollars remaining on the mortgage on the property, of course she can’t just give it to you, it’s still collateral for that mortgage. It’s not hers to give.

If it was paid off, but part of the estate and subject to the rules of inheritance, then it would be affected by other non-mortgage debt.

US Federal estate tax does not count until it’s above $13.99 million per individual. In this example, unless it is a huge property, it would not be subject to inheritance tax.

I think I cut off of $13.99 million is more than adequate and only taxes those who can afford it.

I’m in the process of directly inheriting something like 200k in various savings and retirement accounts along with a half million dollar life insurance payout, and there are zero taxes on any of that.

I’m also taking over the deed on a house with $300k mortgage remaining - of course I have to keep paying that mortgage. That’s not inheriting debt. I could turn around and sell the property immediately and get paid the difference between the remaining mortgage balance and sale price.

[–] Bgugi@lemmy.world 1 points 5 minutes ago

All taxation is theft.

Inheritance/estate tax is one of the more ethical ones, though.