> Y'all are trying to be very specific about this 150 year old thing when there are vast number of people with ages above 100 that are in the database: You may

> Y'all are trying to be very specific about this 150 year old thing when there are vast number of people with ages above 100 that are in the database: You may wish to read the SSA Inspector General audit report, "Numberholders Age 100 or Older Who Did Not Have Death Information on the Numident.": * https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf > It's a gripping read. It tells me, for instance, that 98 percent of these folks have received no payments. * https://twitter.com/justinwolfers/status/1891516202612060438 https://twitter.com/justinwolfers/status/1891516202612060438 The report states: > SSA determined the estimated $5.5 to $9.7 million in expenditures to correct these errors was too costly to implement and that the effort would have limited benefit to the administration of SSA programs. We acknowledge that almost none of the numberholders discussed in the report currently receive SSA payments. However, SSA issued each of these individuals a valid SSN and these SSNs could allow for a wide range of potential abuse. So it would cost several million dollars to correct the database to prevent less than several million from going out. Once again, perhaps the government knows what it's doing, these "discoveries" are not new or surprisingly, and that a cost-benefit analysis has already been done.