Social Security Enumeration At Birth

[Shuftin]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

It turns out that in some states (e.g. Michigan), the registration is so automaticthat nobody in the hospital can control it -- all birth certificates sent to the State Health Dept eventually get shared with the Social Security Admin.

It also turns out that the hospital report has distinct advantages; it involves no expense or inconvenience to the parents. If, instead of registering the kid for SocSec straight from the maternity ward, the parents try to register their kid separately (as might happen if the baby doesn't get a name until weeks after birth), a parent - with ID - has to bring the baby into the SocSec office - with the baby's birth certificate; and I think there's a small fee for this separate registration.

This excerpt is from the State BAR of Georgia handbook.

http://www.gabar.org/handbook/handbo...sory_opinions/

QUESTION PRESENTED
Does a nonlawyer engage in the unlicensed practice of law when he prepares, for another and for remuneration, articles of incorporation, bylaws or other documents relating to the establishment of a corporation?

SUMMARY ANSWER
Yes. The existence of a corporation depends entirely upon the law, and the documents that bring it into being secure legal rights. Consequently, the preparation of those documents involves the practice of law. A nonlawyer who prepares such documents for another in exchange for a fee engages in the unlicensed practice of law.

Notice that a fee (wage) was paid to an individual to force a SSN on a baby against the will of the parent. Thus the Corporate strawman was created for the baby and the individual who prepared the documents practiced law without a license.

[Lawdog]

Wrong on two counts.

As one can see from going to their website, it's the State Bar of Georgia, not BAR. Bar is not an acronym.

Two, this has nothing to do with birth certificates. A birth certificate does not set up a corporation or other artificial legal entity. That's just "sovrun citizun" mythology.

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

So you too are suspicious of "all caps."

Who here has recently said anything at all about "acronyms" other than you?

Paranoia?

Prove it.

Prove it.

Lots of claims.

You going to prove you are an Attorney, son?

I say you are a wannabe fraud like Codee.

How about posting some of your own "court" "victories?"

Still waiting for those CJS footnote cites on Attorney/Client.

I thought you loved your BAR ASSOCIATION stare decisis card castle, boy.



What, one standard for citizen DOG, and another for the sovereigns?



Run away little man.

[mrg]

.................................................. .............

[psholtz]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

The IRS had become aware, by the time of the Nixon Administration, that there was a good deal of tax fraud arising from the exemptions and deductions for children. These frauds included, as examples, claiming the deduction for non-existent children, for children long after they were grown and were earning their own living, by divorced parents both laying claim to deductions for the same child, etc.

You'd think that if they wanted to save $$ on income taxes, they would have just rescinded their own SSN/taxpayer ID, instead of trying to invent deductions for non-existent children..

Some people never learn.. LOL..

[psholtz]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

If, instead of registering the kid for SocSec straight from the maternity ward, the parents try to register their kid separately (as might happen if the baby doesn't get a name until weeks after birth), a parent - with ID - has to bring the baby into the SocSec office - with the baby's birth certificate; and I think there's a small fee for this separate registration.

Yes, here in Amerika, you actually have to PAY to be a slave(!)

[psholtz]

Originally Posted by Livefire

There is so much to learn from the Amish and Mennonite peoples! It probably would be a good idea to organize and live in tight knit communities, depending on the land for sustenance.

Yes, I agree..

w/ the caveat that both groups strike me as being some kind of bizarre, long-term, multi-generational (and very old) controlled government experiment in controlled breeding and genetics.

I'm quite serious about that.

Things are almost never what they appear to be, on the surface.

But yes, both groups live very simply and (largely) in harmony w/ Nature, and there is much to learn from their survival skills and techniques.

[gldskr]

I fail to see why many folks still see the SSN as some kind of bogeyman, the mark of the beast 666 or some sort of adhesion contract. It is none of these.

It is a marketing tool.

It holds no power unless you energize it.

Since all birth records are a matter of public record, wouldn't it follow that any and all corporations would want to know and register in their database all their potential customers?

I remember when my daughter was born. Shortly afterwards we were inundated with offers for magazine subscriptions and other sundry baby items. Did I scream bloody murder, no, I ignored them.

Surely, they had the right to assign to my daughter a registration number within their database. Did this number affect her in any way? No, not until the point that I or she accepted the crap offered.

If you see the SSA, or any government agency, for what it truly is, a corporate entity, then the indignation goes away. Simply ignore them, there is nothing you can do about it.

The product they're selling is FRN's. That the hook is a psuedo retirement plan is inconsequential. It may be deceptive but is not fraudulent, and the unwashed masses buy it up.

Because FRN's are what they are, "the money", its not surprising that every conceivable activity revolves around and is regulated because of them. If you're buying what they are selling you have no right to bitch.

If you don't want to play stay out of their sandbox. If you do, learn how to be the quarterback rather than the cornerback. Control the game, rather than react to it. Its jurisdiction, jurisdiction, jurisdiction.

gldskr

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Prior to that, SSNs for children were considered a rarity (circa 1952, a six year old in my neighborhood was mentioned in the newspaper as being the youngest known holder of an SSN, which he had to procure because he had been hired to appear in a softdrink commercial).

pretty good informative post, Bernie

Bro, you must really be old to know that kinda info!

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by gldskr

I fail to see why many folks still see the SSN as some kind of bogeyman, the mark of the beast 666 or some sort of adhesion contract. It is none of these.

It is a marketing tool.

It holds no power unless you energize it.

Since all birth records are a matter of public record, wouldn't it follow that any and all corporations would want to know and register in their database all their potential customers?

I remember when my daughter was born. Shortly afterwards we were inundated with offers for magazine subscriptions and other sundry baby items. Did I scream bloody murder, no, I ignored them.

Surely, they had the right to assign to my daughter a registration number within their database. Did this number affect her in any way? No, not until the point that I or she accepted the crap offered.

If you see the SSA, or any government agency, for what it truly is, a corporate entity, then the indignation goes away. Simply ignore them, there is nothing you can do about it.

The product they're selling is FRN's. That the hook is a psuedo retirement plan is inconsequential. It may be deceptive but is not fraudulent, and the unwashed masses buy it up.

Because FRN's are what they are, "the money", its not surprising that every conceivable activity revolves around and is regulated because of them. If you're buying what they are selling you have no right to bitch.

If you don't want to play stay out of their sandbox. If you do, learn how to be the quarterback rather than the cornerback. Control the game, rather than react to it. Its jurisdiction, jurisdiction, jurisdiction.

gldskr

You are missing the obvious gldskr; it is attached to a compelled government benefit which the parents do not want and which will obligate the child to participate in a so******t ponzi scheme at a future date unless appropriate action is taken.