New Gen No SS#

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by BOBT12

I assumed that you read the cases, thus, could point out the relevant sections. Such as, please provide us with a quote(s), what does this mean regarding the forced participation, by individuals, of any government program. And how does it deal with the Constitution's limitation on governmental power, Amentment 4 through 10 to name a few. However, it is pretty clear that you cannot. And that all the cases you are providing act as sand in our eyes.

This is over the three strikes limit Demo.

It is quite humorous to witness first hand someone attempting to support a position through misdirection, obfuscation and blatent misrepresentation of facts on one topic which has no application to another.

Where is the quote or law that states anyone must have a SSN before they can work for a living Demo?

[Demosthenes]

The cases involve the Constitutionality of the Social Security program. Several people here have argued the very same points addressed in these cases. Why do you refuse to read them. Is your ability to read limited to quotes that others have to post for you?

It explains quite a bit.

And, as an aside, you might want to learn to spell mandatory.

[Demosthenes]

Originally Posted by FreeFromContract

Where is the quote or law that states anyone must have a SSN before they can work for a living Demo?

First things first. Can the government impose a tax for the purposes of a national insurance program comes before have they.

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by Demosthenes

First things first. Can the government impose a tax for the purposes of a national insurance program comes before have they.

Originally Posted by Dr Zapola

What are they going to do with this new generation of kids who will not get an SS#?

Based on the original poster's (op) question, the question before us, is whether the federal government has the power to compel participation, by individuals, of any government program. And how does it deal with the Constitution's limitation on governmental power, Amentment 4 through 10 to name a few.

This is serving no further point. I will, respectfully, ask that the moderators close this thread, if the original poster agrees. This thread is geting too long, and there is no longer serious debate over the op's question.

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by Demosthenes

First things first. Can the government impose a tax for the purposes of a national insurance program comes before have they.

That's your question. Not mine. How many times are you going to get off topic? You posted way back here....

http://www.suijuris.net/forum/82450-post25.html

and here....

http://www.suijuris.net/forum/82648-post42.html

Where you state that someone (a teenager in your example) needs a SSN to get a job. There is no law to back you up. There is no law that prevents someone giving a job to someone who doesn't have a SSN. There are people who are providing paychecks to others working for them (who do not have a SSN). There is nothing illegal about it. These people have that right. It is a God given right that everyone of us can exercise in the manner that each of us wants, independent of what others (like YOU) may want to impose on us. If someone wants a SSN and wants to work they have the right to make that decision too. But it is a God given right that each of us have complete jurisdiction over.

Demo, are you that incompetent that you can't understand? If you can't, drop it, let it go. Quit debasing yourself.

Your position has the appearance of wanting to regulate or manage one's God given rights. To me, that is pathetic position to take.

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by BOBT12

This is serving no further point. I will, respectfully, ask that the moderators close this thread, if the original poster agrees. This thread is geting too long, and there is no longer serious debate over the op's question.

Agreed. She continues drifting off topic and bringing on additional misapplied material (althought she has given me a few good laughs in the process).

[Demosthenes]

Originally Posted by FreeFromContract

Agreed. She continues drifting off topic and bringing on additional misapplied material (althought she has given me a few good laughs in the process).

So you guys think it's irrelevant whether or not the Social Security system is Constitutional?

Thanks for conceding that it is Constitutional.

Originally Posted by Demosthenes

So you guys think it's irrelevant whether or not the Social Security system is Constitutional?

Thanks for conceding that it is Constitutional.

You are the one that has conceded on several ocaissions by not bringing forth the required documentary evidence to support your claims. You have defaulted and are therefore acquiescing to the claims of your opponents.

Jerry.

[Demosthenes]

You are the one that has conceded on several ocaissions by not bringing forth the required documentary evidence to support your claims.

You mean other than those three pesky Supreme Court rulings which you all refuse to read?

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by Demosthenes

First things first. Can the government impose a tax for the purposes of a national insurance program comes before have they.

Going off on another tangent...go figure (maybe it's time for you try something new, like answering the question we've ask for the xxth time).