Legal name = mark of the beast ?

[Chex]

Social security always baffled me, I could never understand why I had to enlist into this program when I didn’t want it; never the less at fourteen I was told I needed this to get a job.

My question is how am I with a new grandchild underway was going to get power of attorney for this child. You know when the nurse comes in the first order of business is the SS5 very important even before the B/C gets signed by the informant (like Wisconsin, Massachusetts and Louisiana Administrative Code RS 40:34 and I’m sure the other states alike) to have this application filled out. I didn’t understand why it was necessary for a baby to have this number at birth other than the lie “you get a tax break”.

I needed some detailed information about this SSAct in that sensational style and at a 6th grade reading level and thanks to treefarmer from the Table of Contents starts the process.

What really caught my attention are the facts that represent the rulings especially in Chapter 8. Watching this judge really brought attention to detail, especially when one court case involving a minor who purchase an automobile from a adult by contract and the judge told the plaintiff “You cannot contract with a minor, check your state laws”,

Although further research states “The minor is able to cancel any contract at any time prior to reaching the age of majority and for a reasonable period after that time.”

What is for a reasonable period of time? I might be thirty years past the date and slept through the class in high school when they were teaching this subject but I like to know how the SSA contracted with a fourteen year old and for some reason it’s considered a binding contract?

Curiosity gets the best of me so I called the SSA and told them to stop the deductions because I wanted to take those contributions and invest them myself into a more promising venture (like me) in the same amounts that were taken out of my payments of debts I was receiving.

I was told “NO” because if I continue working and my credits do not get applied I will be receiving a lower benefit instead of a greater benefit. I told her I understand that, I’ll take the penalty. Then the kicker, “You have to call the IRS for permission”. Why do I have to ask the IRS for permission? “They have the authority” she stated.

Chapter 5 referring to Fleming v. Nestor and the RESERVATION OF POWER maybe is not an earned right perhaps that’s why I have to call the IRS or be in economic hardship.

Maybe it's my Tax Class 5? "gift" and not an earned right.

[shikamaru]

Social security always baffled me, I could never understand why I had to enlist into this program when I didn’t want it; never the less at fourteen I was told I needed this to get a job.

I think I can explain this.

If you look at the case Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, you will note that there is a standard for raising a Constitutional issue.

If you avail yourself of a statute or act, you will be unable to raise a Constitutional issue. The issue becomes merely administrative.

This is why it is important to correct your status and remove one's self from statutory benefits.

Ashwander rule

1. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of legislation in a friendly, non-adversary, proceeding, declining because to decide such questions "is legitimate only in the last resort, earnest and vital controversy between individuals. It never was the thought that, by means of a friendly suit, a party beaten in the legislature could transfer to the courts an inquiry as to the constitutionality of the legislative act."[1]

2. The Court will not "anticipate a question of constitutional law in advance of the necessity of deciding it." [2] "It is not the habit of the Court to decide questions of a constitutional nature unless absolutely necessary to a decision of the case." [3]

3. The Court will not "formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the Precise facts to which it is to be applied." [2]

4. The Court will not pass upon a constitutional question although properly presented by the record, if there is also present some other ground upon which the case may be disposed of. This rule has found most varied application. Thus, if a case can be decided on either of two grounds, one involving a constitutional question, the other a question of statutory construction or general law, the Court will decide only the latter. Appeals from the highest court of a state challenging its decision of a question under the Federal Constitution are frequently dismissed because the judgment can be sustained on an independent state ground.

5. The Court will not pass upon the validity of a statute upon complaint of one who fails to show that he is injured by its operation. Among the many applications of this rule, none is more striking than the denial of the right to challenge to one who lacks a personal or property right.

6. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one who has availed himself of its benefits.

7. "When the validity of an act of the Congress is drawn in question, and even if a serious doubt of constitutionality is raised, it is a cardinal principle that this Court will first ascertain whether a construction of the statute is fairly possible by which the question may be avoided." [4]

Many of the other one's are important too.

[shikamaru]

Thank-you everyone for your contributions.
So much meat to chew on here !!