Social Security Number

[Shuftin]

If Social Security is a trust, a beneficiary should be able to resign and waive the benefits to terminate the trust relationship.

I'm most interested in how "the Informer" removed himself as beneficiary from the trust. Glad I have his broadcasts .

I had a link to the informer [website] with corresponding information on the old forum which was lost when it went down. From my understanding and memory, the informer discovered, possible from the IRS Code, that a SSN is composed of a nine [not ten] digit number having zero alphabetic letters. When one retires, the IRS attaches a tenth symbol, the letter "A" to the tail-end of the SSN. By doing so, the IRS converts a valid SSN into a non-valid SSN and one then becomes a beneficiary. Or words to that effect.

I wish I could remember better but maybe this will give you some direction. Then again, possibly it was the SSA rather than the IRS that attached the additional symbol "A" to the tail-end of the SSN. In either event, one loses his SSN upon retirement and one is then issued something that is not a valid SSN.

Things similar are not the same.

My knee-jerk reaction at the time of reading was: In order to stand forth and speak Truthfully saying "I have no SSN" is to simply retire. The documentation of TPTB become proof-positive that one no longer has a valid SSN.

[shikamaru]

I had a link to the informer [website] with corresponding information on the old forum which was lost when it went down. From my understanding and memory, the informer discovered, possible from the IRS Code, that a SSN is composed of a nine [not ten] digit number having zero alphabetic letters. When one retires, the IRS attaches a tenth symbol, the letter "A" to the tail-end of the SSN. By doing so, the IRS converts a valid SSN into a non-valid SSN and one then becomes a beneficiary. Or words to that effect.

I wish I could remember better but maybe this will give you some direction. Then again, possibly it was the SSA rather than the IRS that attached the additional symbol "A" to the tail-end of the SSN. In either event, one loses his SSN upon retirement and one is then issued something that is not a valid SSN.

Things similar are not the same.

My knee-jerk reaction at the time of reading was: In order to stand forth and speak Truthfully saying "I have no SSN" is to simply retire. The documentation of TPTB become proof-positive that one no longer has a valid SSN.

Here is my cluster of "the Informer" as well as James Montgomery and others of interesting note:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...wall-and-more-

[IgraineS]

Social Security age has turned into a contentious problem, as the prosperous see it as a deficit hog and the poor see it as a lifeline. It appears to be as much of a class war as it has ever been. Resource for this article: Class war between haves and have nots over raising Social Security age. For me, it's alright.

[allodial]

Retire can mean to leave public service or the like.

1. To withdraw; to retreat; to go from company or from a public place into privacy; as, to retire from the world; to retire from notice.

2. To retreat from action or danger; as, to retire from battle.

3. To withdraw from a public station. General Washington, in 1796, retired to private life.

4. To break up, as a company or assembly. The company retired at eleven o'clock.

5. To depart or withdraw for safety or for pleasure. Men retire from the town in summer for health and pleasure. But in South Carolina, the planters retire from their estates to Charleston, or to an isle near the town.

6. To recede; to fall back. The shore of the sea retires in bays and gulfs.(Webster's 1828)

[jesse james]

Hey let me ask you guys a question .........has anybody here actually read the Social Security Act?

The reason why I ask if anybody has read the Act is because Social Security defines "state" using the federal territory description.

(e) State, United States, and citizen
For purposes of this chapter?
(1) State
The term ?State? includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
(2) United States
The term ?United States? when used in a geographical sense includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
An individual who is a citizen of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (but not otherwise a citizen of the United States) shall be considered, for purposes of this section, as a citizen of the United States.

Not only are the federal union state overlays included in this definition........ so are the territories and possessions.

Social security isnt hiding anything from you....you just werent inform how to read and understand law.
By participating in SS you are actively well within federal jurisdiction.

Heres more to confirm and document.

Title 5
USC : Title 5 - GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES

(13) the term ?Federal personnel? means officers and employees of the Government of the United States, members of the uniformed services (including members of the Reserve Components), individuals entitled to receive immediate or deferred retirement benefits under any retirement program of the Government of the United States (including survivor benefits).

Anybody care to guess who administers Social security?
The government of the united states thats who!
And if you are not convinced-

26usc 3101

(a) Old-age, survivors, and disability insurance
In addition to other taxes, there is hereby imposed on the income of every individual a tax equal to the following percentages of the wages (as defined in section 3121 (a)) received by him with respect to employment (as defined in section 3121 (b))?

[David Merrill]

My suggestion is to treat the Social Security like an insurance policy. If you have already paid in for 40+ quarters then your premiums are paid. If you employer wants to deduct for SSI though, I would not quibble and I would not try to get the premiums back like with your withholdings.

I am familiar with that definition of the State and state districts formed in 1789. The real rubber meets the road if you are in contract, or not. If you endorse private credit from the Fed then you are contracting with this state. Therefore you get to be obligated to the State whatever the definition for it is.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[jesse james]

My suggestion is to treat the Social Security like an insurance policy. If you have already paid in for 40+ quarters then your premiums are paid. If you employer wants to deduct for SSI though, I would not quibble and I would not try to get the premiums back like with your withholdings.

I am familiar with that definition of the State and state districts formed in 1789. The real rubber meets the road if you are in contract, or not. If you endorse private credit from the Fed then you are contracting with this state. Therefore you get to be obligated to the State whatever the definition for it is.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Your logic Mr. Merrill............ummmm..........doesnt make sense at all.
Americans dont go to banks to apply for Social Security or a SSN...................pretty much illogical train of thought dont you think Mr. Merrill?

Americans are obligated to the state because Americans apply for a ssn through the SSA..................thats logical thinking dont you agree Mr. Merrill?
I mean who goes to a bank to apply for Social Security?
Nobody does thats who!

[David Merrill]

Your logic Mr. Merrill............ummmm..........doesnt make sense at all.
Americans dont go to banks to apply for Social Security or a SSN...................pretty much illogical train of thought dont you think Mr. Merrill?

Americans are obligated to the state because Americans apply for a ssn through the SSA..................thats logical thinking dont you agree Mr. Merrill?
I mean who goes to a bank to apply for Social Security?
Nobody does thats who!

I think you are an incompetent reader and a fully experienced foul-mouthed troll.

Maybe you would like to think of Social Security as insurance because SSI is for Social Security Insurance?

But I doubt that will raise anything from you but more requests to be banished.



P.S.

Looking at the edit timestamps, Jesse went on a rant and was rethinking that just before I quoted him. So I quoted his post and made comment just as he edited out the temper tantrum. Good enough! That is what editing is for.

[David Merrill]

I had a link to the informer [website] with corresponding information on the old forum which was lost when it went down. From my understanding and memory, the informer discovered, possible from the IRS Code, that a SSN is composed of a nine [not ten] digit number having zero alphabetic letters. When one retires, the IRS attaches a tenth symbol, the letter "A" to the tail-end of the SSN. By doing so, the IRS converts a valid SSN into a non-valid SSN and one then becomes a beneficiary. Or words to that effect.

I wish I could remember better but maybe this will give you some direction. Then again, possibly it was the SSA rather than the IRS that attached the additional symbol "A" to the tail-end of the SSN. In either event, one loses his SSN upon retirement and one is then issued something that is not a valid SSN.

Things similar are not the same.

My knee-jerk reaction at the time of reading was: In order to stand forth and speak Truthfully saying "I have no SSN" is to simply retire. The documentation of TPTB become proof-positive that one no longer has a valid SSN.

That sounds counter-intuitive. Usually when one retires, they go onto Social Security.

But I think I know what you mean, when you cite the Informer, he used a lot of counter-intuitive approaches to get some very vital points across.

[David Merrill]

Hey let me ask you guys a question .........has anybody here actually read the Social Security Act?

The reason why I ask if anybody has read the Act is because Social Security defines "state" using the federal territory description.



Not only are the federal union state overlays included in this definition........ so are the territories and possessions.

Social security isnt hiding anything from you....you just werent inform how to read and understand law.
By participating in SS you are actively well within federal jurisdiction.

Heres more to confirm and document.

Title 5
USC : Title 5 - GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES


Anybody care to guess who administers Social security?
The government of the united states thats who!
And if you are not convinced-

26usc 3101

There are three vital components to jurisdiction.

1) territorial
2) in personam
3) subject matter

Therefore if you participate in SS then you are indeed under federal jurisdiction, but only so far as matters of Social Security (subject matter jurisdiction). The Supreme Court has determined (1938) that Social Security is a valid Income Tax, but it is not the same thing as the IRS Income Tax system.