Well since you bring up "duties" somewhere on the Social Security website one condition in participating is paying all duties (taxes) associated with participating in SS.Originally Posted by Chex
Both the impositions found at 26usc 3402 and 26usc 3101 are "pre-existing duties" to pay the taxes associated with participating in Social Security.
Has nothing at all to do with lawful money or fiat money.
Then why is there a "federal income tax" and a separate "FICA" tax and a "Medicare tax" listed on a W-2 form?
Are you saying that all three are Social Security taxes, but split up into three different categories?
If so, why are they split up?
Treefarmer
There is power in the blood of Jesus
Are those not all but hidden taxes anyway? With them all going directly into a general fund with nothing being earmarked for a specific purpose; just the same as "Obamacare", yet another pointless tax hike at 2.5/5-percent (or more) annually. With the federal government reserving the right to terminate such entitlement programs at anytime they see fit, which subsequently could result in the forfeiture of any future benefits in those programs or in greatly reduced benefits from such entitlements, dependent upon nothing but the generosity of whoever is holding the House at the time.
Federal income tax is separate from the other two.
FICA has to do with SS.
Medicare has to do with social insurance .... interesting.
If Medicare is a social insurance program ... the tax you pay is your premium in contribution to the program....
Interestingly enough, France and Canada also have Medicare or some form of social insurance program. I have a hunch this may be international in scope. If this is the case, then there are greater implications not spoken ....
Insurance is squarely in the realm of Admiralty/Maritime law.
It is not unlawful for government to tax a benefit given (per the Supreme Court). I've seen this in one of the Supreme Court cases on Social Security. I'm guessing it is Flemming v. Nestor (1960), but don't quote me on it.
If you accept a benefit from government, expect there to be a tax.
If you want to reduce your exposure to taxes, decline the benefits.
Cease to be a beneficiary.
Last edited by shikamaru; 01-08-12 at 01:17 PM.
No its not unlawful for the government to tax a benefit................especialy a benefit that comes directly and administered from the government itself.Federal income tax is separate from the other two.
FICA has to do with SS.
Medicare has to do with social insurance .... interesting.
If Medicare is a social insurance program ... the tax you pay is your premium in contribution to the program....
Interestingly enough, France and Canada also have Medicare or some form of social insurance program. I have a hunch this may be international in scope. If this is the case, then there are greater implications not spoken ....
Insurance is squarely in the realm of Admiralty/Maritime law.
It is not unlawful for government to tax a benefit given (per the Supreme Court). I've seen this in one of the Supreme Court cases on Social Security. I'm guessing it is Flemming v. Nestor (1960), but don't quote me on it.
If you accept a benefit from government, expect there to be a tax.
If you want to reduce your exposure to taxes, decline the benefits
Cease to be a beneficiary.
Social Security is a federal government benefit program that has no mandatory participation clause in it whatsoever............its all voluntary.
And its voluntary to participate because in doing so you proclaim under penalty of perjury to being a 14th amendment federal "US citizen" having but a scant Bill of Right protections of the Constitution.
If they would have such a mandatory participation clause in the benefit Act it would be in violation of the US Constitution on many different levels.
Do you think they could force every American to participate if this mandatory participation labels you a second class citizen that has a little Bill of Rights?
This fight against taxation boils down to "RIGHTS" not money!
The Right of Publicity is a consent principle legal definition called fiduciary duty the highest standard of care at either equity or law.
A fiduciary (abbreviation fid) is expected to be extremely loyal to the person to whom he owes the duty (the "principal"): he must not put his personal interests before the duty, and must not profit from his position {for who’s position? the Consent of the Governed} as a fiduciary, unless the principal consents.
The Right of publicity means the right of an individual to control any commercial use of his/her name, image, or some other aspects of one's identity.
In the U.S., it is a state law-based right. In the U.S., right of publicity is enforced through state law.
32-36-1-7. Right of publicity, The recognition of the right varies from state to state.
Some states have clearly provided this right by way of statute. States which do not have specific legislation relating to the right to publicity recognize the right by way of common law.
It is generally considered a property right rather than a personal right.
So the right of publicity is descendible to the person's heirs after their death. It’s a fignet legal definition.
In the United States, the Right of Publicity is a state-based right, and therefore each state must determine if and how it will recognize the Right.
The Right of Publicity is a rapidly-evolving right with great increase in reported cases in the United States and worldwide. The right of publicity is also termed as publicity rights or personality rights.
It’s all in the nature of legal estate in land not to be confused with the carrot theory from the inferior parrot theory.
"Right of publicity" means a personality's property interest in the personality's:
If you believe you're land is you're body wouldn’t you consider it a property right and all that's included rather than a personal right for the reason of "I am the alpha and the omega created in the image of YHWH."
Last edited by Chex; 01-09-12 at 05:02 PM.
The astute reader may notice Jesse has not indicated whether he himself is a "US Citizen," if he participates in Social Security, and if not, how he did it.
Nor does he explain how I can work making plenty of lawful money, then deposit that into a checking account started with the Social Security number the government sent me, and yet not pay a dime in Federal Income Tax, Social Security, nor Medicare tax, for the past four years.
I'm sure if you had a shred of decency you'd tell them the truth that you control the reporting from your multiple bussinesses.
Fellow forum members JohnnyCash here basically pays himself and opts from reporting. He admitted to this on another forum.
I highly doubt Johnny you are even remotely successful as you say you are if you were paid from entity you had no control of reporting to the SSA.
Keep propping yourself up high and mighty Johnny as the fall, when it catches up, is just as mighty!
I outlined my success on that other forum quite nicely for you so stop bullshitting everyone here as if you are some sort of authority.
I relied on understanding fully how SS works and knew exactly what was needed to be done to secure my Rights of not participating which stopped all reporting and withholding.........................you know this Johnny very well!
So why the bullshit?
Also Johnny, thanks for showing proof with your SS statement that you are only successful because the SSA doesnt show any "income" reported.
You know damn well all IRS data comes from the SSA......................I shown you that regulation which you had no clue about!
No reported income means, or should mean, no retaliation from the IRS.
Lets hope no idiot data entry IRS goon audits your businesses and looks at you like they do drug dealers who also dont show any "income", but yet have large amounts of $$$ transactions in a bank account.
You think you are so smart, but yet your ego shows everyone here how stupid you are by showing these documents that most likely are gonna get you audited and caught.......unless of course you know how to defend yourself against DoJ which we discussed, or I tried discussing with you a while back, but with no avail.
Really should try to control your ego........its the same thing that brought down lucifer from a most highly earned position with the Father to being sentenced to be destroyed, as in will no longer exist, by the Father.
Last edited by jesse james; 01-10-12 at 02:39 AM.
I like your link to the large transaction with the Redeemed stamp. Thank you for sharing.
The power to contract used against a registrant.
I see it as another scheme of servitude predicated on benefits for duties.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote