Social Security Number

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • David Merrill
    Administrator
    • Mar 2011
    • 5949

    #16
    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.
    www.lawfulmoneytrust.com
    www.bishopcastle.us
    www.bishopcastle.mobi

    Comment

    • jesse james

      #17
      Originally posted by David Merrill View Post
      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!
      Last edited by Guest; 04-05-12, 01:38 AM.

      Comment

      • David Merrill
        Administrator
        • Mar 2011
        • 5949

        #18
        Originally posted by jesse james View Post
        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.
        Last edited by David Merrill; 04-05-12, 09:58 AM.
        www.lawfulmoneytrust.com
        www.bishopcastle.us
        www.bishopcastle.mobi

        Comment

        • David Merrill
          Administrator
          • Mar 2011
          • 5949

          #19
          Originally posted by Shuftin View Post
          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.
          www.lawfulmoneytrust.com
          www.bishopcastle.us
          www.bishopcastle.mobi

          Comment

          • David Merrill
            Administrator
            • Mar 2011
            • 5949

            #20
            Originally posted by jesse james View Post
            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.
            www.lawfulmoneytrust.com
            www.bishopcastle.us
            www.bishopcastle.mobi

            Comment

            • David Merrill
              Administrator
              • Mar 2011
              • 5949

              #21
              Originally posted by David Merrill View Post
              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.
              P.P.S.

              The post that I was responding to above was a really crappy thing to say. I am sorry that I did not catch it in time to show you all. It strikes me that Jesse James is basically in pain or just surfs to ventilate a lot of hatred. I took a look for the first time at his posts around here and he is persistently antagonistic and mean to others, especially to me and what I have discovered through careful research and an astounding brain trust of suitors. I have banished him and I apologize for being too busy with other entertaining items in life to have noticed this problem before Jesse annoyed a lot of good people. I noticed by the others who had been visiting his User page that they had likely been assuming I was paying more attention; I was not. Sorry! Please forgive me.
              www.lawfulmoneytrust.com
              www.bishopcastle.us
              www.bishopcastle.mobi

              Comment

              • David Merrill
                Administrator
                • Mar 2011
                • 5949

                #22
                I am starting to get it now...

                Jesse James is actually JJ MacNAB of Demosthenes, now Famspear fame on Quatloos. Take a look.
                www.lawfulmoneytrust.com
                www.bishopcastle.us
                www.bishopcastle.mobi

                Comment

                • JohnnyCash

                  #23
                  Possibly. The odds over at LostHorizons.com was that Famspear was actually the Texas persona attorney Jay Adkisson created to use at quatloos.com. See there on the right side:
                  About Me

                  Partner of the Newport Beach, California, law firm of Riser Adkisson LLP, who practices in the areas of creditor-debtor law, including creditors collections and debtor asset protection, and business planning including captive insurance company planning and litigation involving captive insurance arrangements. Current Chairman of the American Bar Association's Committee on Captive Insurance. Author of business books on asset protection, captive insurance, and equity-indexed annuities. Twice an expert witness to the U.S. Senate Finance Committee regarding tax scams and frauds. Creator of the anti-scam website Quatloos.com
                  The creator gives his handle as sooltauq, but you'll see very few sooltauq posts. Why create a website and then hardly use it?

                  I think Jesse James is Jay Adkisson. That is just opinion though.

                  Comment

                  • David Merrill
                    Administrator
                    • Mar 2011
                    • 5949

                    #24
                    Originally posted by JohnnyCash View Post
                    Possibly. The odds over at LostHorizons.com was that Famspear was actually the Texas persona attorney Jay Adkisson created to use at quatloos.com. See there on the right side: The creator gives his handle as sooltauq, but you'll see very few sooltauq posts. Why create a website and then hardly use it?

                    I think Jesse James is Jay Adkisson. That is just opinion though.

                    Yep. You could have a better theory.
                    Last edited by David Merrill; 04-18-12, 10:53 AM.
                    www.lawfulmoneytrust.com
                    www.bishopcastle.us
                    www.bishopcastle.mobi

                    Comment

                    • sensi
                      Junior Member
                      • Dec 2012
                      • 2

                      #25
                      Has anyone ever heard of the Taco Bell case??

                      This one was given to me by the informer. enjoy!

                      Comment

                      • salsero
                        Senior Member
                        • Feb 2013
                        • 136

                        #26
                        David, thanks for all this great info. I have a question with regard to social security taxes, please.

                        At the employer/W-2 level if one is properly redeeming lawful money, is there a way to claim a refund of social secuirty taxes that have been paid? For federal income tax withholdings, one deducts lawful money redeemed on line 21 - other income but what about social security taxes - is one able to have these monies returned as well? If so, how would one place this on the form 1040? This is a question of interest - I bascially agree why bother once you already put in the 40 quarters.

                        Also on subcontractors - if one gets a 1099 MISC at the end of the year from a company and has properly redeemed lawful money on the total gross amount that is being reported on that 1099 MISC, is one tax EMPEMPT for the social security taxes as well as the income taxes? And if exempt from social security taxes, how would one go about placing this on the 1040 form? Would it be shown as a misc deduction on Schedule C?

                        I did try to look in the posts and see if I could find the answer to this - I am sorry if this info has been posted and I missed it. Tony

                        Originally posted by David Merrill View Post
                        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.

                        Comment

                        • allodial
                          Senior Member
                          • May 2011
                          • 2866

                          #27
                          Originally posted by David Merrill View Post
                          Employers register as federal employers?
                          The application for an (IRS) employer ID # seems to the means by which they register. The SS-4.

                          Click image for larger version

Name:	ss4.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	59.5 KB
ID:	40678
                          All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

                          "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
                          "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
                          Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

                          Comment

                          • Chex
                            Senior Member
                            • May 2011
                            • 1032

                            #28
                            By by Edwin Vieira, Jr.

                            (2) The Social Security Act provides a striking modern parallel for such an application of a statutory "reserved-power" clause.

                            Although that act provides for payment of benefits, Fleming v. Nestor denied that such benefits constitute "accrued property rights"222 "The Social Security system", the Supreme Court explained,

                            may be accurately described as a form of social insurance * * * whereby persons gainfully employed, and those who employ them, are taxed to permit the payment of benefits to the retired and disabled, and their dependents. Plainly the expectation is that many members of the present productive work force will in turn become beneficiaries rather than supporters of the program. But each worker's benefits, though flowing from the contributions he made to the [610] national economy while actively employed, are not dependent on the degree to which he was called upon to support the system by taxation. * * * [T]he noncontractual interest of an employee covered by the Act cannot be soundly analogized to that of a holder of an annuity, whose right to benefits is bottomed on his contractual premium payments.

                            * * * [The Social-Security] program was designed to function into the indefinite future, and its specific provisions rest on predictions as to expected economic conditions which must inevitably prove less than wholly accurate, and on judgments and preferences as to the proper allocation of the Nation's resources which evolving economic and social conditions will of necessity in some degree modify.
                            Last edited by Chex; 02-12-13, 05:06 PM. Reason: Addition resources
                            "And if I could I surely would Stand on the rock that Moses stood"

                            Comment

                            • shikamaru
                              Senior Member
                              • Mar 2011
                              • 1630

                              #29
                              Can we get down to brass tacks what FICA is?

                              It is an excise tax, plain and simple.
                              It was a way to raise additional revenue for government without having everyone going Toussaint L'Overture on government.
                              Couple a benefit with a tax, that's how you slide it in.

                              We are all aware that payment of FICA tax goes into the general fund of government without any earmarking in any manner?

                              Comment

                              • allodial
                                Senior Member
                                • May 2011
                                • 2866

                                #30
                                It might be that FICA was really meant to be paid by the employers but they figured out a way to dump it on employees. Nonetheless, from an accounting and economic standpoint FICA is very important to keep the SSA solvent (afaik about $578B in 2007). AFIK the SSA is highly solvent. If you get that the person named on the SS card is a legal entity and if you get what SSA is really in the business of doing (yeah insurance isnt the right word because insurance is technically commercial--SSA provides the something like insurance but technically non-commercially).

                                Its worth noting that from what I've gathered, the SSA invests all of its money in U.S. treasury securities.
                                Last edited by allodial; 02-12-13, 11:22 PM.
                                All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

                                "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
                                "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
                                Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X