| No human being has the right -- under any circumstances -- to initiate force against another human being, nor to threaten or delegate its initiation. The Zero Aggression Principle |
| |
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
April 21,
2008 If you go to "Social Security Online, Your Social Security Number And Card" , you will find the following statement: "A Social Security number is important because you need it to get a job, collect Social Security benefits and receive some other government services. Many other businesses, such as banks and credit companies, also ask for your number." As we will see, the first part of this statement is an out right lie because there is no law that says you "need" a Social Security number to get a job. Pursuant to Privacy Act of 1974 and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, federal agencies are required provide you with a Notice of your rights and obligations when they ask for information. The Notice provided by the Internal Revenue Service with their 1040 booklet for 2007 (Page 83) shows the legal requirements placed on federal agencies by these laws. The IRS Notice states, in part: "The IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, the Privacy Act of 1974 and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 require that when we ask you for information, we must first tell you our legal right to ask for the information, why we are asking for it, and how it will be used. We must also tell you what could happen if we do not receive it and whether your response is voluntary, required to obtain a benefit, or mandatory under the law. Our legal right to ask for the information is Internal Revenue Code sections 6001, 6011 and 6012 (a) and their regulations. They say you must file a return or statement with us for any tax you are liable for. Your response is mandatory under these sections." The reader will note the use of the words "must" and "mandatory." If we compare this Notice with the one provided by the Social Security Administration that accompanies the application for a Social Security number/card, we find there is a stark difference between the two: "The Privacy Act of 1974 requires us to give each person the following notice when applying for a Social Security number. Sections 205(c) and 702 of the Social Security Act allow us to collect the facts we ask for on this form. We use the facts you provide on this form to assign you a Social Security number and to issue you a Social Security card. You do not have to give us these facts, however, without them we cannot issue you a Social Security number or a card. Without a number, you may not be able to get a job and could lose Social Security benefits in the future. (FN-1) The Social Security number is also used by the Internal Revenue Service for tax administration purposes as an identifier in processing tax returns of persons who have income which is reported to the Internal Revenue Service and by persons who are claimed as dependents on someone's Federal income tax return." According to the Social Security Administration, the two laws cited "allow" them to ask for information but, as they state, you are not required to provide it. And if you do not provide it, the penalty is, heaven forbid, they cannot issue you a Social Security number/card. Nowhere does the Social Security Administration Notice make the statement, like the IRS Notice does, that you are "required" to provide the information. If Americans were "required" to have a Social Security number, then the obligation to complete the application and provide the requested information would be "mandatory" In addition, the Social Security Administration Notice would have to cite the law that required you to fill out the form and provide the information. (See again the IRS Notice where it states: "Our legal right to ask for the information is Internal Revenue Code sections.. Your response is mandatory under these sections.") If we return to the IRS Privacy Notice, there is a sentence that helps put the final nail in the coffin of the Social Security Administration Notice and the so-called "requirement" that Americans must secure a Social Security number/card. Paragraph 4 states, in part: "You are not required to provide information requested on a form that is subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act unless the form displays a valid OMB control number." The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number is usually found in the upper right hand corner of federal forms. A review of the Application for a Social Security card (Form SS-5) shows that it has been assigned OMB NO. 0960-0066. When the Department of Health and Human Service, Social Security Administration, applied for approval of the form and assignment of the OMB control number, it was required to submit to the Office of Management and Budget a packet of information. Attached to this packet is an OMB form known as "Standard Form 83-Request for OMB Review." The form is filled out by the agency seeking approval of their form and assignment on an OMB number. Keep in mind, the response to the questions on Standard Form 83 cited below were filled in by the Social Security Administration. The answers to questions 13 and 24 state: 13. Abstract - The information obtained on form SS-5 is used to assign Social Security numbers to individuals so that they may obtain employment, report earnings, open bank accounts, pay taxes, apply for benefits and for other purposes. The affected public consists of individuals who apply for Social Security numbers. 24. Respondents' obligation to comply (check strongest obligation that applies) 1 __ Voluntary. As shown on this government generated and approved form, Americans are not legally obligated to apply for a Social Security number/card. The requirement only applies, as stated on the form, if you want to obtain or retain a (government) benefit. This raises some interesting questions about Social Security. * Since the requirement to secure a Social Security number/card only applies if you want to obtain or retain a government benefit, how can individuals who have not applied for the government benefit called Social Security, or secured a number, be compelled to pay Social Security taxes? * Since Americans were not required to apply for the government benefit called Social Security, what legal recourse do Americans have against the federal government and employers for deceiving them into applying for a number and signing-up for the benefit as a condition of employment? * Since the average American was tricked into applying for the government benefit called Social Security and securing a number under the guise of being legally required, what is the procedure for rescinding your application for a Social Security number based on fraud and/or withdrawing from the government benefit program? (FN-3) If politicians and government bureaucrats had attempted to perpetrate this type of fraud and deception on the people following the American Revolution, the people would have tar and feathered them after whipping their asses in the street. In modern America, the usurpers are rewarded with huge salaries, political perks, and extravagant retirement packages. Then, to add insult to injury, Americans donate their time and money to help get the thieving bastards who are robbing them blind re-elected to office. What a country! (FN-1) The reader will note that when the Social Security Administration is required to comply with the law, the statement from their website that "you need it (Social Security number) to get a job" becomes "you may not be able to get a job." If there is no legal requirement to get the number, how can you be denied a job for not having one? (FN-2) The author got this packet directly from the Office of Management and Budget. (FN-3) Since there is no general requirement to have a Social Security number, the federal government has taken deception to a new level by coercing parents into signing their newborn up for the government benefit called Social Security as a condition of claiming the child as a tax deduction. No number-no deduction. Thus, the child will already have the number when they apply for their first job. How convenient! This raises a question in my mind. How can the child be compelled to participate in a government program, when they become an adult and get their first job, if they were enrolled in the program by someone else without their knowledge and consent?
Some other, related reading: The Flawed Second Amendment Debate The Second Amendment and the Preamble to the Bill of Rights Another Look at the Wording of the Second Amendment Tell me why the States needed the so-called "Collective Right" Second Amendment? The Second Amendment is an Individual Right A Question For The Supreme Court
Now Available! See Editor's review here. "The Bill
of Rights Does Not Grant You Any Constitutional Rights" $10.00-includes shipping and any applicable sales tax. P.S.C.S. Email any questions concerning the book/booklet to Bob at-govtnitwit [at] yahoo.com
Robert
Greenslade focuses his writing on issues surrounding the federal government
and the Constitution. He believes politicians at the federal level, through
ignorance or design, are systematically dismantling the Constitution in
an effort to expand their power and consolidate control over the American
people. He has dedicated himself to resurrecting the true intent of the
Constitution in the hope that the information will contribute, in some
small way, to restoring the system of limited government established by
the Constitution.
If you are interested in finding out more about the Constitution, take a look at this book. I use it in many of my articles and it is the best book I've found on this subject. Bob Reprint of the 1868 edition. ''Perhaps the ablest analysis of the nature and character of the federal government that has ever been published. It has remained unanswered.'' This review of Judge Story's Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States is perhaps the ablest analysis of the nature and character of the Federal Government that has ever been published. It has remained unanswered. Indeed, we are not aware that any attempt has been made to challenge the soundness of its reasoning. The great vise of Judge Story and the Federalists consisted in desiring the clothe the federal government with almost monarchical power, whereas the States had carefully and resolutely reserved the great mass of political power for themselves. The powers which they delegated to the federal government were few, and were general in their character. Those which they reserved embraced their original and inalienable sovereignty, which no state imagined it was surrendering when it adopted the constitution. Mr. Madison dwelt with great force upon the fact that ''a delegated is not a surrendered power.'' The states surrendered no powers to the federal government -- they only delegated them. 160 pages. |
Please see the bottom of the page for Bob's book offer. Archives The 2004 Declaration of Independence The Constitution and YOU Part 1 The Constitution and YOU Part 2 The Constitution and YOU Part 3l "Government of the People, by the People and for the People" -- or Not? Are the Barry Bonds' Record-Setting Baseballs Subject to the Federal Income Tax? Tell me why the States needed the so-called "Collective Right" Second Amendment? Rudy Giuliani shows his Ignorance of the Second Amendment The Second Amendment is an Individual Right A Question For The Supreme Court The Second Amendment Question before the Supreme Court is Constitutionally Flawed and Dangerous It's Time To Break Out The Torches And Pitchforks! Constitution to Hillary, Obama and McCain Congress Makes the Laws not the President Do the American People really want Liberty and Constitutional Government? The Real ID Act proves the Federal Government is Not the All Powerful Oz Complete Archives for Robert Greenslade
| |||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||||
|
|
