Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tips_and_tricks] Social Security Benefits:

Expand Messages
  • N. English
    Of course it was not legal , but you have since gone how many years without rebutting the presumption of voluntary ? You must exhaust your administrative
    Message 1 of 54 , Mar 31, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Of course it was not "legal", but you have since gone
      how many years without rebutting the presumption of
      "voluntary"?

      You must exhaust your administrative remedies by
      'noticing' all parties that (under the Doctrine of
      Latches.), you have just this moment recognized that
      you were coerced fraudulently into requesting the
      application and consequently signing it...."because
      you were told by W.T. Grant Company that you had to
      have a social security number in order to continue to
      work at their store in Meriden Conn."..[Which was the
      case with me in 1957.]

      Now you know, (have found out), that there is NO law
      that mandates that you MUST have a SS#, you were
      "misinformed", and that you never would have,
      willingly, knowingly and intentionally pledged your
      future wages to the United States government as a
      direct tax, nor did you ever knowingly want to become
      a 'territorial citizen' subject to the control of
      Congress.

      N.

      --- Tim Costello <timcostello@...> wrote:

      > I was about 14 when I signed mine. I do not
      > remember signing it but I
      > am sure I must have.
      >
      > It was not voluntary (not that someone was sticking
      > a gun to my head)
      > but I was a minor.
      >
      > Is that lawful...signing as a minor when you have no
      > idea what you signed?
      >
      > Tim.
      >
      > N. English wrote:
      > > I disagree.....
      > >
      > > You voluntarily asked for (from an US govt.
      > agency),
      > > and you were given AN APPLICATION to fill out
      > that, if
      > > accepted by the govt. (and they had the right to
      > > reject your application as filled out at will), an
      > > application that would PERMIT you to join into the
      > > Social Security system.
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Frog Farmer
      ... Why would one need a passport, as opposed to just desiring the convenience it may afford? Most countries have provisions for accepting foreigners
      Message 54 of 54 , May 27, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        On May 2, 2006, at 4:23 PM, Grant Innes wrote:

        > The problem is that a certificate may be needed by the child in the
        > future, for example, getting a passport.
        >

        Why would one "need" a passport, as opposed to just desiring the
        convenience it may afford? Most countries have provisions for
        accepting foreigners without them having a passport. A passport just
        means that the current US regime will vouch for you to a foreign
        government. People who are not foreign to that particular government
        can do the same thing. The USA may be respected somewhere still, but
        usually a country respects its own citizens more. With most countries,
        an invitation to visit from one of their nationals, plus that person's
        agreement to be responsible for you while you are there, is enough.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.