SSA & IRS

[Malsem]

Then I would have to say you are more the fortunate.  I don't know that I could say, "the exception to the rule," but it would certainly be illogical to say, "well, then, I guess that means it must be fine for everyone of any situation."

Regardless, it's good that you haven't had any negative feelings or repercussions as a result of the experience.

-M

[Gabo]

I'd have to pay SS tax by law even if I cancelled my number and whatnot

Not necessarily.
Why would you pay into the SS system if you weren't a SS member?

[AmerTownCrier]

So, if you forfeit your SSN, how do you function within the economy?

It's not always easy. But then, anybody who thinks gaining back our freedom is going to be easy forgets that we are dealing with an imbeded 'system' and it's going to protect itself anyway it can...even if it means taking away your rights. And if you do think it's going to be easy...please don't move to New Hampshire. None of your ideas will probably work very well because you are thinking or hoping there's a 'magic bullet' to be used.

For example, if you intend to purchase land or a home, and you need a loan, you must have an SSN for a secular loan.  Unless you inherit money or win the lottery, I don't see how you can opt-out.  Otherwise, aren't you limited to working at gas stations and living out of a tent with your family?

As far as purchasing or selling property....use an LLC or trust. Jobs? Well, a statement of citizenship can work better yet...the best solution is SELF EMPLOYMENT! Also, if it isn't worth living in a tent as a free family...then what's the alternative? It's also a great freedom business for someone to start up. A bank/lending insitution I mean. If I 'inherit' money I'll use it for that...I promise I won't ask account holders for an SSN.   It won't be winning the lotterty that does it though...they want an SSN before they pay you.   

As well, many places (like the town dump) do not accept cash, only checks.  And if I get paid by check, I have to have an account in order to cash it.  So with money in the bank, I'm subject to service charges and fees in a ridiculous way.

No, you don't need an account if you go to the issuers bank. If they refuse to cash it...then they are essentially saying there are insufficient funds. Postal Money orders are also a great tool to use.

Then there's this whole tax thing.  I do not support the things for which taxes pay on a federal or state level--except maybe the school system that facilitates my kids--and even then I'm still fighting uphill battles with the schools.

'this whole tax thing' is the point. Your SSN is your Taxpayer Identification Number.

But paying a tax on the money I earn is simple thievery--a subdued mugging.  Paying for land is absurd in the first place, but then having to pay a tax on it is outright stealing, as well, like paying the bully at school for "protection."  Losing your SSN doesn't resolve the tax-paying issue, as far as I know (and please enlighten me if I'm incorrect . . . PLEASE), it only removes you from the "benefits" of social security when you're retired.  So what's the deal?

Yes, it does remove you from the tax roles and responsibilities. Only 'taxpayers' pay the tax...and without going into great detail...the SSN is...I repeat...your Taxpayer Idendtification Number. Only taxpayers have it. Foreigners mainly as well as privileged occupations...ie: alcohol, tobbaco and firearms.
As far as Social security...just what do you expect to get back when you retire? More paper money that will be worth less in the future then it is now? And for that 'benefit' you lower your current standard of living to hope for a future benefit?

It's not for everyone. I'm never going to say flat out to anyone..."Stop using your SSN and stop paying taxes"! I'd be just as happy getting to New Hampshire where there are at least enough people who understand the laws and support those of us who do not participate in the theft.

-M

[AmerTownCrier]

But paying a tax on the money I earn is simple thievery--a subdued mugging.  Paying for land is absurd in the first place,

This statement almost got by me. Are you really saying 'paying for land' is absurb? Or did you mean paying taxes on it is absurb?

[Malsem]

Okay.  I'm a NH resident.  I have a business--self employed.  My SSN is still required on top of my EIN for loans, accounts, etc.  As well, as an LLC, I'm still considered a "sole proprietor," which seems like a load of crap to me.

As far as living in a tent goes, once again, it comes down to having kids.  It just ain't gonna fly.  I want them to be free, not restricted.  If I had my druthers, we'd all be living in huts as it is.  But that ain't gonna happen either.

Paying for land is absurd.  Land isn't a commodity, and it can be parcelled no more than you could subdivide your skin.  I think this is where I diverge from this group.  We all seem to dislike the present system, I just happen to take it a step further and dislike modern concepts of our perceptions of nature and spirit, as well.

I had an employee at one point.  He tried to cash a check at my bank, and they wouldn't let him do it without an account.  Fortunately, I was there, and I convinced the teller that it was my account from which he was making the withdrawal, and it worked out.  But not without effort.  I've also been declined in attempting to cash other people's checks at their own banks without having my own account there.

The whole SS "benefit" thing seems sketchy, too.  I don't put much stock into it (except what they steal).  It's annoying paying for the former generation's welfare while I'm also trying to clean up the phenomenal mess they left behind for my grandchildren to deal with, as well.

Paying for land isn't right.  Especially considering on a general basis that the people who have the most money to buy the land are also the ones who tend to either know the least about it, or rape it perpetually.  And this whole thing about people inheriting millions of dollars worth of land and houses . . . UUUGHH, does that make me sick.

However, if I am forced to function within this system, I don't see any option but to pay for a parcel for my family and my work.  But I work for the money.  It's no damned dowry.

Taxes, though, are outright piracy.  I love the loophole of representation.  I don't agree with the representation, but technically, I'm not being taxed without documented representation.  It's kind of like freedom of speech.  You can say whatever you want, but it won't get printed or broadcasted unless it's what people want to hear.

Thanks for taking time to respond.

-M

[AmerTownCrier]

Okay.  I'm a NH resident.  I have a business--self employed.  My SSN is still required on top of my EIN for loans, accounts, etc.  As well, as an LLC, I'm still considered a "sole proprietor," which seems like a load of crap to me.

Look into a New Mexico LLC. They provide the necessary 'numbers' and your checks from clients can be made out to the LLC.

As far as living in a tent goes, once again, it comes down to having kids.  It just ain't gonna fly.  I want them to be free, not restricted.  If I had my druthers, we'd all be living in huts as it is.  But that ain't gonna happen either.

Your kids don't like to camp out? And saying you want them to be free, not restricted is what is happening now.

Paying for land is absurd.  Land isn't a commodity, and it can be parcelled no more than you could subdivide your skin.  I think this is where I diverge from this group.  We all seem to dislike the present system, I just happen to take it a step further and dislike modern concepts of our perceptions of nature and spirit, as well.

Land isn't a commodity? You are absolutely correct...this is a major divergence from this group. Socialism DOESN'T WORK! Exhibit A...Social Security.

I had an employee at one point.  He tried to cash a check at my bank, and they wouldn't let him do it without an account.  Fortunately, I was there, and I convinced the teller that it was my account from which he was making the withdrawal, and it worked out.  But not without effort.  I've also been declined in attempting to cash other people's checks at their own banks without having my own account there.

Unless they are willing to say there are insufficient funds..they will cash it with the exception of telling you it's too much for them to handle...and that's another can of worms that fractional reserve banks don't like to talk about. The point I suppose...is it did work...even if it took an effort.

Paying for land isn't right.  Especially considering on a general basis that the people who have the most money to buy the land are also the ones who tend to either know the least about it, or rape it perpetually.  And this whole thing about people inheriting millions of dollars worth of land and houses . . . UUUGHH, does that make me sick.

You really might be on the wrong website. Are we all 'entitled' to a piece of property? If so, how much? Who decides? It would require taxes of all types to finance 'giving' me a piece of property...so again...welcome to the need for a social security type program. And you made the point of saying you work for your property and it's not a dowry...the farmer who sells some of his land worked for his land as well...why should he be told to give it to you?

[Malsem]

Look into a New Mexico LLC. They provide the necessary 'numbers' and your checks from clients can be made out to the LLC.

I don't know that I wholly understand this, but it is intriguing.

Your kids don't like to camp out? And saying you want them to be free, not restricted is what is happening now.

This is simplistic.  If you have children, one of whom is autistic, and you're living in a tent, and you're running a business, and there is no issue, then I'm dying to know how it's done.

Land isn't a commodity? You are absolutely correct...this is a major divergence from this group. Socialism DOESN'T WORK! Exhibit A...Social Security.

What the heck is Socialism?  And what does it have to do with the Earth being a living organism?

Unless they are willing to say there are insufficient funds..they will cash it with the exception of telling you it's too much for them to handle...and that's another can of worms that fractional reserve banks don't like to talk about. The point I suppose...is it did work...even if it took an effort.

I'm sorry but this is just not true.  I'm more than willing to try again, but based upon experience, it doesn't happen.

You really might be on the wrong website. Are we all 'entitled' to a piece of property? If so, how much? Who decides? It would require taxes of all types to finance 'giving' me a piece of property...so again...welcome to the need for a social security type program. And you made the point of saying you work for your property and it's not a dowry...the farmer who sells some of his land worked for his land as well...why should he be told to give it to you?

Boy, does this open up a whole new dimension and barrels of worms.

Yes, we are entitled to live on the land.  However, we are not entitled to overpopulate it.  Natural law always outweighs manmade law.

Natural Selection and Survival of the Fittest are determining factors.  But manmade laws are "equalizers."  There is so much damaging repercussion that you can't even imagine because of this concept. 

Your body is made up of roughly the same proportions of elements as the Earth.  We are inexorably a part of this planet and all things that live on it.  There is no separation unless we make a separation of spirit and respect.  When we treat the land as a commodity, and we treat other life as a commodity, we damage ourselves and force a disease on our progeny.  Our system fosters this, not only politically, but philosophically, as well.

But this is beside the point . . . just a little.

-M



[/quote]

[cathleeninnh]

I am also bothered by the bank thing. I have seen the signs that say they won't cash checks for someone without an account. Now, I only took one banking course in college and it was, ahem, some time ago, but isn't a check still an order to pay? I write the check and order the bank to pay so and so. If so and so shows up and can prove he is so and so, how can the bank not pay? I should be able to sue the bank if they don't pay on my order, right? I am the customer, dad burnit!

Cathleen

[Malsem]

See, that's what I think.

If a client gives me a check, it's a "token" for money--which, oddly, is just another token.

But when I take it to the client's bank, should the client's account not be ready to deliver the exchange?  Otherwise, isn't it fraud?

But then there's this whole convenience of "two days to clear for in-state checks," garbage.  What kind of crap is that in the "computer age" where everything happens in a micro-second?

I think it's a gimmick to try to get people to become bank customers.  Otherwise, it's just another federal finger with a tight grip.

-M