• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Your Social Security Number is NOT to be Used for Identification

I'm not old enough, but I do remember criticism that it was supposed to be temporariy as well.
 
Last edited:
boyntonstu said:
Your Social Security Number is NOT to be Used for Identification

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/ssn.htm
Click to expand...

Oh, God. This old canard. More epic fail from one of our tame *******.

The legend on the old social security card referred to the CARD, not the number. Federal agencies have been authorized to use SSNs as identification numbers since the 1930s, although the legend was added in 1946 and kept until the 1970s.

But even in the 1940s, it was recognized that the card itself is trivial to forge. So the SSA put the legend on the card to remind people that when you were asked for "identification" (i.e. if you needed to register to vote, renew a driver's license, apply for a library card, buy a beer, whatever), your social security card should not be acceptable as ID.

You want a beer, show me a driver's license. Show me a passport. Show me a military ID. For most of the 1950s or 1960s, showing a student ID or a workplace ID would have worked as well. But the social security card was not valid as "identification" any more than a book with your name written in the flyleaf would have been.

So, more epic fail.

As though the site itself weren't epically failing enough. Here's a hint, *******. If you want us to take your vacuous ravings seriously, don't open threads by linking to a site that says things like:

. THE UNITED STATES IS STILL A BRITISH COLONY
THE UNITED STATES IS STILL A BRITISH COLONY EXTORTING TAXES FOR THE CROWN! A DOCUMENTARY REVIEW OF CHARTERS AND TREATIES August 17, 1996 An introduction by the "Informer" This is
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/bcolony.htm


Queen Elizabeth controls and has amended U.S. Social Security
Queen Elizabeth controls and has amended U.S. Social Security THE ULTIMATE DELUSION Subject: THE ULTIMATE DELUSION Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 17:40:27 EDT From: To the people, I found
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/queen.htm
Click to expand...

Edited by Locknar: 
Breach of Membership Agreement content removed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wait, what, really, the Queen Elizibeth runs the Social Security Admnistration? This explains so much!
 
boyntonsu learned nothing from his fail with being an enthusiastic support of the Orly Obama Birther Lawsuit, which went down in flames yesterday.
 
APFN is a fruitcake site. Anything you find there is going to be nutty.
 
[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 28, Volume 1]
[Revised as of July 1, 2008]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 28CFR16.53]

[Page 290-291]

TITLE 28--JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER I--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

PART 16_PRODUCTION OR DISCLOSURE OF MATERIAL OR INFORMATION--Table of Contents

Subpart D_Protection of Privacy and Access to Individual Records Under
the Privacy Act of 1974

Sec. 16.53 Use and collection of social security numbers.

Each component shall ensure that employees authorized to collect
information are aware:
(a) That individuals may not be denied any right, benefit, or
privilege as a result of refusing to provide their social security
numbers, unless the collection is authorized either by a statute or by a
regulation issued prior to 1975; and

[[Page 291]]

(b) That individuals requested to provide their social security
numbers must be informed of:
(1) Whether providing social security numbers is mandatory or
voluntary;
(2) Any statutory or regulatory authority that authorizes the
collection of social security numbers; and
(3) The uses that will be made of the numbers.

Also read:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2682567/Social-Security-Number-Not-Required
 
Last edited:
boyntonstu said:
[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 28, Volume 1]
[Revised as of July 1, 2008]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 28CFR16.53]

[Page 290-291]

TITLE 28--JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER I--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

PART 16_PRODUCTION OR DISCLOSURE OF MATERIAL OR INFORMATION--Table of Contents

Subpart D_Protection of Privacy and Access to Individual Records Under
the Privacy Act of 1974

Sec. 16.53 Use and collection of social security numbers.

Each component shall ensure that employees authorized to collect
information are aware:
(a) That individuals may not be denied any right, benefit, or
privilege as a result of refusing to provide their social security
numbers, unless the collection is authorized either by a statute or by a
regulation issued prior to 1975; and

[[Page 291]]

(b) That individuals requested to provide their social security
numbers must be informed of:
(1) Whether providing social security numbers is mandatory or
voluntary;
(2) Any statutory or regulatory authority that authorizes the
collection of social security numbers; and
(3) The uses that will be made of the numbers.

Also read:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2682567/Social-Security-Number-Not-Required
Click to expand...

What are you wearing?
 
drkitten said:
Or possibly the boat. Or possibly Queen Elizabeth of Hungary; the minor fact that she died eight hundred years before the SSA was even thought of is the least of boytonsu's plausibility issues.
Click to expand...

Are you so sure about that? Why hasn't she produced a death certificate?
 
boyntonstu said:
Your Social Security Number is NOT to be Used for Identification

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/ssn.htm


For those not old enough to remember what was on a Social Security Card, here is proof.

AFAIK The Law has not been changed.
Click to expand...

Hello. Um...ever since I have had a social security card, I've known that it is supposed to be put in a safe place, not carried with you. I've only had to produce the card itself twice that I can recall, and that was in applications for my new name when married.

Now, at one time here, our drivers license numbers were our SS numbers, and that was changed, primarily, I think, because of identification theft.

Social Security cards would be woefully inadequate ID cards, since there is no picture, just a name and a number.
 
It's a matter of propriety -- the government requiring you to have a unique ID that you must use for just about everything, not just tax-related issues, gives a way to track people. I know it's hard to believe, based on human, and even US history, that misuse of such is even a remote possibility.

It's not about picture IDs, it's about paperwork, and, nowadays, computers. IF there's no number that can represent, uniquely, "me" in the government's (non-tax) databases, then there's no possibility of misuse, is there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom