Time to say goodbye to Social Security cards ?

Dom,

Are you offered a choice over information  which is collected about you now?
How about you IRS tax returns?
They have a lot of information about you right there.  Add to that credit card purchase information, posting on social media--Facebook and here.
This chip just organizes it all.

When "chat rooms" first appeared on the Internet, I made the mistake of "chatting."  I was single.  I used a false name fully feeling confident that protected privacy.  It did not and I believed I eliminated all "chats."  Time passed and I only used the Internet for work.  Then I published Arirang: The Bamboo Connection and found I needed to promote and that was when I put up a MySpace, later a web site, then Facebook, then Digg, then Stumbleupon, then Book Marketing Network and Book Town and the list goes on.  I was still careful not to reveal my home address or phone number.  I was advised to open a business.  I did so and registered a business fictitious name (name of the filing) with the State of Florida who promptly listed my home address, my phone number and everything but my SS# online. 

Putting the home address in Google brought up a map to my residence.  Putting my residence address in Google brought up the information from the database with home owner property value and tax information.  So far, just about every detail of my life is open season except my ss#

However, now all the social media are asking for security questions and cell phone numbers to "update and recover accounts." 

Ancestry.com has all the birth and death information of a family and more.

All online banking uses the social security number and so do some other accounts.  Chrome remembers all the data put in a form anywhere and "auto fills" the next form.  If you ever used a ss# in an online form, Chrome has it.

The census has it all; the IRS has some, too.  Any job for which you apply does a background check and some clerk has all that info.  I requested a copy of mine for a job in Miami - it went back twenty years with every address, marriage, traffic ticket, etc. 

I think the Internet just took us all by overwhelm in the damage it could do to privacy and even the agencies requesting info thought it was transparency to post online - or worse yet, sold the listings to a data mining agency.

I've just accepted the inevitable.  I do think, as the government has tried with the credit reporting legislation (a free yearly credit report from the three main reporting agencies) that if we have lost all privacy, we do need to know the sum total of the information about us.

It's a two-way street.  People have a right to know what is on that chip, and the opportunity to address any misinformation or outdated data.

And the same openness needs to be required of the officials who are doing the deciding.

What is their income? What taxes do they pay?  Where do they keep their money and how much do they have?  What do they spend it on?

What's good for the goose....

Back to the 1% who control and are not transparent.  Oligarchy.

alj wrote:

It's a two-way street.  People have a right to know what is on that chip, and the opportunity to address any misinformation or outdated data.

And the same openness needs to be required of the officials who are doing the deciding.

What is their income? What taxes do they pay?  Where do they keep their money and how much do they have?  What do they spend it on?

What's good for the goose....

Good goal and good luck!

We need to pick our battles. Do we prefer privacy or terrorist attacks
We can't expect safety without cooperation.
Times have changed.

What will happen is that if you do not want to have the chip and disclose all your soul, you will not get a loan to buy a house or enlarge your business, or get a visa, or a passport, or enroll in college, ...well the gov will have you by the balls.  They do already.
Love,
Betty

Alice,
 The people the IRS went after were against Obama. Here are two questions the IRS asked those people;

"What books have you read? Give us a detail what the books are about."
"What do you ask for when you pray?"

Why does the IRS have to know what you are reading, and what you pray about?

I have no knowledge of this.

6/16/2013

                  Alice..
                          It's true what DOminic says, they have asked the most stupidist
                 questions of these people, I would even be offended !

                                                              Cheers  Joe..

Naturally Tea Partiers would be against Obama.  They wanted tax deductions.  Should political parties
get tax breaks?   I think not.
All of us will need to pay higher taxes so they can have a break.
I am offended that they wished to be tax exempt.

This is just another ploy to make Sarah Palin look like she has a brain instead of an empty shell of John McClain's brain.  Trash!

6/16/2013

                     I can't stand her voice ! I think all organizations including Churches
                     understand me , read my lips, " NOT GET TAX EXEMPTIONS !" Even
                     all political parties !

                                                                 Cheers.........Joe...

WE AGREE!

The IRS has no business going after people who are against Obama. They have broken the law. Some congress men want to get rid of the IRS, and give everybody a flat 25% tax.
When the IRS wants to know what you say in your praying, things are out of hand.
 With a flat 25%, you can make out your tax on a post card.

6/16/2013

                     FLAT TAX 25% , FLAT TAX 25% , FLAT TAX 25%

                      YES ! FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAAATTTTTT  TTTTTTAAAAXXXXXXX

                                               CHEERS....Joe...

Great idea!

Quote :

We need to pick our battles. Do we prefer privacy or terrorist attacks.

This is a false dichotomy. It's not either/or. Apparently the government has been collecting this info for years, but they didn't see (or ignored?) the many red flags the Boston bombers waved. The Ft. Hood shooter, too. Oh wait, that's probably because mosques are off-limits to surveillance. That makes sense, right?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/13/mosques-limits-government-snooping-2011-ibd-editor/

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/16/IRS-Supervisor-in-DC-Obama-Donor-Reviewed-Tea-Party-Applications

This is some amazing stuff, both the actions and the lying about it. You think once data is collected on us -what we read, post, buy, etc., -and analyzed, we won't be put in the pile that says "ignore" or "scrutinize more closely" because someone doesn't like our political opinions? It's not about protecting us from terrorism at all.

The origins of the tea party included all parties.  It was a philosophy, not a political party.

DK said:  

Quote :

The origins of the tea party included all parties.  It was a philosophy, not a political party.

This is not about political parties or the office of the president.  This is about the way certain government agencies have worked for some time, on their own, as parties go in and out of power.  Whenever another secret is revealed (which is what Revelation is all about,  Eyes immediately turn to the party in power as the source.  It would be so much more convenient if that were true: Vote the suckers out of office and it's fixed and we are still in control.  But the problem is in the system itself.

Our "democracy" is designed to keep the powerful in power, and those powerful few have no real party affiliation.  The way to take away their power is to continue exposing their secrets.  When the general public has knowledge of what goes on behind the closed doors of these independent government agencies, they will stop allowing them to function in ways that benefit the few at the expense of the many.

Knowledge is Power.  It is a far more powerful tool than violence

Revelation is about secrets being revealed.  The Biblical version that I quoted earlier in this discussion is a metaphor for a universal truth.  Whatever is hidden away in secret - whenever a few people withhold knowledge and replace the truth with convenient lies, they gain control.  They lose that control when the agenda becomes public knowledge.

We are in the process of massive change in the way the world works.

We do not need to blindly accept circumstances that rob us of freedom and personal power.  It will do no good to place the blame on President Obama.  He is not the cause.  The system that operates outside established governmental process of elections is the problem, and we are becoming more aware of their existence, not just here but around the world.  People are not robots or programmable objects.

That is the message and realization that is creating the future.

Okay, what are we going to do about it?  Gripe complain, blame?

I agree with Ann's analysis up to the part where the people have any control.  We are too caught up in our own comforts to take the risks that are part of revolutions.  Too many rights and powers have been given away already for that very reason.  We don't participate in the political process.  We participate in our own little world of comfort, regardless of how meager that comfort may be.  We gave away our choices to the powerful few - who are members of the party that provides them with the most benefits at any given time.  Our Congress and our Administration are actors on a stage, looking like they have power but actually possessing very little.  If they all went home - and stayed there - the country would pretty much go on as usual for quite a while until legislation started sunsetting.

Facebook is now called the nation of Facebook. It is global. 

Those who control politics, commerce, and the fortunes of the world are global. The best we can do is vote for things in our little communities and participate on local boards and commissions.  There we still have a little power.

We're not going to stop the invasion into privacy.  We can probably gain an awareness of how deep it goes.

Quote :

The origins of the tea party included all parties.  It was a philosophy, not a political party.

DK -not sure what you mean, or what difference it makes. People with specific "philosophies" will be targeted, then. Or is that what you were saying?

Some people have said "good" to the TP being targeted, since they're not a social welfare organization deserving of tax exemptions. This is true, but according to the article I posted, similar "liberal" groups got that status.

Quote :

I agree with Ann's analysis up to the part where the people have any control.  We are too caught up in our own comforts to take the risks that are part of revolutions.

People with unpopular opinions have been run out of jobs and homes. This is way beyond "comforts."