Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thanks again for screwing up the USA!
Author Message
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #1
Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thanks again for screwing up the USA!
I was just referring to this in another thread on minimum wage, and lo and behold, clicked on a top news story from yahoo:

21-Year-Old Sues Parents for College Tuition — and Wins
https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/21-year-...31362.html

This is exactly the kind of lunacy this law promotes, and it is destroying the country.

I'll copy my post from the other thread so this discussion can continue here.
(This post was last modified: 12-09-2014 05:41 PM by GoodOwl.)
12-09-2014 05:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #2
RE: Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thnaks again for screwing up the USA
(12-08-2014 02:22 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(12-08-2014 12:50 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  When folks are underpaid, we end up paying for the shortfall through things like food stamps and assistance. The net result is that you can get the government to subsidize your business, unwillingly, if you just underpay people.

OR you get people to live within their means as opposed to having someone who only has the skills for a minimum wage job living on their own, owning a car, having a 50 inch flat screen and an iPhone 6+. (euphemisms for making bad decisions that result in never having anything but a min wage job)

The fact is that the minimum wage doesn't really have much of an impact on the poor. I'm going from memory but according to the CBO, it only impacts about 25% of the poor. The other 75% are either on assistance or earn a wage slightly above the minimum wage already...

The way to force wages higher is to do what Reagan, Clinton and Bush (to varying degrees and with varying degrees of success) did and focus on a greatly expanding economy which pulled people off of unemployment, out of retirement and even out of the home because of the high demand and relatively high pay/advancement for relatively low skills... GIVING them the skills they needed for higher paying jobs, even when the economy slowed.

All this does is increase the 'skills required' for something greater than a minimum wage job.

I agree with some of your points here Ham, but most everyone in this thread is omitting one huge and very relevant factor in the room that skews the whole thing and causes much of the trouble in the first place: Social Security Act Title IV, Part (D) which amounts to de facto slavery.

Social Security Act Title IV, Part (D) reduces and/or eliminates incentives for people to try when they have better opportunities, and keeps much of the country mired in a cycle of socially supported endless poverty for the sake of enriching the state, the judges and those who are the tax-free recipients of their ill-gotten gains with not a lick of accountability for it.

You can raise or lower minimum wage to $100 or to $1 and it won't really matter a lick until you Remove Social Security Act Title IV, Part (D) from the legal system and begin addressing one of the main causes of this whole American poverty/entitlement mess.
12-09-2014 05:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #3
RE: Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thnaks again for screwing up the USA
(12-09-2014 12:43 PM)Crebman Wrote:  
(12-09-2014 12:41 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Can you elaborate on this (so I don't have to read government writings on it). I'm not familiar with that particular section (or described that way)

Ditto!

see OP this thread and my response below
12-09-2014 05:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #4
RE: Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thnaks again for screwing up the USA
(12-09-2014 12:41 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(12-08-2014 10:33 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I agree with some of your points here Ham, but most everyone in this thread is omitting one huge and very relevant factor in the room that skews the whole thing and causes much of the trouble in the first place: Social Security Act Title IV, Part (D) which amounts to de facto slavery.


Can you elaborate on this (so I don't have to read government writings on it). I'm not familiar with that particular section (or described that way)

I was being purposefully vague to encourage people to just try to read it (emphasis on try.)

I'm no lawyer, but I've been spending time late nights and weekends trying to get through some of these byzantine state and federal statutes and decipher what is going on. I thought things were messed up and needed some work before I was "invited" to become involved in this nastiness, but it is not until you spend some time going through this garbage bit by bit that you begin to see how harmful some of these sacred cow laws that many people treat like scriptural truth really are.

It's "fun" to start with sections 455 and 458 of Title IV Part (D) and work out from there. Those deal partially with the incentives the federal and state governments have to enslave innocent people in the scheme through coercion, doublespeak and bait and switch techniques.

In the name of doing one thing perceived as "helpful," theses laws and subsequently created policies actually are accomplishing the exact opposite, and perpetuating both the cycle of poverty they purport to be alleviating for the most vulnerable citizens, intentionally stunting and stagnating the otherwise free-market growth this country was founded to promote in contrast to other oppressive systems around the world, removing from productivity great swaths of capital and talent and finally, institutionalizing a "Hunger Games" mentality among authorities to ensnare ever more people in a grab for money, control and power never, ever intended or even foreseen by the original creators of the Act, let alone the Constitution.

The scary part is this overarching theme runs consistently throughout both Federal and State Statutes and legal systems I have explored in all states. Most people think these are good laws that "protect" the people. They have in most cases nothing to do with the Constitution, and often oppose the rights and values contained within directly.

The result is largely the incredibly bloated, inefficient, ineffective and completely unaffordable social government system we have had in this country since the late 1960s. Most people do not know where it comes from or how we got here because they are not going to sit down and read just a little of this and think about the implications--they're too busy playing the latest "Halo" game on their X-Boxes or whatever. The few that are aware keep silent and kick the can, feeding the beast because they have no earthly idea how to stop it and fear the consequences of having to replace it.

There is a simple, elegant answer to all of this (nothing to do with minimum wage, but it would effectively help raise wages and create stability for most everyone), BUT it would result in things neither the American people or those who control its government want:

result: +A strong country based on the Constitutional values and intent of those who originally founded this government (including the idea that slavery, in any form is wrong and against all people's inalienable rights),
result: +a balanced budget resulting from the lack of need for any of the social systems and bureaucracy due to the very problems they were created for but can never solve themselves actually being otherwise largely solved,
result: +a people who clearly as Americans, whatever their backgrounds, represented the best of what humanity has to offer,
result: +a smaller, more focused and efficient government,
result: +dramatically reduced crime, poverty and far less inequality
result: +a more stable and reliable growth economy,
result: +a strong, reliable and growing middle class,
result: +freedom for anyone to be upwardly mobile, and
result: +fear in our enemies because what we are doing would be working and people would once again clamor to be more like America and seek to be friendly with it, which would create tremendous wealth for America and the entire world.

Most people don't want any part of those things. Their actions, choices and behaviors prove it.
12-09-2014 05:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #5
RE: Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thanks again for screwing up the USA!
Disclaimer: If you've been through it yourself, bad as I and too many others have, you'll more than understand my tone in this post. If you only know it from the outside, there's no way I could ever explain how it messes with you. The worst part is the knowledge that it is all completely unnecessary and literally based on a lie.

Now, back to the OP. I'm going to go through the article step by step and expose the example of how this seemingly unrelated (in the thread title) Social Security Act is actually the cause of the imbecilic entitlement attitude and resulting lawsuit by a spoiled brat, and that's just one of hundreds of millions of instances of the same thing over and over for 40 years:

from the article:
21-Year-Old Sues Parents for College Tuition — and Wins
https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/21-year-...31362.html

"New Jersey case precedent established that financially capable divorced parents should contribute to the tuition of qualified students."

1. Stop: Exactly WHO determines if the parents are "financially capable?", why the bureaucrats in the government, of course!
WHAT gives them the right to do that? Why Social Security Title IV Part (D)!
WHY? Divorce-the American Dream for happiness! (because nobody should have to stay unhappy, right?) Let's continue to see how all this plays out, now that everyone can have the right to not be unhappy, and it's nobody's fault (it just happens.)

2a. It matters not that the 'child' in question is a 21-year-old adult.

2b. She doesn't have to go get a job and work for her own tuition, you know, like the dinosaurs did back in the pre-historic ages; she doesn't have to take out her own loans; she doesn't have to save money by going to a less-expensive school even (she wants to go to Temple University in Philadelphia at a starting cost quoted as 'only' $16,000 (the cost of a brand new car!!) but does not include extra costs of room, board, books, etc...etc...) she only...and this is key...has to WANT it:
again from the article: "But all is not settled: In October, Caitlyn Ricci also sued her parents for another $16,000 in tuition from Philadelphia’s Temple University, where she is currently a student. In October, a judge ruled in her favor, but Michael Ricci and McGarvey are planning to appeal, saying their daughter didn’t apply for all eligible loans and scholarships, The Inquirer reported. They are raising funds for their appeal through a GoFundme account."

2c. So now the parents are (separately or jointly, it does not clearly specify) soliciting other money from the public to pay for lawyers (there are those wonderful, helpful people again!) to fight paying for their adult child's tuition which they voluntarily do not feel they can afford. Remember, since they are divorced, they no longer have the rights to make those kind of decisions for themselves ever again. They become slaves to the state.

Let's continue the fun from the article:

"It varies state by state, but generally, when people get divorced (couldn't expect to bring this case and win without that one little detail there--you lose your Constitutional freedoms and rights at the moment you bring the word divorce into your life--or have someone do it involuntarily to you--becoming a de facto slave to the whim of the state; and if you're the payor/respondant, you're a double slave!) and they have kids that aren’t in college, they determine what their obligations are for college expenses,” Nicole Onorato, a family law attorney (there's another wonderful helpful person again! Yay!) at K*** & S****** in Chicago, tells Yahoo Parenting. “If the court orders at the time of the divorce – or at the time the kid is ready for college – that parents have to contribute, a kid can ask the court to enforce that.”

3. So your adult kid can sue you for something you have determined that you can't afford and may have even pre-specified in the divorce wasn't going to happen, now the courts can, under this law, ignore the agreement and force you to pay anyway, just because the 21-year old adult 'child' wants it. You have effectively been further enslaved, this time by your adult 'child,' with the assistance of SSA Title IV, Part (D).

Article continues:

"Though Onorato hasn’t seen the original divorce agreement between Michael Ricci and McGarvey, she says she’s not surprised the court ruled in favor of Caitlyn Ricci. “States see their obligations to children as primary,” she says." (couldn't help but notice it's a female attorney here, but male attorneys are just as despicable when they can make a buck off this garbage.)

4. Oh, really? States want to help the children? BS! 01-rivals
States see the money grab and continued control as primary. Let's back up to the article for a little background:

"Relations have been strained between Caitlyn Ricci and her parents for some time. In February, 2013, Caitlyn Ricci moved in with her grandparents. The reason for the move is in debate: McGarvey told the court her daughter left because she was asked to do chores and follow a curfew, and also because she had drinking problems. Caitlyn Ricci said she left in part over a dispute about summer classes, according to The Inquirer.

In a November post on her blog, McGarvey wrote about her daughter’s problems with alcohol abuse, and explained that she set strict rules if her daughter was going to live at home: “This plan included a full-time job, household chores, a curfew, and for her to register for three summer classes,” she writes. “The only part of our plan that she had a problem with was the three summer classes. She chose to move out of my house instead of following the rules we established. She packed her things, and moved into her paternal grandparent’s house.”

5. Okay, okay--hey the 'kid' is 21 and likes to "party" with alcohol (and who knows what else) so what's wrong with that--isn't THAT the whole purpose of college? Get drunk and get laid, right? Smoke a little ganga herb while there maybe? Hang with the boys 'hitting it' when they please, perhaps (who knows)? That's all cool--or so Hollywood keeps reminding us, right? (not that anyone would ever be influenced by what they see and hear in the media.)


Back to the attorney:

“If you have a kid who is serious about college education, I would imagine these cases will usually fall in favor of the children.”

6. What happened to 'serious' adult college students having to take responsibility for themselves? Oh, that's so 1950's, Dad (and you can bet it will be Dad who ends up paying, not Mom.)

Onorato says she expects to see more of these cases come up as college tuition rises. “We’re talking about 20, 30, 40 grand a year,” she says. “For some people that will be a big burden. As the cost of tuition skyrockets, there will be more people who are unable to meet that obligation and the ripple effect will be more kids suing parents for college since they cant afford it on their own.”

7. How can they be assured of winning? Well, Social Security Title IV, Part (D) says they can, that's how!

8. Family courts are NOT courts of law (you silly people, where do you get such stupid ideas?)--they are courts of EQUITY (funny term there! see the videos posted below) and thus can ignore the US Constitution:
-Unreasonable searches and seizures? Sure, no problem!
-Forced surrender of property without committing a crime: Absolutely!!
-Subject to the Greatest Amount of Individual and Haphazard "discretion" of any courts: BINGO!!! You're a Winner on "The Price is Right (and you have to pay over and over and over....or else....wait for it because this is REALLY GOOD:
....
....
....
THEY CAN SEND YOU TO DEBTOR'S PRISON!!!!! (What 13th Amendment???...Slavery Rules AGAIN!!! Bring Back the Plantation--Thank you (anti)Family Courts and Thank you Social Security Act!!! Well Done!!!)
http://GA: Debtors’ Prisons – Illegal in...till Used?

Back to the article once again:

"McGarvey continues in the post, which she called 'The Age of Entitlement': “I was very clear with Caitlyn about what [moving out] would mean for her – her father would no longer be required to pay child support, I would no longer have the money to help her pay for college, etc." (Hey, mom, um, if Dad can afford Child Support and taxes on the money he sends, where's your half? Oh, yeah...we're not supposed to ask because it's ..you know...politically incorrect.)

9. So...the MOTHER is calling the adult 'child' spoiled because if the 'child' moved out from living with the MOTHER, then the MOTHER would lose the ability to force the Father to keep up his payments to the MOTHER

(child support is tax free income to the MOTHER, remember. There is no obligation or requirement whatsoever (it's actually illegal to require) of the MOTHER to use it to pay for any actual child support expenses, she can go buy a boat with it, or whatever she wants. There are Zero reporting requirements for this tax-free windfall; in fact, it's illegal to ask for receipts! It can be used on legal expenditures to get more money from the Father--so the more the father can earn, the more the MOTHER can take away from him to spend on layers to keep raising the amounts the Father has to give to the MOTHER so she can get more legal help to get more money from the Father...etc...etc...and the lawyers and judges make money off of it, effectively also from the Father, and the States get a matching dollar for dollar amount from the Federal Government (there's Social Security Title IV, Part (D) again!) for the amounts that their courts order the Father to pay in child support--so what incentive do they have to be "equitable" to the Fathers? Why none, of course! Judge, jury, and executioner, just like in the Consti...oh, yeah, but they don;'t have to follow that dumb document in (anti)family law court (it don't git no better than this, sisters!)

-So....father pays all the taxes--Yippee!) and the Mother isn't required to use any of her own money on her own either she's not paying a d**n thing for all this, remember, but the Father certainly is!)

so the MOTHER wonders in her blog where the adult 'child' got the idea of entitlement from????? Things that make you go Hmmmmmm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF2ayWcJfxo

But just when you think it can't possibly get any better...it somehow does!!

back once again to the article:

"McGarvey, an English teacher, and Michael Ricci, a high school basketball coach, are divorced and have each remarried and have younger children. The New Jersey-based parents say they can’t afford out-of-state college tuition."

9. BEAUTIFUL!!! Thanks to the liberalization of the (anti)family Law courts (which aren't even courts of law, remember?) The Whole Cycle can repeat over and over again--now there are two NEW families who can get divorced with younger kids!!!! HOORAYY!!!! The madness spreads! Is everyone Happy yet????

More money for the state!
More money for the courts!
More money for entitled adult 'child' brats because they "want it" (which we have grown up learning from the liberal school system is a valid enough reason to take from others without permission.)

More taxes to pay for all the social workers, law enforcement sheriffs, clerks, court workers, lawyers (there they are again!) Lawyers are tax-supported when there's child support money to go after for a single or separated or remarried mother---it's all free to everyone with their hands out--oh...but not so for the poor payor (likely the Father) he can't get any free help at all. There are a few small organizations, but none of them have any money to help. Legal Aid WILL NOT help a father in a divorce custody case, but Legal Aid in every state, city and county WILL HELP AND ENFORCE for the MOTHER getting the Father's child support payments established and increased regularly,l and WILL HELP FIGHT any reduction in father's payments regardless of his inability to pay because of job changes, downsizing, health or other hardship. You don't find this out until you ask of course, and by then it's wayyy too late to matter.

So...What the heck is the father's incentive? Might as well give in and just give up and.....go on WELFARE!!!!
The dream of the democrats--another voter, right? Get you some FOOD STAMPS!!! WhOOPIE!!!

OR he can go to JAIL!!!!! For being a "deadbeat dada!!!"
MORE Government workers: security guards, wardens, construction jobs, etc... etc...

See how all the government programs work so WELL together!
Boy, i Loves me some Big Problem-Solving Guv'mint....and now, for the Finale:

These people ARE NOT MINORITIES (Had you fooled, didn't they?) IT CAN AND DOES HAPPEN TO EVERYONE AND ANYONE NO MATTER INCOME, BACKGROUND, EDUCATION LEVEL, RACE-- TYRANNY DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE! God BLESS AMERICA!
[Image: 7e4bbe5db971cd42ceff1dcd65bbfd54e2a8e208.jpg]
Caitlyn Ricci

Now--who's Happy to be first in line to sign up and be next for this?


(This post was last modified: 12-10-2014 12:16 PM by GoodOwl.)
12-09-2014 06:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #6
RE: Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thanks again for screwing up the USA!


12-09-2014 07:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #7
RE: Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thanks again for screwing up the USA!
JAIL!!!!! Without committing a crime!!!! YAY!!!!!


12-09-2014 07:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #8
RE: Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thanks again for screwing up the USA!


12-09-2014 07:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #9
RE: Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thanks again for screwing up the USA!
SSA Title IV Part (D) at it's finest--screw the children:


12-10-2014 11:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
LSU04_08 Offline
Deo Vindice
*

Posts: 18,020
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 234
I Root For: The Deplorables
Location: Bon Temps, La
Post: #10
RE: Social Security Act Title IV Part (D)....thanks again for screwing up the USA!
Damn, Owl, you're not bullshittin are ya!
12-10-2014 12:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.