From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 11:02:05 -0800 (PST)
To: "Timothy C. May" <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Children and Privacy
Message-ID: <3.0b36.32.19961112110803.0075a02c@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 12:31 AM 11/12/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote:
>(Side note: Jim McCoy's suggestion that kids can be kept off the
>parental-unit's tax returns and thus not get a SS number is fraught with
>problems. Many schools--including public schools--use the SS number for
>various internal and tracking reasons. 

Anyone who turns their children over to puiblic schools cannot be very
interested in privacy since public schools are the major pathway that
governments use to exert social controls on families.  In addition to all
the paperwork on and tracking of the children, public schools record and
track the families.  The various state child protective services agencies
use information derived from schools to control children and parents.  If
you are not on welfare and do not have your children in a government
school, you will almost never come to the attention of those authorities.

>Even if the kid is free of SS
>numbers until he's a teenager--at a cost of thousands of dollars a year in
>IRS deductions not taken--he'll essentially have to have an SS number in

The "fine" for not listing your kids SS# on returns is minor ($50) and is
not usually assesed in any case.  You can still deduct them.  Also those
millions of parents who don't file their returns don't face the problem
either.

>his high school years, for a variety of reasons. Maybe this can be avoided,
>but I doubt the reward is worth the hassles.)

It is very rare to have an SS# bounced back at you if you just make one up
which is valid on its face.  This applies to both schools and jobs.

DCF