Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!xanth!nic.MR.NET!srcsip!jhereg!mark
From: mark@jhereg.Jhereg.MN.ORG (Mark H. Colburn)
Newsgroups: comp.org.ieee
Subject: Re: IEEE Computer Society Membership drive
Message-ID: <880@jhereg.Jhereg.MN.ORG>
Date: 12 May 89 15:06:56 GMT
References: <15908@bellcore.bellcore.com> <508@thor.wright.EDU>
Reply-To: mark@jhereg.MN.ORG (Mark H. Colburn)
Organization: Minnetech Consulting, Inc., St. Paul, MN
Lines: 26

In article <508@thor.wright.EDU> jsloan@thor.UUCP writes:
>And I guess while we're at it, I'd better mention that Social
>Security Numbers are not, and were never intended to be, unique.
>There, that should stir up some discussion.

Ahem.  Exuse me?

It really depends on what you mean by unique.  However, for each social
security number which is currently assigned there had better be exactly one
living person which corresponds to that social security number.

This does not rule out re-using social security numbers once a person dies
and all related social security benefits for that person have been paid.

The reason is that your social security number is essentially an account
number for a "savings account", if you will.  At any time, you may request
a balance on your social security account.  If there is more that one
living person who has the same social security number, benefits will not be
paid to one of the holders (or at least should not be paid, it is the
government you know :-) 

There, that should quiet things back down again :-)

-- 
Mark H. Colburn                          mark@jhereg.mn.org
Minnetech Consulting, Inc.