ZeroForce wrote:
In learning more about Trusts, I keep coming to the point that if one wants to interact with, say, the local liquor store clerk, one would need a proxy to do so if that clerk asks for ID for the purchase if one did not have one or wish to present it.
My usual answer is, "I don't identify myself to anyone. Cops, judges, anyone... Why would I identify myself to you? Do you want the business or not?". It almost always works. If not, or if I actually DO need to identify myself (to TSA or to a banker to cash a check, basically), I might present a passport card. The passport is an interesting document in that it identifies both the individual (the people) and the citizen or national (the person), but it does not identify the individual AS the citizen or national. A driver's license, on the other hand, identifies the individual as acting in the capacity of the citizen-subject.
ZeroForce wrote:
This seems weak and flimsy to me. Additionally, if the whole of society finally got educated and interacted in trust, who would be left to get that 6-pack from the store?
More to the point, it seems that one would have to put his burdens on another by asking someone to do something for himself he cannot do, as is the case here. And, from one perspective, isn't that a reasonable limitation in one's life that one might not wish to bear.
So, is the Trust really as powerful as I think it is? Is it not standing in a less powerful place when one has to ask another to "help" them? I don't think a Rothschild heir has to do so.
Input?
Neither a Rothchild nor I has any of the problems you're asking about. I've been living this way for many years. It's simpler, not more difficult. With time and understanding you'll see. Cheers.