And you think that would work. Silver and gold. Rare expensive commodities that everyone would need. Not enough in the world to cover what would be needed. Promissory notes work just fine. But if you like your idea. Just do the maths on arranging the new currency. You would bankrupt the nation. Thank you for your idea and a glimpse into your thinking. It's impractical in this case. And wouldn't work. Plastic exchanges and virtual currency which is where we are already heading for are far less costly to get into circulation So sorry again we disagree
I agree economically its a house of cards and the system does not work as the biggest bankrupt economy in the world is slowly bankrupting all the others. I don't believe theres an answer and if there is I doubt you could convince the worlds top 1000 corporates and/or governments. That valid major point i agree with. If only they stopped moving the goalposts? But then again thats the nature of life
The United States effectively abandoned the gold standard in 1933 under Roosevelt, and completely severed the link between the dollar and gold in 1971 under Nixon. FDR takes United States off gold standard http://www.history.com/this-day-in-hist ... d-standard Nixon Ends Convertibility of US Dollars to Gold http://www.federalreservehistory.org/Ev ... ailView/33 Presidents assassinated since 1933: One Presidents assassinated since 1971: Zero Please explain how you posted something so factually incorrect. Are you ignorant of history, or did you simply not bother to read the load of manure you copied and pasted? No, they didn't. There is no prohibition against paper money in the Constitution. "Regarding paper money, Nathaniel Gorham explained at the Constitutional Convention that he "was for striking out" an explicit power of Congress to issue paper money, but Gorham was also against "inserting any prohibition." That is what ultimately happened at the Convention: language explicitly giving the federal government power to issue legal tender paper money was removed on a vote of 9-2, but an option allowing the issuance together with a prohibition against making it legal tender was not acted upon. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress power to "borrow money on the credit of the United States," and therefore Gorham envisioned that "The power [e.g. to emit promissory paper], as far as it will be necessary or safe, is involved in that of borrowing."The power to emit paper money (e.g. bank notes) has been justified by invoking the Necessary and Proper Clause in combination with the other enumerated powers which include the power to borrow money." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_Ten ... aper_money You're full of crap. I gave you a detailed explanation as why there is no "secret" constitution on your other thread, using court proceedings as an example. Your response was to refer me to the Declaration of Independence, which by the way, is NOT a law and is not legally binding on any court. People insult you because you're an idiot who ignores facts and keeps on spouting nonsense.
Please tell me you know better than this. You're a moderator for christs sake. Vdjdjsbbahababhahabajjabshsjahabhahabahai ekkaoanfbsindbjsbakqpaosuwbmwosvavkaisbz njsjsjsjsjnsnsjsisjsjsjsjsjsiisowoqytafvqnosuzcv aoarqqoqoqpmaosgualepepejbsbsjshsbushsbs ialqpqoq < thats spam So what the threads follow the same theme? As long as they are a different topic its not spam. Its not the same thing, don't paint it as so.
I agree with canabis. He writes the same theme but not the same subject. You can't say that all book writer are spammers. They have their way of writing that's make them as individual. What x_x wrote you like it or not it's up to you. This is online everyone have different understanding of things. For example two person read same bible but both can have two different interpretation. Read up and have fun. You want to argue go ahead just don't get butthurt if you can't bring someone to understand you. You have the right to your opinion so does the OP. Respect his opinion. It's good he keep thread with somewhat interesting things other than the game subjects. Mods should be doing this things to somehow keep game interesting on other things other than the game itself. Good job OP and thank you
There is no promise on it, if you read the ucc, or even un convention on bills of exchange and promissory notes it tells you what is required to make a promissory note Unconditional promise or order to pay at a specified time and place When you take a federal reserve note to redeem it and get paid they refuse "we don't do that here" It's an iou that you can't cash, it also has no specified time by default that makes it payable on demand, and they never pay All of our gold and silver has been seized by the government and in return they agree to pay all of our debts forever, and they don't (HJR 192) They don't have the value of a dollar, you can't freely exchange FRN for dollar, if they had the value of a dollar you could buy an once of silver for 1 FRN, yet it takes lets say 20 of them That means if your being paid $10 an hour in reality you earn .50 cent an hour instead of 20x10= $200 you need 200 FRN per hour to make the value of 10 dollars per hour You might think that's fine, I don't You have to understand what a dollar is, a dollar is a unit of measure in silver, in 1776 it was like 90% pure, like inches it's just a unit of measure When anyone says give me a dollar, we should ask a dollar if what? When someone says give me an inch, We do say inch of what When someone says give me a minute we know what they're talking about Dollar means silver not paper, we are being robbed on an epic scale like never seen before in history, maybe you can't see that yet,
Though I agree these are all individual topic. They are all easily debunked conspiracy nonsense. Legal experts have debunked the other threads and this one is yet another case of more conspiracy based on half truths. It spreads false or misleading information in a manner designed to try and get the reader to act against the best interest of the reader. There is no viable alternative to living without paper money in modern society without excluding yourself from society. These threads are spam as the numerous conspiracy theories could all be merged into one thread rather than oP having multiple threads clogging up forums with false or misleading info. And sorry op. Yes people are going to rag on you when you present such an easy target with these threads. The way you represent the content and that you assume you know better than all readers and presume to tell everyone they are idiots and sheep for not believing what you do. Of course people will not respond kindly towards you. I did tell you that on a prior similar thread. I actually think the mods have been quite lenient considering some of the content. But that's for them to govern. Personally I haven't seen any legit evidence to back up any of your claims. Not have you presented a realistic viable alternative for any situation. Telling people the truth is out there and calling them idiots who don't deserve the answer doesn't help your case. Maybe next time. Shorter thread and open a point of discussion on a subject that has evidence supporting both sides. State what you would implement that is a viable alternative and then engage the community to discuss whether there really is a viable alternative that people would consider in both an ideal world or more importantly the real one. You seem like an idealist. Unfortunately we live in a cynical real world where wishing for a different way of life really isn't an option. We can change things within our control. Living in our society means living with rules you may not agree with and accepting that society has expectations of you to conform to an extent. Now that's not a personal attack. That's just how this is.
It's not possible for a country that has monetary sovereignty to be bankrupt. They can simply print more currency. The only downside is currency inflation and the risk that other countries won't accept your currency. The current exchange rate is 1 US Dollar equals 0.94 Euro. "Insolvency tends to happen when liabilities are greater than assets. That’s very basic accounting. One of the U.S. government’s assets is its ability to tax the U.S. economy for revenue. The national debt -- which includes debt held by the public and money owed to other branches of the government -- is only equal to about six years’ worth of tax revenue. If the U.S. devoted a fifth of tax revenue to paying down the entire national debt, it would take 30 years to do it. That’s not insolvency." https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles ... ebt-crisis You're also overlooking assets that the federal government owns, including: * More than 900,000 separate real assets covering more than 3 billion sq. ft. * Mineral rights, on and offshore, covering 2.515 billion acres of land, more than the total surface land in Canada * Oil and gas resources on and offshore worth $128 trillion, roughly eight times the national debt of the country The world is not broke. But don't take my word for it. Here's what Mitt Romney's company Bain had to say about it: "A world awash in money...By 2010, global capital had swollen to some $600 trillion, tripling over the past two decades. Today, total financial assets are nearly 10 times the value of the global output of all goods and services...Our analysis leads us to conclude that for the balance of the decade, markets will generally continue to grapple with an environment of capital superabundance...Looking beyond today’s market conditions, however, our analysis found that capital superabundance will continue to exert a dominant influence on investment patterns for years to come. Bain projects that the volume of total financial assets will rise by some 50%, from $600 trillion in 2010 to $900 trillion by 2020" http://www.bain.com/publications/articl ... money.aspx There's so much money out there they don't know what to do with it.
@big bang No one has printed gold backed currency since Nixon, I don't see your point Lincoln funded the Civil War with green backs instead of bank loans Kennedy was printing silver certificates, which was immediately recalled on his death, his aides were saying when they got on airforce 1 everyone was cheering and partying, the guy was dead for 30 minutes and they celebrating His family started to get into politics they're all dead And please show me where you find any reference to paper notes in the constitution, the term is "coin money" coin is metal not paper "Money" as defined in Blacks law dictionary 5th edition, "does not encompass notes" Ty
Look, you can't say all my threads are the same, one was about what the pope said, one was what colonel Edward Mandel house said, one was about tacit acquiescence, one was about some act passed in California This one is about what Traficant said to the house of reps, I'm not calling anyone idiots because they don't believe it, I'm just making threads about off-topic that interest me and are thought provoking and informative, it's not a challenge that needs to be debunked your bringing that, it's not my conspiracy or my theory I did provide the solution, it's right there in the constitution, it's already the solution by default we just have to use it, Congress could easily regulate the value of silver to match FRN that's what we trust them to do It's not any secret information or stuff I make up, you are defensive and feel you have to prove me wrong in some way, that's not the point of the threads, just sharing what I'm reading while your watching the big game I'm looking for answers Have an open mind, nothing is set in stone that can't be smashed, life has a nice flow like a lazy river you can swim up stream, climb out, or do nothing and go with the flow
You never do. You stated: They've been printing money not backed by gold since 1971. They're doing it right now. Name a president that's been assassinated since 1971. A flat out lie. This isn't ancient history. It's all documented. Show us some proof to back up this claim. Please show me where you find anything in the Constitution that prohibits the printing of paper money by the federal government. As explained to you before, "The power to emit paper money (e.g. bank notes) has been justified by invoking the Necessary and Proper Clause in combination with the other enumerated powers which include the power to borrow money." Why am I supposed to care how Black's Law Dictionary defines money? It's not a legally binding definition. Neither is this one: "What is MONEY? A general, indefinite term for the measure and representative of value; currency; the circulating medium ; cash. “Money” is a generic term, and embraces every description of coin or bank-notes recognized by common consent as a representative of value in effecting exchanges of property or payment of debts." http://thelawdictionary.org/money/ While I'm at it, what made gold valuable as a currency? Common consent. Everyone agreed it was valuable. They could just as easily agreed to use diamonds. In fact, tulips were once used as currency in Holland. Look it up. Things have value because people agree it has value. It's that simple. Lemme explain it to you this way: You and I are stranded on an island. Your side is barren. No food or water. But your side has a gold mine. My side has no gold, but I have food and water. Which side is more valuable? "Value" has no meaning other than in relationship to living beings. The value of a thing is always relative to a particular person, is completely personal and different in quantity for each living human — "market value" is a fiction, merely a rough guess at the average of personal values, all of which must be quantitatively different or trade would be impossible. … This very personal relationship, "value", has two factors for a human being: first, what he can do with a thing, its use to him… and second, what he must do to get it, its cost to him" Robert A. Heinlein I'm off to work, because my skills have value to someone. I'll be back later.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/411 Shall be redeemed in lawful money at the treasury This tells us 2 things 1. It's not lawful money 2. It's not from the treasury The federal reserve bank is not a government bank, it's private I forget the guys name, Hans Van Hansel or something like that, it's a foreign bank that's why no one can look at it's books The comptroller of currency can not look into anything they do, that means they are unregulated, no one has ever looked at the books, Look at what the office of the comptroller of currency does, (bank regulator/bank auditor) As far as what the constitution says, it delegates authority to coin money and regulate the value thereof You'll have to read the coinage act, minting coins is exclusive to the several mints and that's it, anyone who mints a coin is going to have very serious problems for a long time Nothing in the constitution prohibited anyone from printing any paper currency including the government, in fact there are some towns that do print their own local currency it's only excepted in town it is a great boost to local economy in small towns where one Walmart would destroy all mom and pop businesses, cripple the job market, and eventually create a ghost town They do this to prevent their local currency from leaving town, and the local federal reserve member banks so exchange them @ 1:1.25 to encourage more businesses to get involved Here is one example they call it berkshares https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=80ydF-095eo That being said, no one is prevented from doing it, we have all heard of United States notes, few have seen them but that's a thing And good luck trying to get one, they are very rare and they do not circulate, this is United States note from our treasury, you notice some differences, it's got red ink on it for the Seal and the security number, also at the bottom it reads "pay to the bearer on demand one dollar" the back of it is unrecognizable there is no occult symbols and it looks quite nice
What is lawful money? How is it different from legal tender? "Lawful money" is a term used in the Federal Reserve Act, the act that authorizes the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to issue Federal Reserve notes. The Act states that Federal Reserve notes "shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank." The Act did not, however, define the term "lawful money," but up until 1913, the only currency issued by the United States that was legally recognized as "lawful money" was various issues of "demand notes" (subsequently known as "old demand notes") and "United States notes" authorized by Congress during the Civil War. At the time, some currency was not considered legal tender, although it could be used by national banking associations as "lawful money reserves." Thus, the term "lawful money" had a broader meaning than the term "legal tender." In 1933, Congress changed the law so that all U.S. coins and currency (including Federal Reserve notes), regardless of when issued, constitutes "legal tender" for all purposes. Federal and state courts since then have repeatedly held that Federal Reserve notes are also "lawful money." Milam v. U.S., 524 F.2d 629 (9th Cir. 1974), is typical of the federal and state court cases holding that Federal Reserve notes are "lawful money." In Milam, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reviewed a judgment denying relief to an individual who sought to redeem a $50 Federal Reserve Bank Note in "lawful money." The United States tendered Milam $50 in Federal Reserve notes, but Milam refused the notes, asserting that "lawful money" must be gold or silver. The Ninth Circuit, noting that this matter had been put to rest by the U.S. Supreme Court nearly a century before in the Legal Tender Cases (Juilliard v. Greenman), 110 U.S. 421 (1884), rejected this assertion as frivolous and affirmed the judgment. https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_15197.htm
On January 6, 1969 this Court filed a Notice of Refusal to Allow Appeal with the Clerk at the District Court, Hugo L. Hentges, for the County of Scott and the State of Minnesota, which is as follows: NOTICE OF REFUSAL TO ALLOW APPEAL TO: Hugo L. Hentges, Clerk of District Court, Plaintiff, First National Bank of Montgomery and Defendant Jerome Daly: You will Please take Notice that the undersigned Justice of the Peace, Martin V. Mahoney, hereby, pursuant to law, refuses to allow the Appeal in the above entitled action, and refuses to make an entry of such allowance in the undersigned's Docket. The undersigned also refuses to file in the office of the clerk of the District Court in and for Scott County, Minnesota, a transcript of all the entries made in my Docket, together with all process and other papers relating to the action and filed with me as Justice of the Peace. The undersigned concludes and determines that M.S.A. 532.38 was not complied with within 10 days after entry of Judgment in my Justice of the Peace Court Subdivision 4 thereof requires that $2.00 shall be paid within 10 days to the Clerk of the District Court for the use of the Justice before whom the cause was tried. Two so-called "One Dollar" Federal Reserve Notes issued by the Federal Reserve Bank at San Francisco L1278283C and Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Serial No. 18041C697A were deposited with the Clerk of the District Court to be tendered to me. These Federal Reserve Notes are not lawful money within the contemplation of the Constitution of the United States and are null and void. Further, the Notes on their face are not redeemable in Gold or Silver Coin nor is there a fund set aside anywhere for the redemption of said Notes. However, this is a determination of a question of Law and Fact by the undersigned pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Minnesota. Plaintiff is entitled to be accorded full due process of Law before the Court in this present determination not to allow the Appeal. If Plaintiff will file a brief on the Law and the Facts with this Court within 10 days, or if Plaintiff will file an application for a full and complete hearing before this Court on the determination, a prompt hearing will be set and if Plaintiff can satisfy this Court that said Notes are lawful money issued in pursuance of and under the authority of the Constitution of the United States of America the undersigned will stand ready and willing to reverse himself in this determination. TAKE NOTICE AND GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY. Dated January 6, 1969 BY THE COURT /s/ Martin V. Mahoney MARTIN V. MAHONEY JUSTICE OF THE PEACE CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
"Martin Vincent Mahoney (February 22, 1915 - August 22, 1969) was a Scott County, Minnesota justice of the peace who presided over the initial trial in the case of First National Bank of Montgomery v. Jerome Daly, Dec. 9, 1968 (Justice Court, Township of Credit River, Scott County, Minnesota), also known as the Credit River case. This case has been cited by various conspiracy theorists and anti-Federal Reserve System protesters as authority for the proposition that foreclosure is illegal. According to a statement published at the Minnesota State Law Library web site, the Credit River decision is not legal precedent, since it was undertaken by a justice of the peace (see also Subject-matter jurisdiction), and was eventually overruled by other court decisions.The defendant, Jerome Daly, was a longtime tax protester and attorney who was later disbarred by a decision of the Minnesota Supreme Court" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Mahoney
Lol, nice Wikipedia post bro, did you change Wikipedia just for me? You do know anyone can put anything on Wikipedia right? Wikipedia has zero credibility, if it's not in line with the constitution it's void, it is null, zero legal force or effect, it completely goes against everything American, it's a massive threat to national security, they could be funding terrorists and no one knows because no one has ever seen their books, it's all counterfeit Congress created the Federal Reserve, yet it had no constitutional authority to do so. We forget that those powers not explicitly granted to Congress by the Constitution are inherently denied to Congress“ and thus the authority to establish a central bank never was given. Of course Jefferson and Hamilton had that debate early on, a debate seemingly settled in 1913. But transparency and oversight are something else, and they’re worth considering. Congress, although not by law, essentially has given up all its oversight responsibility over the Federal Reserve. There are no true audits, and Congress knows nothing of the conversations, plans, and actions taken in concert with other central banks. We get less and less information regarding the money supply each year, especially now that M3 is no longer reported. Rep. Ron Paul in an interview on Glenn Beck last night said that the Fed was never in the plan of the Founding Fathers who drafted the Constitution. He said that in 1913 the Congress shirked their constitutional responsibilities concerning the nation’s money and handed it over to a private corporation in the form of a central banking system. The Federal Reserve System is not a part of our federal government, and there is no reserve of real money (gold and silver), and it is not constitutional. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji_G0MqA ... re=related "The Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned, locally controlled corporations" [Lewis vs. U.S., 680 F.2d 1239, 1241](1982) "As we have advised, the Federal Reserve is currently paying the Bureau approximately $23 for each 1,000 notes printed. This does include the cost of printing, paper, ink, labor, etc. Therefore, 10,000 notes of any denomination, including the $100 note would cost the Federal Reserve $230. In addition, the Federal Reserve must secure a pledge of collateral equal to the face value of the notes." - William H. Ferkler (Manager Public Affairs, Dept. of Treasury, Bureau of Engraving & Printing, Wash. D.C. "It is well enough that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford, Founder of the Ford Motor Co. "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... if the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of currency...the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent that their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson (Ed. – Does this sound familiar ?) Also, just as the income tax is the 2nd plank, the Federal Reserve bank is the Fifth plank of the Communist Manifesto. Communist manifesto http://www.tax-freedom.com/ta12001.htm Article 1 Section 10. US Constitution No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility. No state shall... make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts The constitution is the Supreme law of the land, you don't want to accept it but that's just how it is The constitution don't say anything about federal reserve notes, it's unconstitutional, the end...
Says the idiot posting YouTube videos. But since you don't find it credible, try this link: Credit River Case https://mn.gov/law-library/legal-topics ... r-case.jsp It's going to tell you basically the same the Wikipedia page said. In fact, had you bothered to check the page, you would have seen that the cite was from "Legal Topics: The Credit River Case". Minnesota State Law Library. Retrieved 2010-02-25." But apparently you're either too stupid or too lazy to do that. As has been previously posted, the Constitution doesn't have to say anything about Federal reserve notes. Congress has the authority to make them legal tender and SCOTUS has ruled that they are "lawful money". Legal Tender Cases https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federa ... /case.html It's constitutional. You're an idiot. The end.
Bad case law don't change the constitution, states can't make anything but gold and silver a tender for payment of debt They are acting out of fear, it's obvious, judges always rule in favor of the banks It don't matter what is right or wrong, they only care about retiring rich You are getting off the topic, if you want to talk about banking make a thread about it
You're the one talking about banking, you babbling bonehead. Me, I'm done trying to reason with you. I've posted enough stuff on this thread that anyone with a clue can figure out you're a fool. If you don't want to use Federal Reserve notes, then don't use them. I don't care. Tell your employer you'll only accept "lawful money" and see how far that gets you. My only goal was to expose you as an idiot. My work here is done.