They keep shooting themselves in the foot..the consequences of taking the Ron Paul coins

This is also where I need help defining "legal tender".This is one point that is in need of discussion.Mineral rights are a bone of contention.

I understand that gold and silver are the only commodities authorized by the Constitution to be legal.

I strongly disagree with your statement that "Gold will certainly buy water" ...you can`t eat gold.

ANY currency is only worth the goods someone is willing to trade for it.
At some point food and water are worth more than all the gold in the world if your family is hungry.
This may sound like a stupid hypothetical...i just rememeber a winter in Sarajevo,I was not there,but it could happen here.

Thankyou all for the info.
I would also say that this is why we need to get back to talking about an exchange of goods and services,the reason for which money or notes,currency [a "current" through which something flows],or whatever term one might use,was created. Who determines the gold and silver market? same intl. banking cartel,right?
I say begin focusing on local,community currencies as alternatives/complements,as a way of re-linking currency with goods/services. Gold is only a commodity b/c someone/force deemed it that way[was it really the 'market force'? with a world of consumers,not market forces,that is doubtful]. And gold is only being touted b/c it is at least an outright commodity-but not 'inherently'.
Nothing has inherent value-it is only what we place on it,individually and collectively.
Once people become active market forces again,we will stop being passive consumers of goods,services and information about 'markets'.

Yea,I and a few others had been saying on the liberty dollar threads that they were trying to 'copy' essentially,FRN [money],and this is where the trouble lies. This is why RP says he would 'legalize competition' in currencies,if elected. Implying that they are currently not legal. And this is why alternative currencies can legally co-exist alongside FRN's today in various locations throughout the country. [For those who do not agree that they were copying,pegging,whatever-fine. But they clearly came close enough so as to both get the attention of the feds,and for them to have a case against norfed.Whether this proves true is irrelevant. And I believe that there are many,many ways to go about creating a new economy. It does not need to be the way NORFED is doing it,though of course that is one option. I'm not interested in creating the same type of system/currency,only replacing it with private companies/mints,instead of the goverment via a corporation. That is a lateral trade,in my mind. I want out of that entire way of interacting as a species; it's not free to me. It's a game that is pretty interesting,but not real,ultimately.]
And,I hope NORFED does not think they can also use this 'timing' to their advantage in terms of the RP campaign/supporters.
They can have each other,as far as I'm concerned. Not benefitting us.
It's ridiculous to think that investments are secure. This is a contradiction in terms. So,whoever plays,plays. My belief is that the heart of RP's free market is exchange of goods and services,which is why he speaks of 'entitlements' as a false term for that issue. We are talking about placing value on the creation of another individual or group of individuals. So,hoarding is silly to begin with-regardless of inherent value ratio. [IMHO]

Look, I actually purchase silver rounds. That's the trade name, and I wouldn't pay $20 for one of these. That's ~$6 over spot. Anybody who actually hordes knows that is way too high. You might pay 65-cents at the most.

This was a system designed specifically to replace the monetary system. Who determines the value of the money -the State. Supreme Court has said so, time and time again.

Thus the assertion "we're starting from nothing" would exemplify their defense that it actually was a barter system and not an intent to undermine the issuance of money -which is a Congressional power as delegated per the Constitution. A merchant pegging his prices to Liberty Dollar would be proof there of.

Example: In 1836 an ounce of gold would get you a nice suit of clothes. The equivalent value (in FRNs) for an ounce of gold will get you a nice suit of clothes today.

Simply a merchant saying I will take 1-ounce of silver for x product, it would be relatively constant. Under a barter system it may go up if there is more silver in circulation, but that's the exception.

It does not do this -as the spot price of silver goes up, so goes the "suggested value" of the coin. Needless to say, for it to be a barter system the printing of a "suggested value" is a non sequitur.

However, to offer a "suggestion price" is an attempt to fix the price of goods and undermine the elected US Congress (i.e. "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

"To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;").

Unlike you, I'm not going to insult your intelligence nor claim to be familiar with your background -but you're assertion that the silver/gold certificates being worth less than their "actual" value is a bit flawed.

Please refer to the The Michigan Act (1837). It stipulates that banks can print their own money as long as their certificate is backed by a fixed-weight of gold. That is the certificate was a 1:1 ratio. You could actually go to those banks and get the amount promised on the note. The same was held true during the follow on National Banking Act (1863). If you so desired, you could get the precious metal. You weren't given 80% of the amount promised, but the full amount.

Now, I'm not going to bore you with other details, but I do expect a full and unabridged apology from you concerning the "educate yourself" comment.