"Can you be more specific about the "competitive idea"?"
The criminal idea is very simple, it is only competitive in the power one criminal has over other criminals at gaining the most market share of victims.
That is one idea.
That can be the only idea and then there is no competition other than that one idea.
In math it is called The Prisoner's Dilemma and it goes like this:
If everyone volunteers to be a criminal or if everyone is forced into being a criminal then there are no producers of anything worth stealing.
That is the ONE idea.
That is the non-competition idea.
Now take any other idea so long as any other idea is not the criminal idea.
Here is one:
Stop paying the criminals any rewards, bonuses, authority, credit, loyalty, or anything of any value that can possibly be kept away from the criminals. Call that the crime is no longer affordable idea.
Just stop paying criminals so well for the crimes they do idea.
So now you only have two ideas to look at, but none of these two ideas actual produce anything worth stealing, so there may need to be some cooler heads working on solving the problems associated with having no food, shelter, clothing, or power to heat up the water so that a shower can be enjoyed with some heat in the water.
1. Criminal Idea, Monopoly Idea, Non-Competition idea, which leads inevitably to a point at which the last two people on the planet are both working toward eliminating the last competitor.
2. The make crime pay less idea.
3. Any other suggestions that are not merely copies of the first two listed above.
I call this that we humans do a power struggle. We are in a power struggle. I have a one sentence explanation of Political Economy that I can place next to any book written by any author concerning the principle of Political Economy, and my sentence so far holds up against all competitors.
Are many words better?
Are fewer words more economical?
Power produced into oversupply reduces the price of power while purchasing power increases because power reduces the cost of production.
Principally speaking the most competitive ideas are those ideas that start out in the day with a measure of power and at the end of the day there is more power. The better ideas, and the most competitive ideas, are the ideas that end up with an abundance of power.
The Monopoly idea is the reverse of political economy, the Monopoly idea does the opposite of the most competitive ideas. The crime idea takes power from wherever power can be found and then the criminal consumes that power toward reaching the goal of taking more power from wherever power can be found, it is the destroy everything everywhere idea, again, it is the non-competition idea.
You know the word entropy. That is a way of looking at the crime idea.
Did you know that there is a word called ectropy? That is the competition idea.
"Can you be more specific about the "competitive idea"? That sounds like the solution to the problem, right? But like what? I'm looking for something that's actually doable, by us."
Your idea is not new, and it has been tried, and it works. The idea may not be completely understood by enough people.
Here is a version of the idea:
Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for its citizens, the other 49 states could observe the effects of this venture on Tennessee's economy, the quality of care provided, and the overall cost of health care. If the plan proved to be efficacious other states might choose to emulate it, or adopt a plan taking into account any problems surfacing in Tennessee. If the plan proved to be a disastrous intervention, the other 49 could decide to leave the provision of medical care to the private sector. With national plans and programs, the national officials simply roll the dice for all 284 million people of the United States and hope they get things right.
Experimentation in policymaking also encourages a healthy competition among units of government and allows the people to vote with their feet should they find a law of policy detrimental to their interests. Using again the state-run health system as an example, if a citizen of Tennessee was unhappy with Tennessee's meddling with the provisions of health care, the citizen could move to a neighboring state. Reallocation to a state like North Carolina, with a similar culture and climate, would not be a dramatic shift and would be a viable option. Moreover, if enough citizens exercised this option, Tennessee would be pressured to abandon its foray into socialized medicine, or else lose much of its tax base. To escape a national health system, a citizen would have to emigrate to a foreign country, an option far less appealing and less likely to be exercised than moving to a neighboring state. Without competition from other units of government,the national government would have much less incentive than Tennessee would to modify the objectionable policy. Clearly, the absence of experimentation and competition hampers the creation of effective programs and makes the modification of failed national programs less likely.
Legal Money Power works the same way, and so half measures won't work, since a Constitutionally Limited Republic, like Texas, and like Utah, have to be independent of the ONE MONEY POWER, or there is no actual independence. If the ONE MONEY POWER remains in force, easy to find it, it is where that money is produced, wherever that is, that is where the Central Power of any consequence will be, those people at that Central Location, that is where the POWER will be, not at the State Capital. So how does the quality of MONEY get pushed higher? So how does the quality of government get pushed higher?
So how does the cost of money get pushed lower?
How does the cost of government get pushed lower?
Both have to be voluntary associations.
Both have to be demanded by the buyers and supplied by the sellers in a Free Market.
The quote above shows how the Free Market of Government Power can work, as far as experiments in voluntary agreements, including the voluntary agreements agreed upon by the volunteers who volunteer to stop the flow of power flowing to the criminals, so that crime does not pay.
Trial by Jury worked, and that was understood by the true Founders, the True Framers, the one's that ended up with the false name of Anti-Federalist, like George Mason, Patrick Henry, Martin Luther, and Robert Yates, many more, the real deal, and they knew about Trial by Jury, and why it works.
Do you know the word sortition?
I recent picked up that word from someone on this forum. That is how, by random selection, a Jury is supposed to represent the whole body of people, as in We the People, as in a Jury of your Peers, which would be better, not practical, but better to ask everyone and if everyone says, hey, well, you know, torture is not right, and eating babies is not right, so ahhhhh, don't do it, and don't pay people really huge rewards for eating babies, there will be no end of the supply of baby eaters for profit if the rewards for eating babies is really high.
So do you have to ask everyone? If you find someone that says, hey, I like eating babies, he goes on to say, yea, I ate two babies for lunch, then is that a peer? Is that a person who aught to judge anything? So sortition worked as a mathematical, or statistical function of human morality, in Trial by Jury, not perfect, but better than ONE POWER DICTATING everything.
Everyone who will be on a Jury aught to read this:
So one competitive idea was to limit the governors with a Constitution, some States had the competitive idea of adding a Bill of Rights. States were independent Republics, and when they were all in competition for getting more of the good people to do productive work in their State, not the other State, then those governors had to supply what the productive people demanded, a good place to go, a place to go where a productive person could run away from slave masters. That is how it was working, and I read your earlier claim here:
"We'd get smoked by the rest of the world, right? Who could blame them?"
That is completely backwards. It was under The Articles of Confederation with an all Volunteer Army (despite the Dictators efforts to screw it up, you know, Generalisimo Washington) that defended the 13 Independent Republics from a military invasion and occupation by the largest criminal military force on the planet at that time. We The People were much more powerful then than now, as the Criminals in Power use the Power they steal to cause wars, Indian Wars, the War of 1812, The Civil War, World War I, World War II, and now they are working on World War III, those are the same people, the same IDEA, the same MONOPOLY POWER, at work, sure they fight among themselves to see who orders who around, that is how that works, but it is the same power at work.
Here, here, and here:
So, no, if the idea is to make crime pay less, then paying the worst criminals to destroy the least worse criminals is patently absurd.
The lesser of two evils is a false choice.
Whose idea is that false choice?
Why parrot it?
Competition, again, or voluntary association, same process, same result, different words, and it is the opposite of paying criminals for being good criminals, the exact opposite.
2. Not 1
How many things can a person do once a person is no longer investing in crime?
What happens when there are 10, or 100, competitors selling crime prevention and money systems?
If 90% of the suppliers are offering high cost and low quality crime prevention and money that leaves 10% offering low cost and high quality crime prevention and money, so what happens to the victims who no longer want to be victims of crime by violence, or crime by fraud money?
So that is how a competitive, or Free Market of government worked, when it worked, and it can be called a Republic, so long as it remains voluntary.
So you want to keep the involuntary association, I suppose, by your words, whereby the States obey without question, whatever the False Federal Governors force upon their targeted victims.
That solves nothing. The State Powers will, even if you don't like it, finally exert power to end the crime spree currently being perpetrated by the False Federal Dictators, Criminals. Why call them anything other than Criminals? Why give them any credit at all?
That is the point. Your solution is the solution because that is how it will play out, look at what happened in Russia. It will play out that way, the ONE power will fracture, that is how that works, the only question remains has to do with the nature of the individual pieces once the fracture occurs. Will those individual powers be worse than the one power?
We The People have to choose better instead of worse, if we don't, we will certainly get worse.
I think Utah State is working for better, and so are about 11 other States, last time I looked, and they are reaching for the wooden stake that kills the vampire, they are reaching for competitive legal money.
How is legal money competitive?
It is higher in quality and lower in cost.
If it is higher in quality and lower in cost compared to The World Reserve Currency Power, then what happens?
World War III, if The World Reserve Currency Power is allowed to force the issue.
The World Reserve Currency Power.
Why is that not easy to see?
You don't have a working understanding of Political Economy?
You can borrow my power law. I call it Joe's Law.
Power produced into oversupply reduces the price of power while purchasing power increases because power reduced the cost of production.
What do you think will happen if Utah, and 11 other States, such as Texas, California, Alaska, Arizona, Virginia, Vermont, and soon to be other voluntary associates in the fight against Monopoly Legal and Monopoly Money Power, in the fight against The World Reserve Currency Power, what do you think happens if those States all have their own, independent, forms of sound, accurate, high quality, and low cost money systems working, and improving, each State working to set the bar higher than each other State?
What happens to The International Monetary Fund?
Who do you think is pulling the strings on The Federal Reserve, Wall Street, and Washington D.C.?
"You talked about the country's debts that were created by criminals and that the thing to do was to tell them to "buzz off"."
That is backwards again. This false Federation is a corporation that is currently being raided, do you know how that works? The criminals doing the raiding take over all policy decisions and they simultaneously consume everything that can be consumed while advertizing great future benefits, so that they take out all the value, and then sell the title of the thing to some sap who buys the false story of the future benefits. All the value is being moved to Asia, to pump that place up, win World War III, and then all those worries about all those restless natives are history, and they get to write history. The criminals are dumping out all the value of this "Nation" on purpose, it is the same old routine, and so who cares, the criminals don't care, if the victims like it or not, or if the victims figure out what is going on, it is too late.
The victims say "buzz off" to the debt that is already impossible to pay off? No one in their right mind expects the victims to pay off the entire debt, what they are banking on is that the victims will be powerless to do anything other than paying debt for EVER.
What is National Debt?
Hamilton said it was a great thing.
It is a great thing, for the criminals, they perpetuate their exclusive power to rule everyone, every criminal, and every victim, how great can it get?
Do you think that the Chinese Criminals (not the actual working people in China), do you think that they will just forgive all the War Debt when World War III is over and we lost?
We, as in we the people who are too powerless, including the power of knowledge, to avoid World War III.
They, the criminals are investing your money, stolen from you, in making World War III happen, so they, in their insane minds, love war, it pays so well.
"I think that's exactly what we should do - tell them to buzz off."
Again that is the thinking that remains in the box, the box handed to the victims by the criminals, where the criminals dictate the boundaries, and you had better stay in that box, or else, and if you wander out, there will be much to do effectively to get you back in the box, and when you are back in the box, you get the bill to pay all the expenses consumed in placing you back in the box.
It says so right here:
That is the official Web Page so look here:
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.
So ignore them, completely, they will just go away, so long as there are enough of us who are working outside the box. What is outside that box? Power used to make more power out of less power.
Who will have time to worry about stupid criminals making false claims about someone owing someone Federal Reserve Notes?
I don't see any need to give those criminals any credit at all, who says anyone has to go see them for credit?
That is all completely backwards.
Hamilton and the gang of thieves were claiming that the Nation needs Debt so as to earn Credit. That is a big lie. The productive power of Liberty was so obviously credit worthy, the French offered enough credit to the defenders to help defeat the criminal British, that was proof of Credit accredited to a Confederation of Independent Constitutionally Limited Republics. Hamilton turned the credit already earned into a concept of DEBT. Nice trick?
How well has it worked?
Look at the National Debt Clock. People falsely claim that Hamilton would be turning over in his grave if he saw America today, by what twist of reasoning is that done? Hamilton would be smiling, he would be the first one to invest in China winning World War III, hedge baby hedge.
"I don't think we should have to pay back a cent that has been spent in our names since 9/11"
This has been going on since 1788.
What happened to the concept of credit?
Of course you don't owe anything of value to anyone, not unless a criminal is demanding payment. Why is that not easy to see?
How is any supposed contract supposed to become something involuntary at any time? If you no longer agree to pay anything, at any time, then your credit suffers, but where does that turn into someone knocking at the door with a pointed stick to poke you in the eye if you don't pay up, and then you are charged for the goons pay, and you have to pay for the manufacture of the pointed stick, on and on.
You have to pay the cleaners to clean off the boots of the goon where your blood soiled those boots. Lick those boots.
Who turned the world from Liberty to Crime made Legal?
Hamilton was a key player, and the date was 1788. That is the American version, but the routine was not new.
" increasing the size and power of government is on the government and not us"
Backwards again. That is not the "government," that is Crime made Legal. That is nothing more, and nothing less, than a gang of criminals who somehow manage to keep from cutting each others throats long enough to divide and conquer the targeted victims, and they just so happen to have figured out how to convince the victims that they, the criminals, are the best that money can buy at fighting crime.
Call it government and you lose in two ways.
You help hide the criminals
You help hide any power that might be used to defend against the criminals
You reach for defense against the criminals and all you find are the criminals ready to help you do what?
"When all the states have the same currency, there's nowhere to go to get away from it."
When you look deeper into this process you will find the need, the criminal need, to have both the Fraud and the Extortion powers, which are actually three powers.
Falsehood (The Federal Reserve System of Legal Fraud)
Threats of Violence (The Internal Revenue System of Legal Extortion)
Aggressive Violence upon the innocent (without which the threats are meaningless, and then the lies are powerless)
Having only the One money power, The Federal Reserve, does not work, there has to be The Internal Revenue Service to create the exclusive need for the ONE MONEY.
Does the IRS accept frequent flyer miles, coupons from Wall Mart, cell phone minutes, bushels of pork bellies, stocks in a business, or anything other than the ONE MONEY?
Is that oddly convenient for someone?
"I think that if we work together, we can make at least Congress stop acting so crazy."
I ran for congress in 1996, was on the ballot in my district. I ran on the "it is not nice to torture and murder babies in Waco for fun and profit" ticket.
Recently I was part of the effort to hand deliver Legal Notices of Redress to each Congressman in each District in each State, it was a well done effort, and what was done?
Nothing other than more proof that the criminals are criminals, so why give them any credit for being anything other than criminals, they don't even follow their own laws. The system was built to be self policing, they police themselves, which means that they are untouchable, according to their own system, with few exceptions, when The People follow the rules that are the legal exceptions, then they don't follow their own rules.
What does that mean?
I went to the Reno Nevada Liberty Conference just recently. I personally asked the Speaker who spoke authoritatively about the move by Utah to go into the Independent Banking and Sound Money business. I asked him if they knew that it would then be Game Over for The FED, and The FED would probably not like it. He agreed, and he warned the people in Utah, so things are, of course, a struggle, a power struggle, and it will take a lot of people waking up real fast, or it will be very bad, very, very, bad.
"If the states imposed term limits on them, we'd have a whole bunch of freshmen in 2014."
Yes and the point there is that The States impose term limits, not the False Federal government. The States say hey, you, you are representing this State, so if you don't resign when your term limit is up, you are guilty of a crime in this State, get it?
Are you listening?
If the congressman does not abide by the States voluntary laws, then that congressman is at least no longer a representative of that State, and that can be known publicly, and there does not have to be a goon hired to poke that outlaw with a pointed stick, but We The People, in this State, pay outlaws a good wage, with retirement benefits, and a medical plan?
That is the point. When the federal employees got out of line the States were no longer interested in paying those employees. That is how Voluntary Associations work, and they constitute a Free Market, so that the people paying the bills get to choose which people get paid, and which people don't get paid.
You stop supplying the highest quality around, and your prices are higher than any other supplier, and you had better shape up, or find a job you can do competitively.
Why is that any different than shopping for an insurance policy when you have 10 choices, which was before "insurance" became an order you could not refuse?
What do extortionists do?
They say pay me. You say for what? They say insurance. You say for what. They say insurance for broken knee caps. You say I don't see any risks for broken knee caps. They brake one of your knee caps.
"If we can first put the emergency brake on Congress, then while we have their attention, give them our marching orders, might they execute those orders out of fear? Maybe?"
At this point the most powerful people have enough power that their fears are real, but they fear each other, not the victims, so don't make me laugh. What they fear is a failure to get World War III done on schedule and I think there is ample evidence suggesting that there are delays in the schedule, due to infighting.
That is a golden opportunity for Utah, many other States, to get their Competitive Sound Money Businesses going, and that won't cause fear, it will cause action, as the Criminals will all polarize (stop fighting each other) to take care in destroying any viable Legal Money Competitor. However, and this is big, there are BIG competitors working in other Countries, like Iceland, Venezuela, and others, so now is the time to push these limits, and keep in mind how Legal Criminals work, they will feed on each other for more leverage over each other, so this may be much more of the time to act in defense than I can ever know from where I sit.
I can't describe in words the look on the face of the speaker who spoke with me about Utah and what it means to The FED to have actual competition in Legal Money Markets. It is literally Game Over for Legal Criminals if they lose their World Reserve Currency Power.
If those Legal Criminals find a viable threat to their World Reserve Currency Power, they will do everything to destroy it, but now there may be many competitors, many threats, and again, this is not new, this is why they put everything into World War. But this time may be our time, this time may be the time to reinstate Liberty here in a few States at first, moving back to Constitutionally Limited Republics, joined voluntarily in mutual defense AGAINST the criminals, including the criminals working for The World Reserve Currency Power, which is, again, The International Monetary Fund, which is currently denominated in Federal Reserve Notes, but that money is on the way out, and the new money will take over after World War III.
If they are delayed with their World War, that means something, that means that they are not as powerful as required to stay on schedule. What happens if their efforts to take complete control of China falter? What happens if instead of rushing into an all-out War with Iran is delayed because Troops are needed to Crush a Money Competitor in Utah? You don't think that the governors in Utah thought about this?
I talked to the guy advising the governors in Utah, the guy who spoke at the Reno Nevada Liberty Conference. I think they know.
Timing may be everything. If the Legal Criminals don't get their World War, it may be, once and for all, Game over. They may hide in their bunkers, and consume whatever they have stored, but they won't be getting another dime from honest productive people.
I am saying that you are on the right track with reaching for State Power, but I'm saying you have to get up to speed on Legal Money Power. If you don't stop the flow of power flowing out of the State into the Legal Crime Power, your opposition grows more powerful, and those on your side grow weaker. That is the Legal Money Power at work.
"I know I say "rep" and you think "criminal", but I'd rather have criminals running scared than running loose. If we can fix Congress, we are one step closer to restoring honest money, aren't we? If so, then yes, I'm definitely trying to move in that direction."
I don't think "criminal," I know, they define the meaning of crime upon their innocent victims. Who do they represent?
"I am monopolized to the point that the buck stops with the Constitution because it's what we have to work with right now and I think it's way better than what we're having to live with."
No, that is not what I read into your proposals, if you have a State, then that State has a competitive Constitution, and it is most likely more of a limitation upon those who would be, or are, criminals in office compared to the Monopoly Constitution (false federal) Power, because it is Local, because it is easier access for the victims, so that is the POWER that defeats the Monopoly Power, that is where there is enough Power, but not too much Power, to compete with the False Federal Power, again, send actual Representatives from the State, limited by the State Constitution, and it is great when the State Constitution agrees with agreeable things in the Monopoly Constitution at the False Federal Level, so agree with all that good stuff, like the Bill of Rights, your State may even have a Bill of Rights too, what is to disagree with in that way?
Who ever disagrees with The Bill of Rights?
Is that not a confession?
"I hope you write again, Joe. You are really making me think about what I really think."
I offer a lot of source information, but the best thing I've seen in a long time are the proposals here:
None of that goes against any agreeable parts to any competitive Constitutions with Bills of Rights, so what is to disagree with there, and do you see the value in those types of voluntary associations whereby people help each other defend against criminals who happen to be claiming authority falsely?
A few more links to work on if you see the value in this investment path:
A New System of Paper Currency
Austrian Stamp Script
Math Based Economy
North Fork Shares
The Biggest Game in Town
Imagine, if you can, each one of those Competitive versions of money working by Law in any number of Law Powers (Constitutionally Limited Republics) around the Globe.
Why is there one dominant money Power?
You can't say there isn't one, it is currently called The Dollar Hegemony, or the World Reserve Currency, or even The New World Order, or The International Monetary Fund, and it is very easy to find the criminals behind it, all that has to be done is to follow the Federal Reserve Notes back to the actual people writing the Fraudulent Checks, and then find the people who hired those paper pushers.
If someone bemoans any competitive form of money, resorting to name calling, resorting to arguments of fictional fabrications of dummies, called a Man of Straw argument, then that person doing that routine version of argumentation for-the-sake-of argument confesses either ignorance or willful falsifications.
Bills of exchange, bank checks, and negotiable paper of all sorts add just so much to the body of the currency; and this issue is unlimited by law, and unlimited in fact, except by the exigencies of trade. They are just as really currency as the specie dollar, the greenback, or the bank bill. A field which has no fence up one of its sides is not fenced in, no matter how high and strong its fences may be on the other sides. So, the volume of currency is not, in any true sense, limited by prohibitions of free banking, by a return to specie basis, or by any other means, so long as negotiable paper can be freely issued by individuals; and this free issue of negotiable paper is too useful, and too well entrenched in necessity, ever hereafter to be interfered with. Commerce can be hindered and trammeled to some extent—by statute arrangements claiming to regulate the currency, whether by restrictive measures, or by flooding the community with over-issues; but the volume of the currency can no longer be adjusted by such means.
Simple concepts like a 3 sided fence tell you, me, anyone caring to know, tell us how competition actually works.
"First in the importance of its evil influence they considered the money monopoly, which consists of the privilege given by the government to certain individuals, or to individuals holding certain kinds of property, of issuing the circulating medium, a privilege which is now enforced in this country by a national tax of ten per cent., upon all other persons who attempt to furnish a circulating medium, and by State laws making it a criminal offense to issue notes as currency. It is claimed that the holders of this privilege control the rate of interest, the rate of rent of houses and buildings, and the prices of goods, – the first directly, and the second and third indirectly. For, say Proudhon and Warren, if the business of banking were made free to all, more and more persons would enter into it until the competition should become sharp enough to reduce the price of lending money to the labor cost, which statistics show to be less than three-fourths of once per cent. In that case the thousands of people who are now deterred from going into business by the ruinously high rates which they must pay for capital with which to start and carry on business will find their difficulties removed. If they have property which they do not desire to convert into money by sale, a bank will take it as collateral for a loan of a certain proportion of its market value at less than one per cent. discount. If they have no property, but are industrious, honest, and capable, they will generally be able to get their individual notes endorsed by a sufficient number of known and solvent parties; and on such business paper they will be able to get a loan at a bank on similarly favorable terms. Thus interest will fall at a blow. The banks will really not be lending capital at all, but will be doing business on the capital of their customers, the business consisting in an exchange of the known and widely available credits of the banks for the unknown and unavailable, but equality good, credits of the customers and a charge therefor of less than one per cent., not as interest for the use of capital, but as pay for the labor of running the banks. This facility of acquiring capital will give an unheard of impetus to business, and consequently create an unprecedented demand for labor, – a demand which will always be in excess of the supply, directly to the contrary of the present condition of the labor market. Then will be seen an exemplification of the words of Richard Cobden that, when two laborers are after one employer, wages fall, but when two employers are after one laborer, wages rise. Labor will then be in a position to dictate its wages, and will thus secure its natural wage, its entire product. Thus the same blow that strikes interest down will send wages up. But this is not all. Down will go profits also. For merchants, instead of buying at high prices on credit, will borrow money of the banks at less than one per cent., buy at low prices for cash, and correspondingly reduce the prices of their goods to their customers. And with the rest will go house-rent. For no one who can borrow capital at one per cent. with which to build a house of his own will consent to pay rent to a landlord at a higher rate than that. Such is the vast claim made by Proudhon and Warren as to the results of the simple abolition of the money monopoly.
Mr. Chairman—Whether the Constitution be good or bad, the present clause clearly discovers, that it is a National Government, and no longer a confederation. I mean that clause which gives the first hint of the General Government laying direct taxes. The assumption of this power of laying direct taxes, does of itself, entirely change the confederation of the States into one consolidated Government. This power being at discretion, unconfined, and without any kind of controul, must carry every thing before it. The very idea of converting what was formerly confederation, to a consolidated Government, is totally subversive of every principle which has hitherto governed us. This power is calculated to annihilate totally the State Governments. Will the people of this great community submit to be individually taxed by two different and distinct powers? Will they suffer themselves to be doubly harrassed? These two concurrent powers cannot exist long together; the one will destroy the other: The General Government being paramount to, and in every respect more powerful than, the State governments, the latter must give way to the former.
It is very easy to tell friend from foe, if the person in question works to create an involuntary association they will inevitably reach for lies, threats, and if those don't work, they will reach for aggressive violence. A liar, for example, will reach for character assassination when their lies are exposed, and they cannot resolve an obvious contradiction, so they shoot the messenger.
I read that all the time on this forum. They call their competitors names such as "green backers" or "monetary cranks" or whatever lie works to focus attention away from the actual contradictions that spew out of their mouths, dumping out of their mouths like a monopoly issue of fraudulent currency.
Don't get me wrong, concerning Gold as money paid by State Governments paying for, and voluntarily investing into, a Federated Union of Constitutionally Limited Republics, which is fine, so long as that is the Rules agreed upon by those people hired to run those legitimate forms of Voluntary Government.
Gold would chain down expenditures made by stupid, or criminal, employees who are hired to run Voluntary Governments, so in that way it is a good idea to use a commodity money in legal matters at that level of collective power.
But seriously, if Alaska offered oil as Union Dues, who would turn it down? How much is a barrel of oil worth in gold these days?