Ron Paul: Let's Legalize Competing Currencies
by Ron Paul
Before the US House of Representatives, February 13, 2008
I rise to speak on the concept of competing currencies. Currency, or money, is what allows civilization to flourish. In the absence of money, barter is the name of the game; if the farmer needs shoes, he must trade his eggs and milk to the cobbler and hope that the cobbler needs eggs and milk. Money makes the transaction process far easier. Rather than having to search for someone with reciprocal wants, the farmer can exchange his milk and eggs for an agreed-upon medium of exchange with which he can then purchase shoes.
This medium of exchange should satisfy certain properties: it should be durable, that is to say, it does not wear out easily; it should be portable, that is, easily carried; it should be divisible into units usable for everyday transactions; it should be recognizable and uniform, so that one unit of money has the same properties as every other unit; it should be scarce, in the economic sense, so that the extant supply does not satisfy the wants of everyone demanding it; it should be stable, so that the value of its purchasing power does not fluctuate wildly; and it should be reproducible, so that enough units of money can be created to satisfy the needs of exchange.
Over millennia of human history, gold and silver have been the two metals that have most often satisfied these conditions, survived the market process, and gained the trust of billions of people. Gold and silver are difficult to counterfeit, a property which ensures they will always be accepted in commerce. It is precisely for this reason that gold and silver are anathema to governments. A supply of gold and silver that is limited in supply by nature cannot be inflated, and thus serves as a check on the growth of government. Without the ability to inflate the currency, governments find themselves constrained in their actions, unable to carry on wars of aggression or to appease their overtaxed citizens with bread and circuses.
At this country's founding, there was no government-controlled national currency. While the Constitution established the Congressional power of minting coins, it was not until 1792 that the US Mint was formally established. In the meantime, Americans made do with foreign silver and gold coins. Even after the Mint's operations got underway, foreign coins continued to circulate within the United States, and did so for several decades.
On the desk in my office I have a sign that says: “Don't steal – the government hates competition.” Indeed, any power a government arrogates to itself, it is loathe to give back to the people. Just as we have gone from a constitutionally instituted national defense consisting of a limited army and navy bolstered by militias and letters of marque and reprisal, we have moved from a system of competing currencies to a government-instituted banking cartel that monopolizes the issuance of currency. In order to introduce a system of competing currencies, there are three steps that must be taken to produce a legal climate favorable to competition.
The first step consists of eliminating legal tender laws. Article I Section 10 of the Constitution forbids the States from making anything but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts. States are not required to enact legal tender laws, but should they choose to, the only acceptable legal tender is gold and silver, the two precious metals that individuals throughout history and across cultures have used as currency. However, there is nothing in the Constitution that grants the Congress the power to enact legal tender laws. We, the Congress, have the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, but not to declare a legal tender. Yet, there is a section of US Code, 31 USC 5103, that purports to establish US coins and currency, including Federal Reserve notes, as legal tender.
Historically, legal tender laws have been used by governments to force their citizens to accept debased and devalued currency. Gresham's Law describes this phenomenon, which can be summed up in one phrase: bad money drives out good money. An emperor, a king, or a dictator might mint coins with half an ounce of gold and force merchants, under pain of death, to accept them as though they contained one ounce of gold. Each ounce of the king's gold could now be minted into two coins instead of one, so the king now had twice as much “money” to spend on building castles and raising armies. As these legally overvalued coins circulated, the coins containing the full ounce of gold would be pulled out of circulation and hoarded. We saw this same phenomenon happen in the mid-1960s when the US government began to mint subsidiary coinage out of copper and nickel rather than silver. The copper and nickel coins were legally overvalued, the silver coins undervalued in relation, and silver coins vanished from circulation.
These actions also give rise to the most pernicious effects of inflation. Most of the merchants and peasants who received this devalued currency felt the full effects of inflation, the rise in prices and the lowered standard of living, before they received any of the new currency. By the time they received the new currency, prices had long since doubled, and the new currency they received would give them no benefit.
In the absence of legal tender laws, Gresham's Law no longer holds. If people are free to reject debased currency, and instead demand sound money, sound money will gradually return to use in society. Merchants would have been free to reject the king's coin and accept only coins containing full metal weight.
The second step to reestablishing competing currencies is to eliminate laws that prohibit the operation of private mints. One private enterprise which attempted to popularize the use of precious metal coins was Liberty Services, the creators of the Liberty Dollar. Evidently the government felt threatened, as Liberty Dollars had all their precious metal coins seized by the FBI and Secret Service this past November. Of course, not all of these coins were owned by Liberty Services, as many were held in trust as backing for silver and gold certificates which Liberty Services issued. None of this matters, of course, to the government, who hates to see any competition.
The sections of US Code which Liberty Services is accused of violating are erroneously considered to be anti-counterfeiting statutes, when in fact their purpose was to shut down private mints that had been operating in California. California was awash in gold in the aftermath of the 1849 gold rush, yet had no US Mint to mint coinage. There was not enough foreign coinage circulating in California either, so private mints stepped into the breech to provide their own coins. As was to become the case in other industries during the Progressive era, the private mints were eventually accused of circulating debased (substandard) coinage, and in the interest of providing government-sanctioned regulation and a government guarantee of purity, the 1864 Coinage Act was passed, which banned private mints from producing their own coins for circulation as currency.
The final step to ensuring competing currencies is to eliminate capital gains and sales taxes on gold and silver coins. Under current federal law, coins are considered collectibles, and are liable for capital gains taxes. Short-term capital gains rates are at income tax levels, up to 35 percent, while long-term capital gains taxes are assessed at the collectibles rate of 28 percent. Furthermore, these taxes actually tax monetary debasement. As the dollar weakens, the nominal dollar value of gold increases. The purchasing power of gold may remain relatively constant, but as the nominal dollar value increases, the federal government considers this an increase in wealth, and taxes accordingly. Thus, the more the dollar is debased, the more capital gains taxes must be paid on holdings of gold and other precious metals.
Just as pernicious are the sales and use taxes which are assessed on gold and silver at the state level in many states. Imagine having to pay sales tax at the bank every time you change a $10 bill for a roll of quarters to do laundry. Inflation is a pernicious tax on the value of money, but even the official numbers, which are massaged downwards, are only on the order of 4% per year. Sales taxes in many states can take away 8% or more on every single transaction in which consumers wish to convert their Federal Reserve Notes into gold or silver.
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, allowing for competing currencies will allow market participants to choose a currency that suits their needs, rather than the needs of the government. The prospect of American citizens turning away from the dollar towards alternate currencies will provide the necessary impetus to the US government to regain control of the dollar and halt its downward spiral. Restoring soundness to the dollar will remove the government's ability and incentive to inflate the currency, and keep us from launching unconstitutional wars that burden our economy to excess. With a sound currency, everyone is better off, not just those who control the monetary system. I urge my colleagues to consider the redevelopment of a system of competing currencies.
output
Some news today:
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp...
PARIS -(Dow Jones)- French President Nicolas Sarkozy said Wednesday that the dollar can't remain the world's only reserve currency, as the rise of emerging powers such as China and Russia challenge the U.S.'s prominence.
And This:
http://www.commodityonlin...
The Chinese are right behind India in gold consumption as their gold mining and import activities are going full throttle. China has recently tied up with several international miners to extract its huge Gold reserves. This is a part of a plan to boost output by 30 percent each year through 2012.
Comment: It won't be long until the world chooses a stronger type of money that is more honest than the U.S. dollar.
The Chinese with trillions in reserves can start a new hard asset backed currency at any time.......Are the Americans prepared for this???
Pure Genius.
What more can we say about the man that has not been said before?
His prescience never ceases to amaze.
Where's all the money being spent by the Fed?
What are the buying, and when do I get my share?
End the Fed, now!
grant
I absolutely love reading this man...
Can't wait for End the Fed.
I just LOVE how all the CRAP LAWS...
Came about during war... THEY ALWAYS DO! As far as I'm concerned anything passed after 1861 is up for review by a jury of the people after we re-aquire the reins of the government. The war was nothing but a power grab by the European Bankers.
The Liberty a society retains is inversely proportional to the number of Lawyers in the Government.
Go Ron. grant
Go Ron.
grant
This is such a great idea.
This is such a great idea. The only big problem I have with the gold standard is that it DOES prohibit the ability of a nation to wage a real war as effectively as they could. Printing money can lead to a short term production spike which can help grease the wheels of the war machine and help to finish the job. Surely, our enemies will be doing it. Competing currencies would allow people to use sound money, be it gold or a market-disciplined dollar during peacetime while still giving the government the opportunity to use war keynesianism if necessary.
Excellent bump. I also
Excellent bump. I also notice that bartering is on the rise - Actual work traded for something of value.
We are going to turn into France where there is an underground economy, and no one is honest anymore on their taxes. This is what our government has promoted.
bump
bump
Lincoln and Kennedy
Lincoln and Kennedy attempted to create competing currencies. Lincoln actually circulated , I think, it was close to $500,000.
Look what happened to them.
Maybe the third time will be the charm? It's worth another try, in my humble opinion.
The Wal Mart of our money supply, the Fed could use a little competition
We know who sends the shooters
They need to be put on notice that not only are we killing their crap game we're throwing their asses in jail where they belong.
The thing is we know who these criminals are.
Why/how are they still alive ? Apparently the law doesn't work with these felons, time to fight fire with fire.
Lincoln failed....
Kennedy wasn't the first to try it....There have been many...Many who went out and stood with absolute steel against the bankers.
http://mises.org/story/35...
Lincoln printed Greenbacks,
Lincoln printed Greenbacks, over 400M of them.
"... (we) gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they have ever had - their own paper money to pay their own debts..."
The Treasury notes were printed with green ink on the back, so the people called them "Greenbacks".
http://www.prolognet.qc.c...
Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy
Two great presidents of the United States
Assassinated for the cause of justice
by Melvin Sickler
__________
Both Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy were assassinated while they held the high office of President of the United States. Both of these former presidents had also created their own money system to run the United States while they were in office is this just a coincidence?
Why assassinate a President? Why must everything be kept so covered up? What are they trying to hide from the American people?
The facts will speak for themselves.
Abraham Lincoln
During the Civil War (from 1861-1865), President Lincoln needed money to finance the War from the North. The Bankers were going to charge him 24% to 36% interest. Lincoln was horrified and went away greatly distressed, for he was a man of principle and would not think of plunging his beloved country into a debt that the country would find impossible to pay back.
Eventually President Lincoln was advised to get Congress to pass a law authorizing the printing of full legal tender Treasury notes to pay for the War effort. Lincoln recognized the great benefits of this issue. At one point hi wrote:
"... (we) gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they have ever had - their own paper money to pay their own debts..."
The Treasury notes were printed with green ink on the back, so the people called them "Greenbacks".
Lincoln printed 400 million dollars worth of Greenbacks (the exact amount being $449,338,902), money that he delegated to be created, a bebt-free and interest-free money to finance the War. It served as legal tender for all debts, public and private. He printed it, paid it to the soldiers, to the U.S. Civil Service empoyees, and bought supplies for war.
Shortly after that happened, "The London Times" printed the following:
"if that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the North American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in th history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed, or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."
The Bankers obviously understood. The only thing, I repeat, the only thing that is a threat to their power is sovereign governments printing interest-free and debt-free paper money. They know it would break the power of the international Bankers.
In retaliation
After this was published in "The London Times", the British Government, which was controlled by the London and other European Bankers, moved to support the Confederate South, hoping to defeat Lincoln and the Union, and destroy this government which they said had to be destroyed.
They were stopped by two things.
First, Lincoln knew the British people, and he knew that Britain would not support slavery, so hi issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which declared that slavery in the United States was abolished. At this point, the London Bankers could not openly support the Confederacy because the British people simply would not stand for their country supporting slavery.
Second, the Czar of Russia sent a portion of the Russian navy to the United states with orders that its admiral would operate under the command of Abraham Lincoln. These ships of the Russian navy then became a threat to the ships of the British navy which had intended to break the blockade and help the South.
The North won the War, and the Union was preserved. America remained as one nation.
Of course, the Bankers were not going to give in that easy, for they were determined to put an end to Lincoln's interest-free, debt-free Greenbacks. He was assassinated by an agent of the Bankers shortly after the War ended.
Thereafter, Congress revoked the Greenback Law and enacted, in its place, the National Banking Act. The national banks were to be privately owned and the national bank notes they issued were to be interest-bearing. The Act also provided that the Greenbacks should be retired from circulation as soon as they came back to the Treasury in payment of taxes.
In 1972, the United States Treasury Department was asked to compute the amount of interest that would have been paid if that 400 million dollars would have been borrowed at interest instead of being issued by Abraham Lincoln. They did some computations, and a few weeks later, the United States Treasury Department said the United States Government saved 4 billion dollars in interest because Lincoln had created his own money. So you can about imagine how much the Government has paid and how much we owe solely on the basis of interest.
The Federal Reserve Act
There were changes in the money and banking laws for the next fifty years. Finally, in 1913, the Bankers were able to get their Federal Reserve Act passed through Congress which replaced the National Banking Act that had earlier replaced the Greenback Law. If the Government would have continued the policy of Abraham Lincoln, the warnings given in "The London Times" would have come to pass. America would be a debt-free nation, the most prosperous in the world. And the brains and the wealth of the world would have come to America.
But with this Federal Reserve Act being passed, Congress gave up its power to create its own money that it was given in the United States Constitution, and gave this power over to private Bankers who called themselves the Federal Reserve. The Bankers had achieved their ultimate goal, for now the United States operated under a central bank that was privately owned. They now had the power to run the country by controlling the creation of the money, and were free to charge the interest they so desired.
As Mayer Anselm Rothschild once said: "Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws..."
John F. Kennedy
No United States president since Abraham Lincoln dared to go against the system and create his own money, as many of these so-called elected presidents were actually only instruments or puppets of the Bankers. That is until President John F. Kennedy came into office.
President Kennedy was not afraid to "buck the system", for he understood how the Federal Reserve System was being used to destroy the United States. As a just and honorable man, he could not tolerate such a system, for it smelled corruption from A to Z. Certainly he must have known about the Greenbacks which Abraham Lincoln created when he was in office.
On June 4th, 1963, President Kennedy signed a presidential document, called Executive Order 11110, which further amended Executive order 10289 of September 19th, 1951. This gave Kennedy, as President of the United States, legal clearance to create his own money to run the country, money that would belong to the people, an interest and debt-free money. He had printed United States Notes, completely ignoring the Federal Reserve Notes from the private banks of the Federal Reserve.
Our records show that Kennedy issued $4,292,893,825 of cash money. It was perfectly obvious that Kennedy was out to undermine the Federal Reserve System of the United States.
But it was only a few months later, in November of 1963, that the world received the shocking news of President Kennedy's assassination. No reason was given, of course, for anyone wanting to commit such an atrocious crime. But for those who knew anything about money and banking, it did not take long to put the pieces of the puzzle together. For surely, President Kennedy must have had it in mind to repeal the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and return back to the United States Congress the power to create its own money.
It is interesting to note that, only one day after Kennedy's assassination, all the United States notes which Kennedy had issued were called out of circulation. Was this through an executive order of the newly-installed president, Lyndon B. Johnson? Or was he one of their instruments? At any rate, all of the money President Kennedy had created was destroyed. And not a word was said to the American people.
A lesson to learn
There is much that can be learned from our past history. Here we are in 1997 , and the United States is still operating under the Federal Reserve System. It has already plunged our country over four trillion dollars into debt, a debt it will never be able to pay, and has been responsible for every kind corruption imaginable. Yet, barely a peep of protest can be heard from the American people.
All The Bankers have to do to keep their power is to get rid of the few politicians who are honestly working for a reform in our economic system, and the people at large remain ignorant and controlled. It is obvious the American people need to be awakened to the truth.
The population at large must be educated on the Federal Reserve, and then unite together to put pressure on the Government to get the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 repealed. Otherwise, it will spell disaster for the United States.
There can be no peace witout justice, and there can be no justice without a reform in our economic system, for the financiers are behind all the corruption in our Government.
Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy both had the courage to stand up for principles and to fight for justice. They have both gone down in history as being true patriots of the United States. But do we, as citizens, have the courage to follow their example?
Do the majority of Americans
Do the majority of Americans really understand why both Lincoln and Kennedy were assassinated? Or are they still buying into the propaganda they were taught?
And what happened to the Russian Czar who helped Lincoln? Well there are no more Czar' in control of Russia today are there?
Ron Paul has a sign in his office that says "Don't Steal the Government Doesn't Like the Competition"
Wonder what kind of sign the Rothschild have in their office?
I believe their sign would read
Fleece the Sheep.
I think most are still believing the propaganda, but when their precious fiat dollars are reduced to utter Zimbabwean, Wiemarian worthlessness, it won't matter what they believe.
Gold is the money of kings, silver is the money of people.
Didn't help one bit....
That all of the bankers, were Globalist Zionists who like it or not came from a distorted reality and ran the Banks into the gutter with mystic scripture and occult Judaism.....
General Cornwallis in Great Britain bragged about this in speech to Washington, regarding the Conquest from Europe.
And still to this day people are loathe to admit it....That is exactly what the Banking dynasty is and you know it.
Don't be such a naysayer. In
Don't be such a naysayer. In the past almost every American was totally ignorant of the power and ruthlessness of the Money Changers. Today it's much different.
While the odds of making significant changes are overwhelming, They are not altogether impossible.
Jefferson said:
"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."
—Thomas Jefferson
Without the people nothing is possible, with them nothing is impossible.
Gandhi and Martin Luther King were able to bring about change through peaceful means. So who can really say it can't happen again with our money supply, by creating a competing currency?
I have a question about
I have a question about currency. Can someone explain to me why bartering can't work coupled with credit making up for it's deficiencies? Technically currency in any form is credit, paper money more so, but gold and silver are still forms of credit as they have no intrinsic value, no actual usage in life. In other words, why can't it work like this: You need eggs and milk. All you have to offer is half a cow. Why can't it be...okay, I give you eggs and milk and give me half the cow when that is possible. I imagine the answer to this is the simple thought that the person with the eggs and milk doesn't need a half a cow so therefore he'll just go to someone else. But that thought process is also to assume the person with the cow has absolutely nothing else to offer the person with the eggs and milk. But I am pretty sure it would be a rarity that two people could not find things to exchange that can be agreed upon. Furthermore, where real deficiencies exist...for example, someone needs a cow but truly doesn't have anything to offer for that...why can't that simply be resolved by saying ok sir ill give you the cow. Just give me x, y, z in exchange WHEN YOU GET IT. So why can't bartering coupled with this type of pure credit be the same type of mobilizer that currency is. What am I missing, if I am?
technically?
"Technically currency in any form is credit, paper money more so, but gold and silver are still forms of credit"
I disagree, though I would like to understand why you think this is "technically" correct. Do you have any references or support for your argument? (Saying that "you can't eat gold or silver" isn't good support for your argument, as I also can't eat oil or cotton.)
A neat thing about gold/silver in my posession is that it is mine, it is untraceable, and it can be easily exchanged. I own it, so it's not credit.
Credit as far as i see it is
Credit as far as i see it is essentially a place holder. So you give me 5 dollars and I give you eggs. The only thing you can do with the 5 dollars is give it away to gain something else. You can't actually do anything with the dollar itself. The dollar can't be consumed or used. It can only be transacted, it can only be perpetually transfered. So paper money is definitely credit. With gold and silver, the same principle applies. Yes, you can't consume gold or silver and you can technically use gold and silver, probably more silver than gold. You can make tools, bullets, silverware, belt buckle, or various kinds of uses for metal. But if you were to do that you would then lose your ability to purchase things that you can't barter. The gold and silver is not used but used as currency. Since it isn't used purely, then it's simply a perpetual placeholder for transactions between someone having something of intrinsic value and the other person lacking having that. You want the gold because you gave something away in exchange for it and thus have it for yourself to do the same thing (exchange) when you're on other end.
Oil and cotton have uses in the world. They have intrinsic value. Cotton for a million things. Oil for a ton of things as well. They can be used as currency but that would seem odd as a person who has oil or cotton would probably use it for themselves somehow, unless they lack the skills.
I have no objection to this idea.
"Oil and cotton have uses in the world. They have intrinsic value. Cotton for a million things. Oil for a ton of things as well."
Its called "commodity money". Historically, warehouses receipts for grain became one of the earliest forms of paper money. Fractional reserve banking quickly became a problem, but that is also problem for other types of "promissory note" too.
Gold and silver actually count as "commodity money". The key point is that Ron Paul wants to repeal the laws that effectively force people to use central bank paper as money. Let the market decide what works best.
"I believe the true significance of the Gold Commission is that the politicians and central bankers were so alarmed at such a thing that they made sure it was packed by an array of Keynesians and monetarists." (Ron Paul 1985)
One, why you gotta appear so
One, why you gotta appear so arrogant with your title? Why does your objection or lack of objection matter in all this?
Two, I'm a little unclear what you're getting at. I understand all these items are commodities but I was suggesting gold and silver are different from oil and cotton. Oil and cotton have intrinsic value. Gold and silver get their value today from their specialness, but I don't think they are NEEDED in life. Unless I'm missing something, there are and have been other metals and material to replace their services. I don't NEED a gold fork or gold frame or gold belt.
Also, why does it have to be perceived financially? Why can't it just be commodities are traded? Sometimes they are held onto to trade again to maybe eventually find someone who could use the commodity (serving as a form of credit) or sometimes it is just traded and used (bartering).
So agreeing with you on something is "arrogant"?
"One, why you gotta appear so arrogant with your title? Why does your objection or lack of objection matter in all this?"
Adam, I'm not your nemesis. You don't have to hate me. I'm just some random dude on an internet message board. OK?
Our agreement or disagreement is not earth-shatteringly important. It only becomes relevant when we have conversation.
"I understand all these items are commodities but I was suggesting gold and silver are different from oil and cotton. Oil and cotton have intrinsic value."
As I have already pointed out, gold and silver already have non-monetary uses. The key thing about gold is its suitability as a medium of exchange.
"I don't NEED a gold fork or gold frame or gold belt."
But you do need a reliable medium of exchange, don't you?
"Also, why does it have to be perceived financially? Why can't it just be commodities are traded?"
Why not indeed? What's your answer to that question?
"Sometimes they are held onto to trade again to maybe eventually find someone who could use the commodity (serving as a form of credit) or sometimes it is just traded and used (bartering)."
I'm going to be really arrogant now Adam: I agree with you.
"I believe the true significance of the Gold Commission is that the politicians and central bankers were so alarmed at such a thing that they made sure it was packed by an array of Keynesians and monetarists." (Ron Paul 1985)
No, I could care less. It's
No, I could care less. It's just an odd approach the way you titled it. Anyway...
Of course, gold and silver have non-monetary uses. I know. But why is it a suitable medium of exchange? What's the reason?
My answer is it doesn't. The notion of finances and calling something money (commodity money) that doesn't need to be called money only complicates and confuses things. This is why I think economics is bullshit because it's a lot of mental masturbation with math and numbers, when really it is all about human behavior...meaning psychology.
And that's great we agree. Now I've learned something, or rather reinforced something: my common sense is more powerful than some realms of education.
Point by point.
"Of course, gold and silver have non-monetary uses. I know. But why is it a suitable medium of exchange? What's the reason?"
Gold is durable, fungible (one lump is the same as any other), divisible, portable (except for very large transactions) and *rare*.
"My answer is it doesn't. The notion of finances and calling something money (commodity money) that doesn't need to be called money only complicates and confuses things."
So only fiat money qualifies as "money" in your book? You might want to reconsider your definition in the light of history.
Prior to 1971, non-US governments could convert US$ into gold at the rate of $35 per troy ounce under the post-war Bretton Woods agreement.
The US constitution *defines* a dollar in terms of gold and silver!
"This is why I think economics is bullshit because it's a lot of mental masturbation with math and numbers, when really it is all about human behavior...meaning psychology."
You are onto something here Adam. Have you read "Human Action" by Ludwig Von Mises? Its available as a free download on scribd.
http://www.scribd.com/doc...
Mises is Ron Paul's favourite economist. Mine too of course. You'll be pleasantly surprised.
"And that's great we agree. Now I've learned something, or rather reinforced something: my common sense is more powerful than some realms of education."
Indeed. You question things Adam. That makes you alot smarter than most people in this world already!
"I believe the true significance of the Gold Commission is that the politicians and central bankers were so alarmed at such a thing that they made sure it was packed by an array of Keynesians and monetarists." (Ron Paul 1985)
Alternative?
"The US constitution *defines* a dollar in terms of gold and silver!"
Is it wrong to reintroduce the dollar to gold and silver, AND introduce it to platinum, palladium and rhodium? Detractors of going back to the gold standard never have an answer for this. I reckon if the money presses were stopped, we should have enough purchasing power to bolster gold and silver reserves with othwer precious metals to cover the dollars in circulation.
I know, I know..the biggest hurdle is to pass a Constitutional amendment to include other precious metals, because congress doesn't know economics too good...
What say you?
I like that idea.
Better than the other idea. It goes in line with freedom of commodity.
http://www.mises.org
Point by point.
"Technically currency in any form is credit."
Fiat money represents a debt. Specie money on the other hand, is a medium of exchange that does not represent a liability.
"gold and silver are still forms of credit as they have no intrinsic value, no actual usage in life."
Silver has many non-monetary uses. Gold has more limited non-monetary uses. Both gold and silver hold so much value precisely because of their utility as a medium of exchange.
"In other words, why can't it work like this: You need eggs and milk. All you have to offer is half a cow. Why can't it be...okay, I give you eggs and milk and give me half the cow when that is possible."
Why don't you give it a try?
"But I am pretty sure it would be a rarity that two people could not find things to exchange that can be agreed upon."
My experience of life shows the exact opposite. If you like barter Adam, why not go for it? See how far you get.
"Furthermore, where real deficiencies exist...for example, someone needs a cow but truly doesn't have anything to offer for that...why can't that simply be resolved by saying ok sir ill give you the cow."
Pay it forward Adam. Devote *your* life to the service of others without any thought of reward and see how that works out for you. Good luck.
"What am I missing, if I am?"
Life experience. Your ideas don't seem to be based on it. Not yours or those of anyone else in history.
"I believe the true significance of the Gold Commission is that the politicians and central bankers were so alarmed at such a thing that they made sure it was packed by an array of Keynesians and monetarists." (Ron Paul 1985)
You're just jaded. I am
You're just jaded. I am very aware of what I am suggesting and the difficulty about it. It was to get you to think but you're too much on your high horse with a stick up your ass to do that. You know it all.
Am I stopping you from bartering goods with anyone?
Nope.
Am I stopping you from practising a "gift economy" with other consenting adults?
Nope.
So what is your "issue" exactly?
"I believe the true significance of the Gold Commission is that the politicians and central bankers were so alarmed at such a thing that they made sure it was packed by an array of Keynesians and monetarists." (Ron Paul 1985)
Today, of course it wouldn't
Today, of course it wouldn't work. Gifts, caring, charity, etc. are disrespected (or at least not of first concern) in today's society, partly as a result of the economic progression forcing everyone to fend for themselves and forget about everyone else. But it could work, and no not just in theory. It is a viable option, especially when the dynamic is more local. The dilemma has really gotta do with the size of a population and it being too large for a personal dynamic, and thus making it almost impossible for trust, which is where currency is born. But what I am saying is that at the birth of currency, more complications arise because definition becomes an issue. In other words, what is this or that worth?
Charity is held in very high esteem Adam.
Selfless generosity is valued so much precisely because it is the economic "exception" and not the "rule".
"I believe the true significance of the Gold Commission is that the politicians and central bankers were so alarmed at such a thing that they made sure it was packed by an array of Keynesians and monetarists." (Ron Paul 1985)
I guess we'd have to
I guess we'd have to elaborate on what we mean. Assuming I do understand you though, how you're thinking of it, charity, to me, is only held in high esteem because of it being an exception to an oppression infrastructure. But it's not held in high esteem as an activity to want to do as a defining characteristic of a person's life or society. It's simply not possible in today's dynamic.
Do you kinda get what I'm saying? I mean I agree in the way you say it that charity is held in high esteem, as in this is not part of the normal economic structure and it's great I can do it, or something like that. However, my point is...because it is the exception is the reason it is not respected. If it was truly respected and held high, it would be "infused" into the "rule."
Very deep philosophical issues here Adam.
The one thing I don't want to do is "put words in your mouth".
I would like to pin you down on the political and economic specifics of what you are saying, but I'm guessing that your "issue" is alot deeper than that.
I don't think you are advocating any particular economic or political position so much as a sentiment about politics, economics and human interaction in general.
Am I right?
"I believe the true significance of the Gold Commission is that the politicians and central bankers were so alarmed at such a thing that they made sure it was packed by an array of Keynesians and monetarists." (Ron Paul 1985)
Which yes....
Has been used as an excuse by the "feudalist" overlords to cull us all as population control.
I think that is positively nuts.
But then you realize.....we need to solve crowding. We need to solve large cities. Those are problems we must address.
Yeah, we got to address them big time. Without our neo feudal overlords in any way managing our lives that is!
http://www.ibtimes.com.au...
Mr. Adam.
Please spend some time researching the history of Gold/Silver. It originally "WAS" a barter item because like growing veggies, raising cattle, or drilling for oil, much human effort was used. This in turn made Gold/Silver a very valuable trading item. Try panning for Gold for a few hours and see how your back feels....smile.
Please read this to understand exactly why Gold/Silver was mandated as money right in the U.S. Constitution { The Supreme Law of the Land }:
http://www.constitution.o...
No, I understand the
No, I understand the reasoning why it was put into the constitution. It was smart. Yeah, I get it. My point is about currency. If something, be it gold, silver, oil, whatever is used AS currency it is not consumable. If it is consumed then it is bartering. That's all. And thus if something is used as currency it is a placeholder and thus a type of credit. Gold and silver would apply today as more a pure form of currency because they just don't have any usage really, especially gold, because of steel and other metals. They are still however valuable because of the aspects Ron Paul expressed above, mainly the durability and rarity. However, really the value of gold and silver, more gold, is really just a residual effect of it's genuine value of the past. They serve no real purpose in todays society.
Convince my mom of that.
She has Silver ware, Silver trays, Silver salt & pepper shakers, for special occasions.
Also ask a dentist how many people want Gold or Silver in their teeth.
Most of the married people I know have Gold wedding rings.
My wife collects Gold jewelry of all kinds broken or not, and trades or sells some once in a while.
India imports about 800 metric tonnes of Gold per year, mostly for jewelry, but I read that some families trade or sell their Gold jewelry, during hard times.
Sir, you cannot change history!!!
Gold has been the money of choice for about 6,000 years, it's only recently { August 15, 1971 } that the U.S. dollar was not redeemable in Gold.
Why do central banks around the world still back their currencies with Gold?
http://dsbb.imf.org/Appli...
I think you're not thinking
I think you're not thinking completely about this. I took all that into consideration. Didn't think it needed to actually be addressed. Think about those situations. You've got the cart before the horse. You've filled it around. Why do those people have the silver kitchen stuff, the gold or silver teeth, the gold or silver jewelry, or countries store it? Try not to react to this. Think about what I'm saying and consider I have a point. Why do those activities exist?
Am I missing something?
The point is; My mom cannot serve a turkey on a dollar bill, but she can on a Silver platter, people do not fix their teeth with dollar bills, people from India do not wear paper money around their bodies.
I think it's a way of showing off personal wealth to very personal friends or family.
Why do people like to drive fancy cars, wear expensive clothes, you and I might not do that but some people get personal pleasure from showing off, or impressing a boss or girlfriend.
If I pasted hundred dollar bills on my body in a public place, I might be arrested for being a kook,,, and if they find out I'm a Ron Paul supporter by the hat I wear,,,I'm in real trouble......held for mental evaluation...smile.
Yes, you are. None of these
Yes, you are. None of these activities you list have value in and of themselves. They are the effect, not the cause.
The key issue of our time is
The key issue of our time is the money everyone uses.
Once the people understand that the paper money they use is created at the whims of their overlords,we will see a change in our lost republic.
A growing,intrusive,authoritarian government needs a fiat currency to control the populace with an illusion of a tax system.Remove taxes on everything and government can still operate as is because they can print it,and force people to use their constantly debased money.It is what fuels wars,encourages entitlements,corruption,misuse on a grand scale.
------------------------------------------
"All human constitutions are subject to corruption and must perish unless they are timely renewed and reduced to their first principles.'" --Thomas Jefferson
coercive monopoly
Ron Paul said:
Ron Paul is calling for an elmination of the laws which allow the Federal Reserve to have a coercive monopoly on money.
Those laws are put there by the government. The government is initiating force, and threatening force on us to prevent us from using other forms of currency.
yup
what a bunch of assholes.
A Radical Opinion!
It is my opinion that the worlds fiat monetary systems, including the American dollar, are nothing more than financial bubbles similar to the housing bubble, the stocks bubbles, the tech bubble, and other mass mania type catastrophe's that have happened before throughout history.
The fiat money injected into circulation has disconnected from actual value, because it { fiat }does not have a real value.
Therefore, unless we the people, demand an abolishment of legal tender laws, a Constitutional push and passage of a competing currency law, and an abolishment of the crony capitalism Fed/Goldman Sachs partnership, we the people and our children are doomed to face financial enslavement in the future.
The founders, led by Connecticut Congressman Roger Sherman, demanded that the monetary system in the new country have a real value, which is reflected in the labor needed to produce Silver, Gold, Copper, etc.
Why? Please read this written in 1752 to fully understand exactly why the Gold/Silver clause was put right into the U.S. Constitution:
http://www.constitution.o...
Thank you for reading.
Is there a video
of this speech ?
Bump
Bump
Get off the railroad tracks before you get run over.
After extensive study I've concluded one of the best ways to regain our liberties is to take a cursorary glance at our opponents plan of attack: economics. Okay, simply turn it around on the leviathin. I now cash my paychecks for lawful gold and silver dollars. I buy groceries, gasoline, cars, dry cleaning, clothing, and anything else I need or want for Constitutional money (see: Title 31 U.S.C. section 5112). Two movie tickets, one large popcorn and two cokes are one silver dollar. Dinner for two people at a nice restaurant is one silver dollar. One months rent is one twenty-five dollar gold coin. I pay no taxes as I make less than $11,500 a year in gold and silver dollars according the alleged tax code. I don't even have to file according to both the FTB and the IRS.
Ron Paul and Philip Crane wrote the 1985 Gold Bullion Act for this specific purpose - to give the American people back the Constitutionally guaranteed monetary system. Robert Kahre took the ball and ran with it. He won. It is now YOUR responsibility to go get it and then either save it or spend it. To do this you must:
1. Qualify the check.
On the back write "Redeemed for Federal Reserve Notes, parity of value unknown". This establishes, in case of an audit, that Federal Reserve Notes (hereinafter: "FRNs") are "worthless securities" [see: IRC 165(g)] and "debt instruments" (see: Public Law 94-564) valued in Special Drawing Rights. Below that write "Pay to the order of (Name of Coin Dealer)". Below that sign your name (preferably in purple ink).
2. Cash the check at the coin dealer.
Depending on the amount of the check you can receive silver dollars (Walking Liberties) or gold dollars of five, twenty-five or fifty dollar increments (Double Eagles). Do not accept the ten dollar coin as it is one quarter oz and therefore doesn't comport with the equal weights and measures clause of the Constitution. The coins should be minted after 1985 to meet the legal tender definition (see: 1985 Gold Bullion Act and Title 31 U.S.C. section 5112).
3. Get a receipt.
This documents what you received cash in hand. You may be taxed on what you receive cash in hand. If your check says 180.00 but you received ten silver dollars at 18.00 each then your receipt will evidence this. You will be taxed on ten (lawful) dollars and NOT 180.00. This is why billionaires never pay any income tax. They are paid in gold and silver dollars. You do not become a billionaire by being a fool.
4. Thank the coin dealer and go have lunch.
Walk into a restaurant. When the host or hostess greets you respond kindly and ask them if you may speak with the manager or owner. When this takes place say to them "Hi, I'd like to have lunch here and was wondering if you accept these." HAND them the silver dollar. They will look at it and flip it over in their palm. They will see the see the inscription and the gleam of the metal. They will feel the weight (one troy oz) of the coin. Sometimes they will ask "Is this a dollar?"
Respond with "Yes, it's worth eighteen paper dollars."
Talk as little as possible and give direct and honest answers.
"Okay, have a seat."
Order something off the menu for less than eighteen bucks (FRNs) so you can cover the tip. Sometimes they will bring you change in FRNs so you can tip that way.
5. Get yourself a haircut.
Repeat step 4 and take a seat in the chair offered to you. Pay them one silver dollar for your haircut. Answer questions about the coin AS THEY ASK. Do not get political.
Sometimes you will be politely declined. If they say they don't accept the coin say "Thank you" and leave. Do not patronize them again but rather go to another similar establishment nearby. When the crash comes the business that refused service to you will go bankrupt while the one that takes money will thrive. When I started doing this twelve years ago a dollar was worth six FRNs. Now it is worth eighteen FRNs. People are exponentially being forced to pay attention as the FRNs depreciate and the cost of goods and services must inflate to offset this approbation. You will have an excellent success rate if you:
A. Speak to the owner.
B. Do not go in more than once a week (don't want to overwhelm them).
C. Keep it honest.
D. Say "please" and "thank you".
E. Do not give unsolicited information unless the subject of economics is broached.
If the coin dealer sells a silver dollar for 18.50 then make an attempt to keep the purchase as close to that amount as possible. If the merchant claims that the coin "..is only worth 15.00" then gently remind them that this is the "spot price". The spot price is what the mint sells the coin at based on the value of the FRNs. It is then distributed by twelve different buyers to smaller brokers. These brokers then sell to the coin dealer. Your coin dealer only has a two to three percent profit margin. What the most recent price is on your receipt is what you should trade the coin at. DO NOT quibble over a fifty cent discrepency. DO NOT try to nickle and dime the merchant. Next week the coin may be worth twenty FRNs and the merchant might be wary but at the same time excited that they have established this relationship with you.
The value of the coin NEVER goes up or down. The value of the FRN does. Before 1933 you could redeem fifty FRNs at the bank and receive one fifty dollar gold coin. Now it takes well over a thousand depreciated FRNs to acquire the same fifty dollar gold coin. Today, with the exception of a few hedge banks, all lending institutions are insolvent and have no gold or silver dollars. You will fair better in the long run by redeeming your checks at a coin dealer and spending the money in your community for goods and services. What you don't spend you should save and live within your means.
Will you be audited? There are no guarantees but the bad guys know better than to raise this issue as they would be caught in a fraud under the thrust of the Fair Debt Collections Act. You can't have two types of "dollar" in this country, it would have to be at a 1:1 trade. Never mind that the bad guys (IRS, FTB, et al. have no bond, insurance, oath of office, appointment affidavit or evidence of any delegation of authority from the government as they are mere privately owned corporations.
Regarding the flucuation in the buying site rate. Sadly most prices of goods and services are indicated in Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs). If the coin dealer sells the dollar at 20.00 FRNs then I will have a coin valued at 20.00 FRNs. Next month the coin may be at 40.00 FRNs and I will be able to purchase even more. As I said before "keep it honest". Trade the money at the most current buying site rate. As you can see by pulling up the chart of the gold or silver spot markets the purchasing ability of the FRN is weakening daily. That is a subject I won't extrapolate on here but it is an impetus for the merchant to eventually abandon the practice of accepting illegal and unlawful FRNs as they are nothing more than debt instruments. I sure wouldn't want to be the last one holding them. I've spoken to enough elderly Germans, Hungarians, etc., who told me of the refusal of the "paper money". Don't believe me? Look at the value of Zimbabwes' "paper dollar".
The greatest weapon of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed..
Let's create a floating casino -- that only takes gold
and silver.
I'm thinking this up as I type -- You can pick flaws as we go -- Consider this "open-source" entrepreneurialism.
We'll keep it moving up and down the West Coast -- keep one on the East Coast -- and one in the Gulf.
We'll hire ex-Navy seals to guard it (on board - under the ship - in new-age swift boats - and new-age swift subs).
We'll put the hail storm system on the ship - little ships - and subs.
The ship will be a floating bank -- No passengers -- The gambling is done through swiss banks and e-gambling sites.
You gamble, but the wins are translated in commodities here state-side.
We hire Jim Rogers firm to determine which commodities are in-play.
These casino / banks will provide "debit cards" to all "players."
We use the debit cards to purchase most of our transactions.
All of us groundswell will be investors -- as the idea grows will build more ships and armed escort.
When the country moves towards a Minarchism or some other Economic-Individualism then we'll have our Navy all paid for.
Just a thought
Octobox