Money as Debt

[Liberty_Tree]

Money As Debt (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2550156453790090544&ei=V9g5S5mlHqbuqAONt7DjDg&q=Money+as+debt#)

[NiceGoing]

Bump! EXCELLENT.

"A Pictorial History"

[Travlyr]

This is not an excellent video. The conclusion is that government must take over the money printing. No, that is a very bad idea.

For people to be free, they must let the natural free market operate. Government has no more business creating money out-of-nothing than they do creating rib-eye steaks out-of-nothing. Beef and money are natural products of skill and effort mixed with natural resources.

Honest sound money as prescribed by Dr. Ron Paul is the key to liberty, peace, and prosperity.

[Acala]

This is not an excellent video. The conclusion is that government must take over the money printing. No, that is a very bad idea.

For people to be free, they must let the natural free market operate. Government has no more business creating money out-of-nothing than they do creating rib-eye steaks out-of-nothing. Beef and money are natural products of skill and effort mixed with natural resources.

Honest sound money as prescribed by Dr. Ron Paul is the key to liberty, peace, and prosperity.

This^

[matt0611]

This is not an excellent video. The conclusion is that government must take over the money printing. No, that is a very bad idea.

For people to be free, they must let the natural free market operate. Government has no more business creating money out-of-nothing than they do creating rib-eye steaks out-of-nothing. Beef and money are natural products of skill and effort mixed with natural resources.

Honest sound money as prescribed by Dr. Ron Paul is the key to liberty, peace, and prosperity.

Yup, agreed.

[Galileo Galilei]

It's an excellent video.

[Travlyr]

It's an excellent video.

So, then you are of the opinion that politicians creating fiat money out-of-nothing is better than a central bank printing money out-of-nothing?

How is that better?

[Galileo Galilei]

So, then you are of the opinion that politicians creating fiat money out-of-nothing is better than a central bank printing money out-of-nothing?

How is that better?

That's not the main point of the film, the main point to to explain that money is debt. Anyone can create money out of debt.

[Travlyr]

That's not the main point of the film, the main point to to explain that money is debt. Anyone can create money out of debt.

That does seem to be the main point of the video because they conclude with the government should print the money concept.

Ellen Brown's Web of Debt is closely aligned with this concept. ht tp://www.webofdebt.com/

Her solution: That government's job is to print our money. She has a lot of support but it is just more central planning control over people's lives.


Web of Debt unravels the deceptions in our money scheme and presents a crystal clear picture of the financial abyss towards which we are heading. Then it explores a workable alternative, one that was tested in colonial America and is grounded in the best of American economic thought, including the writings of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln. If you care about financial security, your own or the nation's, you should read this book.

[Galileo Galilei]

That does seem to be the main point of the video because they conclude with the government should print the money concept.

Ellen Brown's Web of Debt is closely aligned with this concept. ht tp://www.webofdebt.com/

Her solution: That government's job is to print our money. She has a lot of support but it is just more central planning control over people's lives.

You missed the basic point of the film, then. Private citizens can create money just as easy as governments can. Money is debt. That is the opposite of fiat money, fiat money is not debt.

[Travlyr]

You missed the basic point of the film, then. Private citizens can create money just as easy as governments can. Money is debt. That is the opposite of fiat money, fiat money is not debt.

I don't think so. A very clever tactic used by the TPTB is to present enough truth to make a concept believable, then draw false conclusions to gain support. That's what this video accomplishes. They do not want to give-up their privileged counterfeiting scheme, and they are hard at work obfuscating the truth.

Private individuals creating money is only a problem for people who get sucked into their scam... it is a contract issue. Governments creating money have the force of law on their side.

Fiat means let it be so ... it's fake because it is created out of nothing. Real money is the opposite of fiat. Real money is earned through honest effort and has valuable properties.

[Galileo Galilei]

I don't think so. A very clever tactic used by the TPTB is to present enough truth to make a concept believable, then draw false conclusions to gain support. That's what this video accomplishes. They do not want to give-up their privileged counterfeiting scheme, and they are hard at work obfuscating the truth.

Private individuals creating money is only a problem for people who get sucked into their scam... it is a contract issue. Governments creating money have the force of law on their side.

Fiat means let it be so ... it's fake because it is created out of nothing. Real money is the opposite of fiat. Real money is earned through honest effort and has valuable properties.

you are confusing some truths about the way things are now, with advocacy. The overall effect on most people of the film is to wake them up about money. The film also makes harsh criticisms of the Federal Reserve System.

The film also has really cool music.

[Deborah K]

How do you get around the fact that Article I section 8 in the Constitution gives Congress the authority to issue money? The film isn't suggesting money be created out of nothing. It has as one of its solutions, using a barter money system based on labor for small communities, they talk about creating a permanent interest free economy based on long lasting infrastructure that would facilitate the economy. Watch this starting at about 6 minutes. I know anarchists would hate these ideas, but since I'm not one, and I am for limited gov't based on the Constitution, I'm not opposed to a debate about the solutions proposed in this video.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qicabStQkc&feature=related

[Deborah K]

I don't think so. A very clever tactic used by the TPTB is to present enough truth to make a concept believable, then draw false conclusions to gain support. That's what this video accomplishes. They do not want to give-up their privileged counterfeiting scheme, and they are hard at work obfuscating the truth.

Private individuals creating money is only a problem for people who get sucked into their scam... it is a contract issue. Governments creating money have the force of law on their side.

Fiat means let it be so ... it's fake because it is created out of nothing. Real money is the opposite of fiat. Real money is earned through honest effort and has valuable properties.

I friend of mine, Andy Gause, is quoted in this film and endorses it. This film not done by tptb.

[matt0611]

How do you get around the fact that Article I section 8 in the Constitution gives Congress the authority to issue money? The film isn't suggesting money be created out of nothing. It has as one of its solutions, using a barter money system based on labor for small communities, they talk about creating a permanent interest free economy based on long lasting infrastructure that would facilitate the economy. Watch this starting at about 6 minutes. I know anarchists would hate these ideas, but since I'm not one, and I am for limited gov't based on the Constitution, I'm not opposed to a debate about the solutions proposed in this video.



To be precise, congress has the power to coin money, not issue it.

[Deborah K]

That does seem to be the main point of the video because they conclude with the government should print the money concept.

Ellen Brown's Web of Debt is closely aligned with this concept. ht tp://www.webofdebt.com/

Her solution: That government's job is to print our money. She has a lot of support but it is just more central planning control over people's lives.

The folks who made "Money Masters" both of whom I also know, Pat Carmack and Bill Still, also advocate a fiat system but done differently, not through a central bank: I don't agree with them but their documentary is still very valuable historic information. Here is their proposal:
http://www.themoneymasters.com/monetary-reform-act/

[Deborah K]

To be precise, congress has the power to coin money, not issue it.

Coin and regulate, yes.

[Travlyr]

How do you get around the fact that Article I section 8 in the Constitution gives Congress the authority to issue money? The film isn't suggesting money be created out of nothing. It has as one of its solutions, using a barter money system based on labor for small communities, they talk about creating a permanent interest free economy based on long lasting infrastructure that would facilitate the economy. Watch this starting at about 6 minutes. I know anarchists would hate these ideas, but since I'm not one, and I am for limited gov't based on the Constitution, I'm not opposed to a debate about the solutions proposed in this video.

Article I Section 8 -- "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"

That is not the power to issue money. They only have the power to coin money, make it regular, and to fix the standard. They were not given the power to issue bills of credit (print money).

For a truly free society, government should not even have the power to coin money. Individuals should be able to trade whatever they want with each other without penalty or fear of losing their freedom.

Ron Paul explains it in "Gold, Peace, and Prosperity"

[Galileo Galilei]

How do you get around the fact that Article I section 8 in the Constitution gives Congress the authority to issue money? The film isn't suggesting money be created out of nothing. It has as one of its solutions, using a barter money system based on labor for small communities, they talk about creating a permanent interest free economy based on long lasting infrastructure that would facilitate the economy. Watch this starting at about 6 minutes. I know anarchists would hate these ideas, but since I'm not one, and I am for limited gov't based on the Constitution, I'm not opposed to a debate about the solutions proposed in this video.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qicabStQkc&feature=related

The film is arguing that a debt-based Federal Reserve System like we have now, is worse than a system of government printed debt-free money. This is not far from what Ron Paul just suggested when he said the US should repudiate $1.6 trillion in T-bills.

But the real genius of the film is not suggestions for improvement, but the concept that money is debt.

(There is another concept for money, items which the government will accept for the payment of taxes, or items the government forces you to accept as legal tender)

[Dr.3D]

A note is not a "coin". Simple as that.

[Deborah K]

Article I Section 8 -- "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"

That is not the power to issue money. They only have the power to coin money, make it regular, and to fix the standard. They were not given the power to issue bills of credit (print money).

For a truly free society, government should not even have the power to coin money. Individuals should be able to trade whatever they want with each other without penalty or fear of losing their freedom.

Ron Paul explains it in "Gold, Peace, and Prosperity"

No need to get hung up on the word "issue". I meant it in the context of one of its definitions: something that is sent out or put forth in any form.

I don't think Ron has a problem with Article I section 8.

[Deborah K]

I also don't think the Constitution prohibits competing currencies, it only states that the federal gov't can coin and regulate but the states can't.

[Travlyr]

No need to get hung up on the word "issue". I meant it in the context of one of its definitions: something that is sent out or put forth in any form.

I don't think Ron has a problem with Article I section 8.I think Ron Paul would be happy to strike that from the constitution, but he is willing to work with it, as long as, they only "coin" money.

[Galileo Galilei]

Money by James Madison

Abstract

This essay, written around 1779, challenges the simple quantity theory of money. From the perspective of the paper money issued to pay for American's Revolutionary War--bills of credit, or continentals -- the essay rejects the idea that the value of money is determined by the number of pieces of paper issued. That idea ignores the fact that an individual nation is just a small part of the world economy. More relevant than quantity, the essay argues, are two other features: the date the government promises to exchange the pieces of paper for specie and the credibility of that promise. This essay originally appeared in a 1791 Philadelphia newspaper. The version reprinted in this journal is the edited and annotated version from The Papers of James Madison (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962). It is reprinted with the permission of the University of Chicago Press.

http://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedmqr/y1997ifallp3-7nv.21no.4.html

[Deborah K]

Ron wants to get rid of legal tender laws, allow the operation of private mints, and eliminate capital gains and sales tax on gold and silver coins.

[Deborah K]

I think Ron Paul would be happy to strike that from the constitution, but he is willing to work with it, as long as, they only "coin" money.

I've never heard him say that.

[Travlyr]

Money by James Madison

I never understood why Madison did not renew the bank charter and then changed his mind a few years later.

[Travlyr]

Ron wants to get rid of legal tender laws, allow the operation of private mints, and eliminate capital gains and sales tax on gold and silver coins.
Right. However to allow private mints would mean striking that part of Article I Section 8.
Ron Paul is not in favor of punishing people for victimless crimes.

[Deborah K]

The film is arguing that a debt-based Federal Reserve System like we have now, is worse than a system of government printed debt-free money. This is not far from what Ron Paul just suggested when he said the US should repudiate $1.6 trillion in T-bills.

But the real genius of the film is not suggestions for improvement, but the concept that money is debt.

(There is another concept for money, items which the government will accept for the payment of taxes, or items the government forces you to accept as legal tender)

I think the film does a pretty decent job of explaining that. What it boils down to is: when only one entity issues and circulates the money, and if the only money in circulation is loaned at interest, where does the money come from to pay back the interest? A system like this inevitably creates failure somewhere down the line.

[tpreitzel]

Ahem, the issue of fraud becomes fraught with fraud when decentralizing coinage. If the process of coinage is restricted to the federal government, we can readily identify the source and largely minimize any counterfeiting.

[Travlyr]

Ahem, the issue of fraud becomes fraught with fraud when decentralizing coinage. If the process of coinage is restricted to the federal government, we can readily identify the source.

If the federal government commits fraud, there is no remedy.

If private mints commit fraud, they will go out of business.

[Deborah K]

Right. However to allow private mints would mean striking that part of Article I Section 8.
Ron Paul is not in favor of punishing people for victimless crimes.

Or more like amending it to include competition with the gov't.

[matt0611]

Coin and regulate, yes.

Coin and regulate the value thereof.

To coin at that time meant: "fashioning pieces of metal into a prescribed shape, weight, and degree of fineness, and stamping them with prescribed devices".

Printing bills that could be exchanged for lawful money (which is what our federal reserve notes were at one time) is the power to "emit bills of credit".
The states are denied the power to print their own currency because they are explicity denied the power to "to coin money; emit bills of credit...".

The constitution does not give congress the power to emit bills of credit because it does not mention it under Article 1 Section 8.

Its important to note that the founders viewed "emitting bills of credit" different than "coining money". They are not the same thing. Legal money is only gold or silver. Hence "no state shall...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts"

To "regulate that value" (of money [which can only be "coined" not printed] and of foreign coin) consists of only the power of comparison and declaration of the money/coins.

The word regulate back at that time did not mean the same thing it does today.

Thus, under the power "To coin Money,” Congress has discretion to set the weight, purity, form, and impression of all silver and gold coins it mints. Whereas, under the power "To regulate the Value,” it has a duty to accurately determine the proportions of market value between the fixed "Money-Unit" (which is the dollar) and the coinage that it, and other foreign nations, mint.

[Dr.3D]

If the federal government commits fraud, there is no remedy.

If private mints commit fraud, they will go out of business.
And go to prison too.

[Galileo Galilei]

I never understood why Madison did not renew the bank charter and then changed his mind a few years later.

Madison did want a central bank in operation during a war. In 1811, it was all but certain that war would begin, so he let the bank bill die. In fact, the battle of Tippecanoe was in 1811.

Madison did not want a bank at all, he was hoping a strategy could be devised that would make the war so short that serious debts did not ensue. But in 1812, the US had few if any competent military leaders. And remember, in 1812 the US was under a strangle-hold, the British had seized 400 ships and kidnapped 8000 men, the French had seized 500 ships, and the Barbary pirates were in operation. And the British on 4 separate incidents had fired upon, inflicted casualties or death to American seamen.

The British were trying to divide and conquer, get the NE of the US to fight against the south and west. The entire situation was nightmare. Remember, from 1588 and the defeat of the Spanish Armada until the 20th century, the British won every colonial war except against the US.

[Travlyr]

Or more like amending it to include competition with the gov't.

No one can compete with government because they have unfair advantage. Separation of state and money is the path to liberty.

[Travlyr]

And go to prison too.

Exactly.

[tpreitzel]

If the federal government commits fraud, there is no remedy.

If private mints commit fraud, they will go out of business.

If the federal government commits fraud, there is no remedy.

There's a remedy all right and it's likely to be invoked quite quickly once the fraud is discovered by the people. Any attempt at inflating a hard asset will likely be met with swift response as it won't be easy to hide.



If private mints commit fraud, they will go out of business.True IF the mint is identifiable. I'm not totally opposed to the idea of a decentralized mint, just cautious. I can only could see a decentralized mint operating under the supervision of the federal government.

[Travlyr]

There's a remedy all right and it's likely to be invoked quite quickly once the fraud is discovered by the people. Any attempt at inflating a hard asset will likely be met with swift response as it won't be easy to hide.
We are going on 98 years so far with the federal government complicit in fraud. We cannot even get an audit... let alone any remedy. That is not quickly enough for me.


True IF the mint is identifiable. I'm not totally opposed to the idea of a decentralized mint, just cautious. I can only could see a decentralized mint operating under the supervision of the federal government.
The mints would be identifiable. Competition would guarantee that. The federal government has proven to be irresponsible regulators. Individuals should be able to trade whatever they want without fear of losing their freedom.

[Dr.3D]

We already have private mints stamping out one ounce gold and silver rounds. We just need to be able to use those as money.

[Deborah K]

No one can compete with government because they have unfair advantage. Separation of state and money is the path to liberty.

So you think he wants to strike Article I sec 8? He has never said as much. And I think he would since he has been so clear on abolishing the FED, the IRS, the FBI etc.

[Deborah K]

We already have private mints stamping out one ounce gold and silver rounds. We just need to be able to use those as money.

getting rid of legal tender laws would accomplish that, right?

[Dr.3D]

getting rid of legal tender laws would accomplish that, right?

For paying debts yes. But we can still use those rounds as money if people just agree to it.

[tpreitzel]

We are going on 98 years so far with the federal government complicit in fraud. We cannot even get an audit... let alone any remedy. That is not quickly enough for me.


Again, inflating a hard asset isn't easy to hide especially on the scale of mass production. Although our coinage has been debased, it's common knowledge. A return to gold and silver coinage as specified by the US Constitution will reestablish a standard for circulating coinage and inflating such coinage will NOT go unnoticed or uncorrected very long. We've ACCEPTED the current debasement will full knowledge, but that debasement will be corrected with a return to constitutional standards.



The mints would be identifiable. Competition would guarantee that. The federal government has proven to be irresponsible regulators. Individuals should be able to trade whatever they want without fear of losing their freedom.Lastly, decentralizing coinage just adds to the complexity of identifying such coins when distributed outside of a local area.

[Travlyr]

So you think he wants to strike Article I sec 8? He has never said as much. And I think he would since he has been so clear on abolishing the FED, the IRS, the FBI etc.
I've never heard Ron Paul say it directly. However, I have read most of his books and it is clear that he is in favor of competing currencies which would necessarily mean striking it.

[Dr.3D]

We already have coins of gold and silver being minted by government mints. The problem so far has been getting enough of them to use as money and people accepting them for more than the fraudulent face value stamped on them.

[tpreitzel]

We already have coins of gold and silver being minted by government mints. The problem so far has been getting enough of them to use as money and people accepting them for more than the fraudulent face value stamped on them.

Correct along with eliminating the debased coins in circulation.

[Travlyr]

Again, inflating a hard asset isn't easy to hide especially on the scale of mass production. Although our coinage has been debased, it's common knowledge. A return to gold and silver coinage as specified by the US Constitution will reestablish a standard for circulating coinage and inflating such coinage will NOT go unnoticed or uncorrected very long. We've ACCEPTED the current debasement will full knowledge, but that debasement will be corrected with a return to constitutional standards.

Lastly, decentralizing coinage just adds to the complexity of identifying such coins when distributed outside of a local area.
You have a LOT more faith in your politicians than I. I want them out of the money creating and coinage business altogether. The sooner the better.

[YumYum]

This is proof the framers left us with a mess. The issue regarding money should be so clear-cut that there shouldn't be any debate. Instead, because the Constitution is so ambiguous, we now have a $14.3 trillion national debt. The framers knew they left us with a mess. That is why I don't worship them as gods.

[Travlyr]

We already have coins of gold and silver being minted by government mints. The problem so far has been getting enough of them to use as money and people accepting them for more than the fraudulent face value stamped on them.

I will gladly take your government issued silver or gold coins off your hands for three times face value... even four times face.

[matt0611]

I've never heard Ron Paul say it directly. However, I have read most of his books and it is clear that he is in favor of competing currencies which would necessarily mean striking it.

Legalizing competing currencies wouldn't require removing any power of congress. They would still have the power to coin money.
Or am I misunderstanding you?

[Deborah K]

This is proof the framers left us with a mess. The issue regarding money should be so clear-cut that there shouldn't be any debate. Instead, because the Constitution is so ambiguous, we now have a $14.3 trillion national debt. The framers knew they left us with a mess. That is why I don't worship them as gods.

It has less to do with the founders flubbing than it does with congress relinquishing it's power to a private entity - the FED. That is when the real problems in our country arise - with every bank war, and there have been 5, this last one lasting the longest.

[Acala]

Coin and regulate the value thereof.

To coin at that time meant: "fashioning pieces of metal into a prescribed shape, weight, and degree of fineness, and stamping them with prescribed devices".

Printing bills that could be exchanged for lawful money (which is what our federal reserve notes were at one time) is the power to "emit bills of credit".
The states are denied the power to print their own currency because they are explicity denied the power to "to coin money; emit bills of credit...".

The constitution does not give congress the power to emit bills of credit because it does not mention it under Article 1 Section 8.

Its important to note that the founders viewed "emitting bills of credit" different than "coining money". They are not the same thing. Legal money is only gold or silver. Hence "no state shall...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts"

To "regulate that value" (of money [which can only be "coined" not printed] and of foreign coin) consists of only the power of comparison and declaration of the money/coins.

The word regulate back at that time did not mean the same thing it does today.

Thus, under the power "To coin Money,” Congress has discretion to set the weight, purity, form, and impression of all silver and gold coins it mints. Whereas, under the power "To regulate the Value,” it has a duty to accurately determine the proportions of market value between the fixed "Money-Unit" (which is the dollar) and the coinage that it, and other foreign nations, mint.

This^ is correct. It becomes very clear when you read Madison's discussion of the limitation on bills of credit in the Federalist Papers. Paper money was considered to be a bill of credit because REAL money was specie - the metal coin itself. Bills of credit were claims on specie. The states were prohibited the power to issue bills of credit explicitly because state power is plenary, meaning the states retained ALL power not specifically denied them. Because the States had created such havoc with paper money (bills of credit) they agreed that they should all stop doing it and in the Constitution took from themselves that power. The Federal government, being one of ENUMERATED powers, never had the power under the Constitution to issue bills of credit (paper money) and so no need to prohibit it.

The Federal government is empowered to COIN METALLIC MONEY. It is NOT empowered to issue paper money. And the reason is that the Founders knew that, contrary to what is suggested in this film, no government can be trusted to issue paper money.

[Travlyr]

Legalizing competing currencies wouldn't require removing any power of congress. They would still have the power to coin money.
Or am I misunderstanding you?
No one can compete with government. That power needs to be taken from them to keep them honest.

[Dr.3D]

I will gladly take your government issued silver or gold coins off your hands for three times face value... even four times face.

And I am free to tell you I would require at least 75 x the face value. :D

[tpreitzel]

You have a LOT more faith in your politicians than I. I want them out of the money creating and coinage business altogether. The sooner the better.

Actually, I have faith that a few old scrooges will swiftly identify any devious behavior by the federal government.

[Travlyr]

And I am free to tell you I would require at least 75 x the face value. :D

75 x? :eek: :( Never mind.

[Deborah K]

No one can compete with government. That power needs to be taken from them to keep them honest.

It was taken from them - and given to the FED. Actually they relinquished it willingly because they knew they borrow limitless amounts of money.

[Dr.3D]

It was taken from them - and given to the FED. Actually they relinquished it willingly because they knew they borrow limitless amounts of money.

They just got rid of the accountability problem.

[Deborah K]

They just got rid of the accountability problem.

Yeppers!!!!!

[YumYum]

It has less to do with the founders flubbing than it does with congress relinquishing it's power to a private entity - the FED. That is when the real problems in our country arise - with every bank war, and there have been 5, this last one lasting the longest.

You don't think that the framers didn't know what a "central bank" was? All they would have to have done was put in the Constitution "there shall be no central bank", and we would not have this problem. Arguing over what the Constitution and what the framers meant is like arguing over the book of Revelation and its interpretation. There is one difference though; the framers weren't high on mushrooms, so they are more accountable.

[Deborah K]

You don't think that the framers didn't know what a "central bank" was? All they would have to have done was put in the Constitution "there shall be no central bank", and we would not have this problem. Arguing over what the Constitution and what the framers meant is like arguing over the book of Revelation and its interpretation. There is one difference though; the framers weren't high on mushrooms, so they are more accountable.

They probably thought they handled it with Article I Sec. 8. If that section is adhered to, there is no need for a central bank.

[YumYum]

They probably thought they handled it with Article I Sec. 8. If that section is adhered to, there is no need for a central bank.

"The Congress shall have Power ...To borrow money on the credit of the United States;"...this has been adhered to faithfully...

[Deborah K]

"The Congress shall have Power ...To borrow money on the credit of the United States;"...this has been adhered to faithfully...

Indeed. When it borrows money “on the credit of the United States,” Congress creates a binding obligation to pay the debt as stipulated and cannot thereafter vary the terms of its agreement. But as we all know, that is not done. Which is why they never attempt to balance the budget. And now they don't even plan a budget. In my opinion it's ridiculous to blame the founders or the Constitution - given that congress has the power to amend it.

[showpan]

The question of granting power to emit bills of credit came up for discussion twice in the convention. The first time was on August 16, 1787. (The convention had begun its deliberations on May 25, 1787, so it was moving fairly rapidly toward the conclusion when the question arose.) The question was whether or not the United States government should have power to emit bills of credit. Congress had such a power under the Articles of Confederation, and most of the powers held by Congress under the Articles were introduced in the convention to be extended to the new government. The vote was overwhelmingly in favor of removing the authority of the United States to emit bills of credit. The delegates voted by states, and 9 states voted in favor of the motion while only 2 opposed it.

Paper Money Rejected
Three other points may be appropriate. The first has to do with any argument that there might be an implied power for the United States government to issue paper money since it is not specifically prohibited in the Constitution. Alexander Hamilton, the man credited with advancing the broad construction doctrine, maintained the opposite view in The Federalist. While he was making a case against the adding of a bill of rights, his argument was meant to have general validity. He declared that such prohibitions “are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do.” In short, the government does not have all powers not prohibited but only those granted.

Second, this point was driven home by the 10th Amendment when a Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution. It reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The power to emit bills of credit or issue paper money was not delegated to the United States. More, it was specifically not delegated after deliberating upon whether to or not. The power was prohibited to the states. The logical conclusion is that such power as there may be to emit bills of credit was reserved to the people in their private capacities.
And third, not one word has been added to or subtracted from the Constitution since that time affecting the power of government to emit bills of credit or issue paper money.


"All the perplexities, confusion and distresses in America arise not from defects in
the constitution or confederation, nor from want of honor or virtue, as much from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation." - John Adams

“that there never was a paper pound, a paper dollar, or a paper promise of any kind, that ever yet obtained a general currency but by force or fraud, generally by both.” - Josiah Quincy



The silver content of a dollar under this act was almost exactly equal to 1/5 of the silver content of the contemporary British pound sterling, or 4 British shillings.

Hamilton's Coinage Act of April 2, 1792
(1 Stat. 246)
Statute I. April 2, 1792
Chapter XVI.--An Act establishing a Mint, and regulating the coins of the United States.

Section 9.
And be it further enacted, That there shall be from time to time struck and coined at the said mint, coins of gold, silver, and copper, of the following denominations, values and descriptions, viz.

EAGLES-
-each to be of he value of ten dollars or units, and to contain two hundred and forty-seven grains and four eighths of a grain of pure, or two hundred and seventy grains of standard gold.

HALF EAGLES-
-each to be of the value of five dollars, and to contain one hundred and twenty-three grains and six eighths of a grain of pure, or one hundred and thirty-five grains of standard gold.

QUARTER EAGLES-
-each to be of the value of two dollars and a half dollar, and to contain sixty-one grains and seven eighths of a grain of pure, or sixty-seven grains and four eighths of a grain of standard gold.

DOLLARS OR UNITS-
-each to be of the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy-one grains and four sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred and sixteen grains of standard silver.

HALF DOLLARS-
-each to be of half the value of the dollar or unit, and to contain one hundred and eighty-five grains and ten sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or two hundred and eight grains of standard silver.

QUARTER DOLLAR-
-each to be of one fourth the value of the dollar or unit, and to contain ninety-two grains and thirteen sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or one hundred and four grains of standard silver.

DISMES-
-each to be of the value of one tenth of a dollar or unit, and to contain thirty-seven grains and two sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or forty-one grains and three fifths parts of a grain of standard silver.

HALF DISMES-
-each to be of the value of one twentieth of a dollar, and to contain eighteen grains and nine sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or twenty grains and four fifths parts of a grain of standard silver.

CCENTS-
-each to be of the value of the one hundredth part of a dollar, and to contain eleven penny-weights of copper.

HALF CENTS-
-each to be of the value of half a cent, and to contain five penny-weights and a half a penny-weight of copper.

Section 11.
And be it further enacted, That of gold and silver the proportional value of gold and silver in all coins which shall by law be current as money within the United States, shall be fifteen to one, according to quantity in weight, of pure gold or pure silver; that is o say, every fifteen payments, with one pound weight of pure gold, and so in
proportion as to any greater or less quantities of the respective metals.


Section 12.
And be it further enacted, That coins, and alloy the standard for all gold coins of the United how to be regulated States shall be eleven parts fine to one part alloy; and accordingly that eleven parts fine to one part alloy; and accordingly that eleven parts in twelve of the entire weight of each of the said coins shall consist of pure gold, and the remaining one twelfth part of alloy; and the said alloy shall be composed of silver and copper, in such proportions not exceeding one half silver as shall be found convenient; to be regulated by the director of the mint, for the time being, with the approbation of the President of the United States, until further provision shall be made by law. And to the end that the necessary information may be had in order to the making of such further provision, it shall be the duty of the director of the the practice of mint, at the expiration of a year commencing
the operations of the said mint, to report to Congress the practice thereof during the said year, touching the composition of the alloy of the said gold coins, the reasons for such practice, and the experiments and observations which shall have been made concerning the effects of different proportions of silver and copper in the said alloy.

Section 13.
And be it further enacted, That the standard for all silver coins of the United States, shall be one thousand four hundred and eighty-five parts fine to one hundred and seventy-nine parts alloy; and accordingly that one thousand four hundred and eighty-five parts in one thousand six hundred and sixty-four parts of the entire weight of each of the said coins shall consist of pure silver, and the remaining Alloy. one hundred and seventy-nine parts of alloy; which alloy shall be wholly of copper.

Sec. 14.
And be it further enacted,That it shall be lawful for any person or persons to bring to the said mint gold and silver bullion, in order to their being coined; and that the bullion so brought shall be there assayed and coined as speedily as may be after the receipt thereof, and that free of expense to the person or persons by whom the same shall have been brought. And as soon as the said bullion shall have been coined, the person or persons by whom the same shall have been delivered, shall upon demand receive in lieu thereof coins of the same species of bullion which shall have been so delivered, weight for weight, of the pure gold or pure silver therein contained: Provided nevertheless, That it shall be at the mutual option of the party or parties bringing such bullion, and of the director of the said mint, to make an immediate exchange of coins for standard bullion, with a deduction of one half per cent. from the weight of the pure gold, or pure silver contained in the said bullion, as an indemnification to the mint for the time which will necessarily be required for coining the said bullion, and for the advance which shall have been so made in coins. And it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury to furnish the said mint from time to time whenever the state of the treasury will admit thereof, with such sums as may be necessary for effecting the said exchanges, to be replaced as speedily as may be out of the coins which shall have been made of the bullion for which the monies so furnished shall have been exchanged; and the said deduction of one half per cent. shall constitute a fund towards defraying the expenses of the said mint.

Sec. 15.
And be it further enacted,That the bullion which shall be brought as aforesaid to the mint to be coined, shall be coined, and the equivalent thereof in coins rendered, if demanded, in the order in which the said bullion shall have been brought or delivered, giving priority according to priority of delivery only, and without preference to any person or persons; and if any preference shall be given contrary to the direction aforesaid, the officer by whom such undue preference shall be given, shall in each case forfeit and pay one thousand dollars; to be recovered with costs of suit. And to the end that it may be known if such preference shall at any time be given, the assayer or officer to whom the said bullion shall be delivered to be coined, shall give to the person or persons bringing the same, a memorandum in writing under his hand, denoting the weight, fineness and value thereof, together with the day and order of its delivery into the mint.

Sec. 16. And be it further enacted, That all the gold and silver coins which shall have been struck at, and issued from the said mint, shall be a lawful tender in all payments whatsoever, those of full weight according to the respective values herein before declared, and those of less than full weight at values proportional to their respective weights.