Rand Paul: feds may have unfairly 'targeted' dad's supporters

[Matt Collins]

The son of Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-Texas) is critical of the government's recent seizure of special copper coins honoring his father.

Dr. Rand Paul says although his father's campaign has nothing to do with the "Ron Paul dollars," he is concerned his father's supporters were targeted because of their political views.

"I know you can't counterfeit money, and that's an appropriate law; but this money has Ron Paul's picture on it and I don't think you're going to fool a lot of people into thinking it's George Washington's picture," he says.

See full article here:
http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/11/ron_pauls_son_says_feds_may_ha.php

[TrueFreedom]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.

[jumpyg1258]

If that is true why are they not enforcing the law at Chuck E Cheeses and other places around the nation that require tokens instead of coins.

[Elwar]

A law that just happened to be enforced when they put Ron Paul's face on a coin...after the company has been in operation for over a decade...and well known by law enforcement agencies and the US Mint.

[ctb619]

commemorative coins are all over the place

[Robben]

So why don't they confiscate Monopoly of Disney Dollars?

[rich34]

Uhh truefreedom what about those disney dollars, tokens you play with at the arcade, or any other "commenritive" coins.

[evadmurd]

So why don't they confiscate Monopoly of Disney Dollars?

It's worth the same.

[Taco John]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.



Counterfitting is against the law. This isn't counterfeitting.

[margomaps]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.

Nobody's claiming that counterfeiting is legal. Everyone agrees that it's not. The Liberty Dollar is clearly not counterfeit, just like any commemorative coin made of precious metals is not a counterfeit.

[literatim]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.

This isn't counterfeiting.

[TrueFreedom]

Right but don't people try to pass Ron Paul coins off as actual money through the use of "bartering" just like the liberty dollar? That is what makes it different than a Chuck E. Cheese or commerative coin, they don't try to pass those off as actual money. I believe the law specifically mentions this......

[constituent]

libertydollars is going to come up looking good out of this deal... eventually.

believe it or not, it is probably a win/win situation... in the long run.

[Robben]

It's worth the same.

Ha!

[hard@work]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.


We walk a fine line on what is legal and is not legal in today's abandonment of the rule of law. I would think carefully again on your position here.

[dirknb@hotmail.com]

What about chocolate-wrapped-in-foil coins, are they gonna shut down Hershey?

[TrueFreedom]

Also US v. Marigold upheld that the design of the coin does not matter.

[TrueFreedom]

I dont see the debate, this is pretty clear.....

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title [1] or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

[Trigonx]

they were not coins btw, they were medallions made of silver and gold and copper that people used to trade with as barter.

[Trigonx]

Liberty Dollar never ever called them legal tender or called them coins, so why do you keep categorizing them as coins such as the Feds are trying to do?

[JMann]

If I buy an arcade token and use it to buy a game in a machine am I not using that token as currency? The machine itself has a slot for a quarter and a token meaning they have equal purchasing power. I haven't been in an arcade in 20 years or so but I remember using the tokens as money daily.

[margomaps]

I dont see the debate, this is pretty clear.....

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title [1] or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

"current money" -- what does that mean?

[TrueFreedom]

Hmm i got this from Liberty Dollars website. I thought they weren't calling it real money.....

The Liberty Dollar is the second-most popular and the fastest-growing currency in America! It's backed by gold and silver instead of being backed by national debt like our familiar US dollars. When you hold the Liberty Dollar, you own silver. When you give this REAL money to someone as payment, they now own silver.

[TrueFreedom]

they were not coins btw, they were medallions made of silver and gold and copper that people used to trade with as barter.

Hmm that quote from their website said it was real money and called it "currency"...

[Trigonx]

Hmm i got this from Liberty Dollars website. I thought they weren't calling it real money.....

The Liberty Dollar is the second-most popular and the fastest-growing currency in America! It's backed by gold and silver instead of being backed by national debt like our familiar US dollars. When you hold the Liberty Dollar, you own silver. When you give this REAL money to someone as payment, they now own silver.


I honestly don't understand your point.

What are you trying to tell people the people here who have already formed an opinion on this matter almost 2 weeks ago after hearing about it and then researching the information themselves to fully understand the situation?


You are mixing up REAL MONEY and "Legal tender"(what the US gov't calls the federal reserve note). I would hope gold and silver is real money since its a precious metal.

[runderwo]

Hmm that quote from their website said it was real money and called it "currency"...

It doesn't matter what they call it... as long as they don't use the buzzword legal tender.

[Trigonx]

TrueFreedom, do you really understand what really happened? The government STOLE gold and silver from its citizens for no reason other than competition. From what I've learned while living in this world as a human being that STEALING is wrong. Why do you keep trying to find fault with the liberty dollar??? They got shafted in this deal but you keep trying to defend the governments action by trying to say that Liberty Dollar was "legal tender." The only thing that would make the Liberty Dollar illegal was if they called it "legal tender" and they have NEVER once said that. So in conclusion you have no argument.

[margomaps]

I honestly don't understand your point.

His/her point might be simply to troll. Who knows? With a name like 'TrueFreedom', I'm surprised this individual is seemingly so eager to discredit Liberty Dollar. Very difficult to discern someone's true motivations online.

[TrueFreedom]

I honestly don't understand your point.

What are you trying to tell people the people here who have already formed an opinion on this matter almost 2 weeks ago after hearing about it and then researching the information themselves to fully understand the situation?


You are mixing up REAL MONEY and "Legal tender"(what the US gov't calls the federal reserve note). I would hope gold and silver is real money since its a precious metal.

I am showing you how it is against the law. You guys say, well they weren't trying to pass it off as real money, it was just a coin like a Chuck E. Cheese coin. Then I show you how it's real money and you say, oh well gold and silver is real money. No it isn't. Gold has no set worth. It is no different than copper or any other metal. Other than being shiny and making jewelry, Gold has no real value other than what we say it is worth......

[TrueFreedom]

His/her point might be simply to troll. Who knows? With a name like 'TrueFreedom', I'm surprised this individual is seemingly so eager to discredit Liberty Dollar. Very difficult to discern someone's true motivations online.

I figured I'd get the troll argument and I understand and expect it. But I am a Paul supporter who has seen first hand the type of garbage he has to deal with. I was with the supporters at the Texas Straw poll when we got locked out and cheated on the vote. I support him and no other candidate. But I disagree with his economic policy, not the cutting of spending, but the competition in currency, and I think this Gold is great idea is flawed. Plus I believe that a lot of the arguments that surround the Paul campaign unfortunately are unnecessary because they are wrong. Most of these come from the movie From Freedom to Fascism. And we need to know what the law says so we don't continue to throw these myths around.

[Trigonx]

I am showing you how it is against the law. You guys say, well they weren't trying to pass it off as real money, it was just a coin like a Chuck E. Cheese coin. Then I show you how it's real money and you say, oh well gold and silver is real money. No it isn't. Gold has no set worth. It is no different than copper or any other metal. Other than being shiny and making jewelry, Gold has no real value other than what we say it is worth......

Sigh.... i give up on you. You are missing the whole point. When people used liberty dollars both parties knew what it was and knew the value, and knew it wasn't legal tender, but they also knew it was not illegal to trade silver and gold. So tell me how trading gold and silver is ILLEGAL.(the whole point you are trying to make)

[TrueFreedom]

It is illegal because they are passing it off in the form of a coin, their website refers to it as real money and currency and the LAW says this......

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title [1] or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.


Therefore it is illegal

[Trigonx]

Also, wtf are you smoking when you say gold has no real value other than what we say it is worth? Gold has always been a precious metal and ALWAYS valuable, the price fluctuates with the supply and demand, not by what we say its worth.

[TrueFreedom]

Also, wtf are you smoking when you say gold has no real value other than what we say it is worth? Gold has always been a precious metal and ALWAYS valuable, the price fluctuates with the supply and demand, not by what we say its worth.

I am smoking nothing. Other than being shiny and making jewelry what is the intrinsic value of gold?

[TrueFreedom]

These arguments are crazy. Lets get rid of Federal Reserve Notes and go back to using gold because there will be no inflation and the worth of the gold won't fluctuate. Oh really? So what happens when I find a goldmine across New Mexico and I want to dump a huge load of gold into the market? Well lets see, the more you have of something, the less the price. Just like with everything else. The only argument you can fall back on is trying to make people believe that gold is limited when you have no knowledge of how much gold is under the Earth. It's a fallacy. Just like if you increase paper dollars you have inflation and the value of the dollar decreases, the same if you have gold and someone dumps in a lot of gold, the value of gold will decrease. And also what are you going to do, limit the amount of currency to what we can back up with gold and silver? Good idea, so what will you do when the billionaires like Bill Gates decide to start hoarding their money?? This gold is great argument makes no economic sense.....

[Trigonx]

These arguments are crazy. Lets get rid of Federal Reserve Notes and go back to using gold because there will be no inflation and the worth of the gold won't fluctuate. Oh really? So what happens when I find a goldmine across New Mexico and I want to dump a huge load of gold into the market? Well lets see, the more you have of something, the less the price. Just like with everything else. The only argument you can fall back on is trying to make people believe that gold is limited when you have no knowledge of how much gold is under the Earth. It's a fallacy

its called competing currency. Understand that term and then i'll read all the crap you wrote above.

[McDermit]

Right but don't people try to pass Ron Paul coins off as actual money through the use of "bartering" just like the liberty dollar? That is what makes it different than a Chuck E. Cheese or commerative coin, they don't try to pass those off as actual money. I believe the law specifically mentions this......

Uh, when I was a kid, we used to trade arcade tokens as money. "I'll give you twelve Funny Bone Dollars for your Lunchable." So since we used them to barter as with money (including in the arcade) does that make the Funny Bone Dollars counterfeit and illegal?

I don't pass my Funny Bone Dollars off as real money, but I can use them in place of USD in the arcade and amongst my friends. Same with Liberty Dollars. No one is saying that they are US currency. But they can be accepted in place of USD amongst friends (or say.. "friendly merchants.") As far as I can see, they're the same situation.



Similarly, there is a community in the Berkshire, MA area that uses their on currency, BerkShares, in place of US Dollars. Banks there even exchange BerkShares for US Notes and vice versa. If Liberty Dollars are illegal, how are Berkshares not?
http://www.berkshares.org/localcurrency.htm#whatare

[TrueFreedom]

its called competing currency. Understand that term and then i'll read all the crap you wrote above.

I know a great deal about competing currency. And lets see, lets take this economic policy 1 step at a time....

1. Our economy is bad bc the Federal Reserve is printing too much money

2. Too much money equals inflation

3. Your plan.........leave the money we have now and then ADD MORE MONEY on the top in the form of competing currency. Do you not realize how bad of an economic policy this is? You think inflation sucks now.......

[Trigonx]

http://www.phoenixdollar.com/

Another competing currency that is legal. And look it has round things made of silver that look like coins.

[margomaps]

I am smoking nothing. Other than being shiny and making jewelry what is the intrinsic value of gold?

I can't tell whether you're asking a question you want answered, or you're dead-set on arguing.

If it's the former, you should know that gold has a number of properties that make it quite valuable in a variety of manufacturing and scientific applications: it's highly malleable, it's ductile (low tendency to break under stress), it's highly conductive of electricity (pretty much only silver is superior in this regard), and it's highly reflective of visible and infared light. It's also highly resistant to corrosion, and it's non-toxic.

[TrueFreedom]

Uh, when I was a kid, we used to trade arcade tokens as money. "I'll give you twelve Funny Bone Dollars for your Lunchable." So since we used them to barter as with money (including in the arcade) does that make the Funny Bone Dollars counterfeit and illegal?

I don't pass my Funny Bone Dollars off as real money, but I can use them in place of USD in the arcade and amongst my friends. Same with Liberty Dollars. No one is saying that they are US currency. But they can be accepted in place of USD amongst friends (or say.. "friendly merchants.") As far as I can see, they're the same situation.



Similarly, there is a community in the Berkshire, MA area that uses their on currency, BerkShares, in place of US Dollars. Banks there even exchange BerkShares for US Notes and vice versa. If Liberty Dollars are illegal, how are Berkshares not?
http://www.berkshares.org/localcurrency.htm#whatare


Simple answer.

From the website you just gave, we got this......

BerkShares will not, and are not intended to, replace federal currency. Their use will help strengthen the regional economy, favoring locally owned enterprises, local manufacturing, and local jobs, and reducing the region's dependence on an unpredictable global economy.

From the Liberty Dollar website we get this........

The Liberty Dollar is the second-most popular and the fastest-growing currency in America! It's backed by gold and silver instead of being backed by national debt like our familiar US dollars. When you hold the Liberty Dollar, you own silver. When you give this REAL money to someone as payment, they now own silver.

There is the answer.....

[Trigonx]

I know a great deal about competing currency. And lets see, lets take this economic policy 1 step at a time....

1. Our economy is bad bc the Federal Reserve is printing too much money

2. Too much money equals inflation

3. Your plan.........leave the money we have now and then ADD MORE MONEY on the top in the form of competing currency. Do you not realize how bad of an economic policy this is? You think inflation sucks now.......

hahahahahaha is all i have to say to you. You are comparing gold and silver to the federal reserve note and saying that by adding gold and silver into the market inflation will increase....

[TrueFreedom]

I can't tell whether you're asking a question you want answered, or you're dead-set on arguing.

If it's the former, you should know that gold has a number of properties that make it quite valuable in a variety of manufacturing and scientific applications: it's highly malleable, it's ductile (low tendency to break under stress), it's highly conductive of electricity (pretty much only silver is superior in this regard), and it's highly reflective of visible and infared light. It's also highly resistant to corrosion, and it's non-toxic.

Well I do believe this has evolved into argument, but I am interested in getting this answered. And why you list some of it's qualities, like I said before, other than the fact that people like it because we are dumb people that like shiny things, and the fact that it makes jewelry, what is so great about it?

[Trigonx]

i'd rather have gold than this paper in my wallet that keeps losing value.

[McDermit]

Stupid people, being obsessed with shiny things for over 4000 years.

[TrueFreedom]

hahahahahaha is all i have to say to you. You are comparing gold and silver to the federal reserve note and saying that by adding gold and silver into the market inflation will increase....

Great analysis, you show your understanding of economics.

[ladyliberty]

Nobody is going after Elvis Presley commemorative coins or George Bush Commemorative coins

http://www.centercoin.com/images/elvis/elvisc.jpg http://x-coin.com/catalog/images/people/small_01501.jpg

[TrueFreedom]

Nobody is going after Elvis Presley commemorative coins or george Bush Commemorative coins

http://x-coin.com/catalog/images/people/small_01501.jpg

No one is calling them real money or currency either......

[TrueFreedom]

I would suggest reading some John Maynard Keynes

[KingTheoden]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.

Disney issues money and even uses dollars and virtually the same style of FRN paper. Anyone can make an alternative means of transacting business, certainly one can mint their own silver and gold rounds as long as they make it clear that they are not 'legal tender.'

[allyinoh]

What if a group of people wanted to use chocolate within their group as currency for services, merchandise, etc? Would that then mean that the chocolate is illegal?

It's not like people are going to Target to use the Liberty Dollar...

I don't understand why it is illegal if a group of people choose to use them with eachother for services or merchandise?

[margomaps]

I would suggest reading some John Maynard Keynes

OK, at least now I know where you're coming from. Keynesian economics is the model used by FDR and other socialists that favor government spending and fiddling in the economy. It's a key tool in the arsenal of central economic planners, and it has failed miserably throughout the 20th century by most objective measures.

Ron Paul, as I'm sure you know, follows the Austrian school, and cites Hayek as one of his heroes. Since Hayek is pretty much the polar opposite of Keyenes in his economic approach, I can now see why you disagree with Dr. Paul's economic views.

I'm sorry to have to say this, but Ron's economic views are nearly central to his philosophy and approach to liberty. You might like Ron for some of his views, but if you're a Keynesian, you're probably better off supporting someone like Kucinich or Nader.

[TrueFreedom]

OK, at least now I know where you're coming from. Keynesian economics is the model used by FDR and other socialists that favor government spending and fiddling in the economy. It's a key tool in the arsenal of central economic planners, and it has failed miserably throughout the 20th century by most objective measures.

Ron Paul, as I'm sure you know, follows the Austrian school, and cites Hayek as one of his heroes. Since Hayek is pretty much the polar opposite of Keyenes in his economic approach, I can now see why you disagree with Dr. Paul's economic views.

I'm sorry to have to say this, but Ron's economic views are nearly central to his philosophy and approach to liberty. You might like Ron for some of his views, but if you're a Keynesian, you're probably better off supporting someone like Kucinich or Nader.

I see what you are saying. And I have done a great deal of research on free market economics ranging from Mises to Walter Williams. And I think that the ideas they present are flawed. Williams for instance says minimum wage is bad because wages are tied to productivity and thus unskilled workers are discriminated against. But where does he get this idea that wages and productivity are tied? They aren't. It's poor policy. Now as far as men like Kucinich and Nader, no i would not support them, although I think Kucinich speaks a lot of truth. I do not support socialism.

[Melissa]

So I guess the logic is if you mow my lawn and I want to bake a cake for payment. I cant do that. well i can it is called bartering. You imply they are illegal because they say they are real money. Well they are to people that want to accept them. So if I want to give you a Euro I am not allowed. I think You are missing the whole point. I am an adult and can take and trade whatever I want it is only illegal if I take my currency to a store that refuses to take it and then I try to tell that store that they have to because it is "legal"

[margomaps]

I see what you are saying. And I have done a great deal of research on free market economics ranging from Mises to Walter Williams. And I think that the ideas they present are flawed. Williams for instance says minimum wage is bad because wages are tied to productivity and thus unskilled workers are discriminated against. But where does he get this idea that wages and productivity are tied? They aren't. It's poor policy. Now as far as men like Kucinich and Nader, no i would not support them, although I think Kucinich speaks a lot of truth. I do not support socialism.

Wages are certainly tied to productivity in the sense that employers are willing to pay more for more productive workers. Enforcing a minimum level artificially distorts the natural relationship between the worker's value and his compensation. But I'm not an expert in this area, so I can't really comment further.

I'm glad you don't support socialism. I think forced socialism is anathema to most aspects of liberty. Unfortunately the area I think socialism impinges most on liberty is in the economic realm. Forcibly taking wealth (the product of one's labor over time) from one person and giving it to another is a form of slavery. And again, unfortunately, Keynesian theory has been used almost exclusively to support socialist ideology.

I know this isn't simply a black and white issue -- but for all intents and purposes, to me Keynes's ideas work strongly against liberty. As a result I reject them.

[TrueFreedom]

So I guess the logic is if you mow my lawn and I want to bake a cake for payment. I cant do that. well i can it is called bartering. You imply they are illegal because they say they are real money. Well they are to people that want to accept them. So if I want to give you a Euro I am not allowed. I think You are missing the whole point. I am an adult and can take and trade whatever I want it is only illegal if I take my currency to a store that refuses to take it and then I try to tell that store that they have to because it is "legal"

No you are wrong. It is illegal if you break the law. This has nothing to do with bartering. Bartering is legal but for the most part ineffective. However, you cannot coin a money and try to pass it off as real money or currency if it is not approved by the US government, and that is the law. I feel as if you didn't read this thread....

[TrueFreedom]

Wages are certainly tied to productivity in the sense that employers are willing to pay more for more productive workers. Enforcing a minimum level artificially distorts the natural relationship between the worker's value and his compensation. But I'm not an expert in this area, so I can't really comment further.

I'm glad you don't support socialism. I think forced socialism is anathema to most aspects of liberty. Unfortunately the area I think socialism impinges most on liberty is in the economic realm. Forcibly taking wealth (the product of one's labor over time) from one person and giving it to another is a form of slavery. And again, unfortunately, Keynesian theory has been used almost exclusively to support socialist ideology.

I know this isn't simply a black and white issue -- but for all intents and purposes, to me Keynes's ideas work strongly against liberty. As a result I reject them.

See I reject that logic. You have to remember that Williams ties this production to wages idea to only lower level unskilled workers. If you were right and this was the case, I'd get my burger from McDonalds a lot faster. But it isn't the case. Because they aren't tied, the employer bases wages around demand.

Socialists may use Keynes but I am not a socialist. I do not like redistribution of wealth.

You are right in the fact that this is not black and white, but I think that Keynes theory can do more to further liberty than this gold, hard money economic style. I still have yet to get a response on how a gold economic system would work. What happens when i find a bunch of gold and drop it in the market? Or what happens when you limit the currency to what we have in gold and the richest people start hoarding money?

[Trigonx]

Wages are certainly tied to productivity in the sense that employers are willing to pay more for more productive workers. Enforcing a minimum level artificially distorts the natural relationship between the worker's value and his compensation. But I'm not an expert in this area, so I can't really comment further.

I'm glad you don't support socialism. I think forced socialism is anathema to most aspects of liberty. Unfortunately the area I think socialism impinges most on liberty is in the economic realm. Forcibly taking wealth (the product of one's labor over time) from one person and giving it to another is a form of slavery. And again, unfortunately, Keynesian theory has been used almost exclusively to support socialist ideology.

I know this isn't simply a black and white issue -- but for all intents and purposes, to me Keynes's ideas work strongly against liberty. As a result I reject them.

I agree with what you write, I was just looking up on Keynes to make sure what I knew about him was right. Keynes theory on unemployment is all about big government spending and control of the money supply.

[bdmarti]

I've been reading this thing called the constitution lately...

can someone here tell me which enumerated power of congress limits individuals right to trade with whatever they want within a particular state?

Which power of congress allows them to stop people from making "coins"? I seem to be unable to find that one either.

Just because our government does something, it doesn't make it right and doesn't make it legal.

I'm of the opinion that legal tender laws are on quite flimsy constitutional grounds. In fact, I'd say those grounds are non-existent...but there is probably some corrupt supreme court case that says they are fine for bizzaro reasons.

[Melissa]

I have read this you have not read what the Liberty dollar is they are not trying to pass it anywhere expect to people that are willing to take it. how in the world is that illegal. You do not seem to understand they are not trying to take it to the bank and pass it off as legal tender.

[margomaps]

See I reject that logic. You have to remember that Williams ties this production to wages idea to only lower level unskilled workers. If you were right and this was the case, I'd get my burger from McDonalds a lot faster. But it isn't the case. Because they aren't tied, the employer bases wages around demand.

I'll let someone else grapple with you on this one, because like I said, I haven't thought a whole lot about that issue.


Socialists may use Keynes but I am not a socialist. I do not like redistribution of wealth.

Awesome, at least we have something in common! :)


You are right in the fact that this is not black and white, but I think that Keynes theory can do more to further liberty than this gold, hard money economic style. I still have yet to get a response on how a gold economic system would work. What happens when i find a bunch of gold and drop it in the market? Or what happens when you limit the currency to what we have in gold and the richest people start hoarding money?

I'm also not an expert on monetary theory, so I'm not going to try talking about it until I'm better informed.

Let me turn the tables on you a little bit though: what is it about Keynes's philosophy that you find appealing/sensible? And further, do you see his approaches as being compatible with your view of liberty? Please elaborate so I can better understand your point of view.

[TrueFreedom]

I've been reading this thing called the constitution lately...

can someone here tell me which enumerated power of congress limits individuals right to trade with whatever they want within a particular state?

Which power of congress allows them to stop people from making "coins"? I seem to be unable to find that one either.

Just because our government does something, it doesn't make it right and doesn't make it legal.

I'm of the opinion that legal tender laws are on quite flimsy constitutional grounds. In fact, I'd say those grounds are non-existent...but there is probably some sorrupt supreme court case that says they are fine for bizzaro reasons.

This is what happens when we get into economic debates that may talk about the Federal Reserve and what laws are on the books and what Supreme Court cases have been passed. We get this "oh the laws are corrupt", or "well it's not really a law". I don't get it. It's always some kind of conspiracy. Congress has the power to coin money, article 1 section 8. Using the necessary and proper clause they can determine whichever way they want to do that, and by saying that you cannot make a coin of your own and call it currency is how they did it......the statue is in this thread. Don't always go back to some corrupt conspiracy argument, it only fuels this mainstream idea that Ron is a kook......

[Kalash]

Screw the whole thing.

All money is worthless.

I want to go on the golem standard!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ankh-Morpork
-See the Currency Section.

(There are a LOT of spoilers if you click through to the "Making Money" book page.)



Making Money - Terry Pratchett

A good book.
;)
Really.
Right on par with Ron Paul's The Ron Paul Money Book. (Kind of.)
There are a few things you should know from the previous books, but as a stand alone- it should work pretty well.

[torchbearer]

The federal reserve is printing counterfeit money, I don't see the FBI crashing their branches.

[bdmarti]

I still have yet to get a response on how a gold economic system would work. What happens when i find a bunch of gold and drop it in the market? Or what happens when you limit the currency to what we have in gold and the richest people start hoarding money?

As far as I can see, you have a problem with LEGAL TENDER laws and not with gold as money.

The problems you cite as being those of "gold" are actually those of legal tender being enforced upon a particular commodity money.

If any arbitrary commodity were used as money it would be subject to the same problems you cite as far as market floods and droughts.

I also think you overstate the problem though. It takes real work and energy to extract gold. You can't just type trillions of ounces of gold into existence. Sure you can mine gold...maybe even a lot of it...and if too much were flooding the market, people would be inclined to use something else as currency. In this way, the demand for gold would drop and the market would self regulate...that is unless LEGAL TENDER laws got in the way.

From the other direction, you also over state the problem. Sure, the rich people could "hoard" the gold, but then what would they buy goods and services with? The less gold they let flow through the markets, the more valuable the remaining gold would be and the higher prices would get. In addition, absent legal tender laws, the market would just shift to alternate currencies.

[TrueFreedom]

The federal reserve is printing counterfeit money, I don't see the FBI crashing their branches.

They not printing counterfeit money. You have no legal justification to back that up whatsoever. The Federal Reserve is printing legal US currency, they were created by the Congress, and the Congress can use the necessary and proper clause to allow the Federal Reserve to coin the money. Show legal backing or Supreme Court rulings for that statement or quit saying it because it marginalizes Ron and his supporters.....

[bdmarti]

... Congress has the power to coin money, article 1 section 8. Using the necessary and proper clause they can determine whichever way they want to do that, and by saying that you cannot make a coin of your own and call it currency is how they did it......the statue is in this thread. Don't always go back to some corrupt conspiracy argument, it only fuels this mainstream idea that Ron is a kook......

The power to coin money means exactly that: they can make coins. It doesn't mean they can LIMIT my powers to make coins and your saying so is strange. It's like saying that if I can bake a cake that you can't...I can ride a bike, so you can't...and so on.


If you'd like to educate, here is a portion of a helpful essay that will teach you a few things about the matter:
http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_03/holloway012003.html

Here you can actually read about how the supreme court ruled against the constitutionality of legal tender laws and then how president Grant stacked the court and all of the sudden legal tender was suddenly constitutional.

Even if you don't like the tone of agenda of the essay itself (and I do) it points you at all the proper case law and history to learn for yourself about the corruption and "conspiracies" behind our legal tender laws.

[TrueFreedom]

The power to coin money means exactly that: they can make coins. It doesn't mean they can LIMIT my powers to make coins and your saying so is strange. It's like saying that if I can bake a cake that you can't...I can ride a bike, so you can't...and so on.


If you'd like to educate, here is a portion of a helpful essay that will teach you a few things about the matter:
http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_03/holloway012003.html

Here you can actually read about how the supreme court ruled against the constitutionality of legal tender laws and then how president Grant stacked the court and all of the sudden legal tender was suddenly constitutional.

Even if you don't like the tone of agenda of the essay itself (and I do) it points you at all the proper case law and history to learn for yourself about the corruption and "conspiracies" behind our legal tender laws.


You could not be anymore wrong. The Congress does actually say I can bake a cake and you can't. Congress can coin money.....you can't. Why do I say that? Because the US Code says that. The US Code is a collection of all the laws in this country. And funny enough it has this one.....

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title [1] or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Which says Whoever.....makes......any coins of gold or silver or other metals....

It's illegal by law.

[TrueFreedom]

The power to coin money means exactly that: they can make coins. It doesn't mean they can LIMIT my powers to make coins and your saying so is strange. It's like saying that if I can bake a cake that you can't...I can ride a bike, so you can't...and so on.


If you'd like to educate, here is a portion of a helpful essay that will teach you a few things about the matter:
http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_03/holloway012003.html

Here you can actually read about how the supreme court ruled against the constitutionality of legal tender laws and then how president Grant stacked the court and all of the sudden legal tender was suddenly constitutional.

Even if you don't like the tone of agenda of the essay itself (and I do) it points you at all the proper case law and history to learn for yourself about the corruption and "conspiracies" behind our legal tender laws.


And again notice how we go back to this CONSPIRACY again. Well, it was legal until President Grant stacked the court.......come on guys, we are better than this...

[Trigonx]

Truefreedom, do you understand who and what the Federal Reserve is?

[TrueFreedom]

Truefreedom, do you understand who and what the Federal Reserve is?

Absolutely, they are a quasi governmental agency created by Congress that creates our money and is a haven for conspiracy theorists who believe that they are out to chip all of us and use their powers for one world global domination and other outlandish claims, it is also incorrectly said to be unconstitutional when it clearly is.

[DjLoTi]

No offense but who cares what Rand says... All I care about is Ron.

[Melissa]

Um not a government agency at all. They are a Private Bank I think you better read about them before saying much more.

[bdmarti]

You could not be anymore wrong...

It's illegal by law.

YOU sir, could not be more wrong.

The constitution is the SUPREME law of the land and no matter what congress says, if it is outside the scope of the constitution or against it then it isn't legal.

[allyinoh]

They not printing counterfeit money. You have no legal justification to back that up whatsoever. The Federal Reserve is printing legal US currency, they were created by the Congress, and the Congress can use the necessary and proper clause to allow the Federal Reserve to coin the money. Show legal backing or Supreme Court rulings for that statement or quit saying it because it marginalizes Ron and his supporters.....

This doesn't sound like something that would come out of the mouth of a RP supporter.

The Constitution grants Congress the power to coin money. It doesn't say, "Congress has the power to pass off their job to a group of private bankers..."

[Trigonx]

Absolutely, they are a quasi governmental agency created by Congress that creates our money and is a haven for conspiracy theorists who believe that they are out to chip all of us and use their powers for one world global domination and other outlandish claims, it is also incorrectly said to be unconstitutional when it clearly is.


With this answer ladies and gentlemen all hope is lost with TrueFreedom. This thread is dead to me.


p.s
(I just think the federal reserve is just stealing our money and making our economy unstable)

[acstichter]

In reading the search warrant against Liberty Dollar, I learned that they were minting 1 oz silver coins and selling them for a profit of at least $1.50 each to a distributor who turned around and sold them to the public for another nifty profit. However when silver prices approached the coin's retail cost, they bumped the value displayed on the coin to the next main denomination (say from $5 to $10 to $50) and decided to take a much higher profit on each coin.

So if someone bought 100 coins, each time they bartered one, they were throwing $5 or so out the window. Not sure what the appeal is to this. The math was quite startling.

Also, the investigation was a fair number of years ago. Like 2003 or something, so has nothing to do with Ron Paul.

[allyinoh]

Absolutely, they are a quasi governmental agency created by Congress that creates our money and is a haven for conspiracy theorists who believe that they are out to chip all of us and use their powers for one world global domination and other outlandish claims, it is also incorrectly said to be unconstitutional when it clearly is.

This guy is not for real... I say get rid of him.. =)

[bdmarti]

And again notice how we go back to this CONSPIRACY again. Well, it was legal until President Grant stacked the court.......come on guys, we are better than this...

It was NOT legal until Grant staked the court.

The only reason the word "conspiracy" is present is because YOU felt the need to bring it up.

I asked you to educate yourself about the HISTORY of the matter. It's not as if the position I and others take on the matter is unsound. It was the position of this country, and of the supreme court for decades.

To write off the possibility that power corrupted individuals within our government and the idea that they may have usurped more power than they were ever intended to have is extremely naive on your part.

[Trigonx]

It was NOT legal until Grant staked the court.

The only reason the word "conspiracy" is present is because YOU felt the need to bring it up.

I asked you to educate yourself about the HISTORY of the matter. It's not as if the position I and others take on the matter is unsound. It was the position of this country, and of the supreme court for decades.

To write off the possibility that power corrupted individuals within our government and the idea that they may have usurped more power than they were ever intended to have is extremely naive on your part.

If you read the link bdmarti gave you, you would realize that it is not a "conspiracy" but REALITY.

[TrueFreedom]

Um not a government agency at all. They are a Private Bank I think you better read about them before saying much more.

Wrong again. It is a government agency created by Congress.

[TrueFreedom]

This doesn't sound like something that would come out of the mouth of a RP supporter.

The Constitution grants Congress the power to coin money. It doesn't say, "Congress has the power to pass off their job to a group of private bankers..."

The necessary and proper clause gives Congress the right to enact their powers however they deem necessary. This includes the Federal Reserve.

[TrueFreedom]

In reading the search warrant against Liberty Dollar, I learned that they were minting 1 oz silver coins and selling them for a profit of at least $1.50 each to a distributor who turned around and sold them to the public for another nifty profit. However when silver prices approached the coin's retail cost, they bumped the value displayed on the coin to the next main denomination (say from $5 to $10 to $50) and decided to take a much higher profit on each coin.

So if someone bought 100 coins, each time they bartered one, they were throwing $5 or so out the window. Not sure what the appeal is to this. The math was quite startling.

Also, the investigation was a fair number of years ago. Like 2003 or something, so has nothing to do with Ron Paul.

Hmm now the truth comes out.

At the beginning of the thread TRIGONX said this.....

Liberty Dollar never ever called them legal tender or called them coins, so why do you keep categorizing them as coins such as the Feds are trying to do?

Now in this post we get this.....

I learned that they were minting 1 oz silver coins and selling them for a profit...

And the law specifically says you can't do this. That should effectively end this debate.....

[Melissa]

No you are the one that is 100% wrong they are not a government agency at all. Private bank is what they are. Please look that one up you will get tons of "blowback" by writing something that is 100% false.

[TrueFreedom]

No you are the one that is 100% wrong they are not a government agency at all. Private bank is what they are. Please look that one up you will get tons of "blowback" by writing something that is 100% false.

So many ways to show you that you are wrong. Where to start?

Oh yeah, if you want to get information on the federal reserve, where do you go?

www.federalreserve.gov

why the .gov?

Because they are a government agency.

But lets see how they were created shall we.....

The Federal Reserve was created on December 23, 1913, with the signing of the Federal Reserve Act by President Woodrow Wilson. The act had been drafted as House Resolution 7837 by Representative Carter Glass (D-VA), incoming chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee.

100% wrong you say? Prove it.

[Trigonx]

We all know that it costs absolutely nothing to mint metal into rounds and it costs nothing to melt metal and it also costs nothing to transport these rounds and it also costs nothing to operate a business. the costs must go somewhere....

[TrueFreedom]

We all know that it costs absolutely nothing to mint metal into rounds and it costs nothing to melt metal and it also costs nothing to transport these rounds and it also costs nothing to operate a business.

Nice job avoiding the issue...... and this has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I don't care how much it costs. I care if it's legal. And it isn't.

[Trigonx]

Nice job avoiding the issue...... and this has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I don't care how much it costs. I care if it's legal. And it isn't.

It has to do with your response to the person submitting the info on the search warrant. STOP BEING SO GOD DAMN IGNORANT, fucking look at both sides to the story instead of sticking to the only knowledge that you know and only care to know.

[Melissa]

I will use your same site to "prove it" They are not a government agency

http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrbanks.htm#6
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrbanks.htm#9

[UtahApocalypse]

TrueFreedom is obviously a troll here.

[TrueFreedom]

I will use your same site to "prove it" They are not a government agency

http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrbanks.htm#6
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrbanks.htm#9

Nothing in those two links proves they are a private bank as you call it. The first link you posted does say this though....

The Federal Reserve Banks, created by an act of Congress in 1913, are operated in the public interest rather than for profit or to benefit any private group.

But wait, i thought they weren't created by Congress and thus were not a government agency.....hmmmmm

[Melissa]

wow did you not read it it even says even the employess are not government employees and ok I quit it says right on thier site they are not government agency and you have your mind set not sure why you are here.

[TrueFreedom]

TrueFreedom is obviously a troll here.

Again you haven't read this thread. I am not a troll, I am a Paul supporter and have been for a long time. I was talking earlier about the studies I have done into John Keynes economics and Mises and the Austrian free market thinkers. I however disagree with Ron's economic stances and this idea of people on this board of saying things that aren't true. A matter of fact, if I am not mistaken, I can find a video of RON himself saying the Fed was created by congress....doesn't he say that in that Freedom to Fascism movie?

[TrueFreedom]

wow did you not read it it even says even the employess are not government employees and ok I quit it says right on thier site they are not government agency and you have your mind set not sure why you are here.

Are you actually being serious here. It gets NO clearer than this....

Federal Reserve Banks were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrbanks.htm#9

Now what ground do you stand on again?

[Trigonx]

Again you haven't read this thread. I am not a troll, I am a Paul supporter and have been for a long time. I was talking earlier about the studies I have done into John Keynes economics and Mises and the Austrian free market thinkers. I however disagree with Ron's economic stances and this idea of people on this board of saying things that aren't true. A matter of fact, if I am not mistaken, I can find a video of RON himself saying the Fed was created by congress....doesn't he say that in that Freedom to Fascism movie?

Show a video of anyone saying that the federal reserve is a US GOVERNMENT AGENCY. Give us proof it is an agency of the US. Its a huge misconception that it is an agency, when it really is not. If it were an agency the government could Audit them and see what the fuck is up. but they can't.

[TrueFreedom]

Show a video of anyone saying that the federal reserve is a US GOVERNMENT AGENCY. Give us proof it is an agency of the US. Its a huge misconception that it is an agency, when it really is not. If it were an agency the government could Audit them and see what the fuck is up. but they can't.

Ok well I just watched the video and Ron says that the Congress has the right to oversight and audit of the Federal Reserve but ignores that responsibility. Therefore it is a government agency if Congress has the responsibility for oversight. If you want to say it's corrupt, fine, elect Congressmen to fix it. But don't lie and say it's not a government entity when I have given you fact after fact that says it is. Unless you can show me how the Federal Reserve Act is wrong, then you don't know what you are saying.....

[Trigonx]

Congressman Louis T. McFadden, was the Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency from 1920–31

here is a speech by Louis T. McFadden

Louis T. McFadden's Speech In the House of Representatives 10 June 1932 http://www.afn.org/~govern/mcfadden_speech_1932.html

Let me put a few paragraphs here.


"Some people think the Federal Reserve banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into States to buy votes to control our legislation; and there are those who maintain international propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us and of wheedling us into the granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.
These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. Those bankers took money out of this country to finance Japan in a war against Russia. They created a reign of terror in Russia with our money in order to help that war along. They instigated the separate peace between Germany and Russia and thus drove a wedge between the Allies in the World War. They financed Trotsky's passage from New York to Russia so that he might assist in the destruction of the Russian Empire. They fomented and instigated the Russian revolution and they placed a large fund of American dollars at Trotsky's disposal in one of their branch banks in Sweden so that through him Russian homes might be thoroughly broken up and Russian children flung far and wide from their natural protectors. They have since begun the breaking up of American homes and the dispersal of American children."



Let me remind you this is from 1932, so this is not something new to the people.

[Jobarra]

This is strange. It's not a for profit body but the FED member banks make 6 percent dividends? Huh? Lot's of double talk on that FAQ page.


Commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System hold stock in the Reserve Bank in their region, but they do not exercise control over the Reserve Bank or the Federal Reserve System. Holding stock in a regional Reserve Bank does not carry with it the kind of control and financial interest that holding publicly traded stock affords, and the stock may not be sold or traded. Member banks do, however, receive a fixed 6 percent dividend annually on their stock and elect six of the nine members of the Reserve Bank's board of directors.

Better question is... WHERE does the 6 percent dividend come from? Any sort of dividend means there was a profit to be had. How does a government agency make a profit? Why does a private agency related to the government make a profit off the public?

[TrueFreedom]

Congressman Louis T. McFadden, was the Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency from 1920–31

here is a speech by Louis T. McFadden

Louis T. McFadden's Speech In the House of Representatives 10 June 1932 http://www.afn.org/~govern/mcfadden_speech_1932.html

Let me put a few paragraphs here.


"Some people think the Federal Reserve banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into States to buy votes to control our legislation; and there are those who maintain international propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us and of wheedling us into the granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.
These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. Those bankers took money out of this country to finance Japan in a war against Russia. They created a reign of terror in Russia with our money in order to help that war along. They instigated the separate peace between Germany and Russia and thus drove a wedge between the Allies in the World War. They financed Trotsky's passage from New York to Russia so that he might assist in the destruction of the Russian Empire. They fomented and instigated the Russian revolution and they placed a large fund of American dollars at Trotsky's disposal in one of their branch banks in Sweden so that through him Russian homes might be thoroughly broken up and Russian children flung far and wide from their natural protectors. They have since begun the breaking up of American homes and the dispersal of American children."



Let me remind you this is from 1932, so this is not something new to the people.

Hmm, well lets take a look at Mr. McFadden and the accuracy of what he is saying here.....

Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government board, has cheated the Government of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through defects of the law under which it operates, through the maladministration of that law by the Federal Reserve Board and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it (C.R. p. 12595).
Once the hyperbole and histrionics are deducted, there is little remaining of substance in the above quotation. McFadden makes the claim that the Federal Reserve had cost the federal government enough money to "pay the national debt several times over." Is he correct?

Disbursements of Federal Reserve Profits, 1914-1931 (millions)

Total Revenues $970.7
Net Expenses 363.3
-------
Profit 607.4


Paid as dividends 102.0
Payments to Treasury 147.1
Retained by Fed 358.3
Source: Annual Report, 1995, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, pp. 298-99.


In this table we see that from 1914 to 1931 the Federal Reserve system collectively earned profits totalling $607 million. About $102 million was distributed to member banks as dividends, and about $147 million was paid to the Treasury as a "franchise tax." The Federal Reserve banks kept the remaining $359 million. The national debt in 1932 was $19.5 billion, so even if the Federal Reserve had been paying all its profits to the government during this time, it would have been enough to pay only 3 percent of the national debt -- a far cry from McFadden's "several times over." Moreover, the Federal Reserve's total revenues for the period were $971 million, so if the entirety of the System's revenues had gone straight to the Treasury, it still would not have been sufficient to make McFadden's claim even remotely accurate.

ouch, kinda hurts the credibility eh?

[ItsTime]

Like every single casino?


If that is true why are they not enforcing the law at Chuck E Cheeses and other places around the nation that require tokens instead of coins.

[Adamsa]

In a truly free market, competing currencies would be legal. Whats especially sad about this case is that the constitution says only gold and silver should be legal tender, and yet the official currency is not this.

[TrueFreedom]

Congressman Louis T. McFadden, was the Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency from 1920–31

here is a speech by Louis T. McFadden

Louis T. McFadden's Speech In the House of Representatives 10 June 1932 http://www.afn.org/~govern/mcfadden_speech_1932.html

Let me put a few paragraphs here.


"Some people think the Federal Reserve banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into States to buy votes to control our legislation; and there are those who maintain international propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us and of wheedling us into the granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.
These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. Those bankers took money out of this country to finance Japan in a war against Russia. They created a reign of terror in Russia with our money in order to help that war along. They instigated the separate peace between Germany and Russia and thus drove a wedge between the Allies in the World War. They financed Trotsky's passage from New York to Russia so that he might assist in the destruction of the Russian Empire. They fomented and instigated the Russian revolution and they placed a large fund of American dollars at Trotsky's disposal in one of their branch banks in Sweden so that through him Russian homes might be thoroughly broken up and Russian children flung far and wide from their natural protectors. They have since begun the breaking up of American homes and the dispersal of American children."



Let me remind you this is from 1932, so this is not something new to the people.

And by the way, a quotation from one member of the House of Representatives doesn't help your case at all. He never mentioned the laws on the books and challenged them, plus have you ever stopped to think that maybe we have some dumb people in the House? I mean we have a member of the House who says this right now....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G980aLrAwoM

you are gonna have to do better than that. Give me laws and court cases to prove what you are saying, not theories or people ranting with no substance.

[TrueFreedom]

In a truly free market, competing currencies would be legal. Whats especially sad about this case is that the constitution says only gold and silver should be legal tender, and yet the official currency is not this.

You are misinterpreting the Constitution. It never says only gold and silver can be the only legal tender. It says states can't make anything but gold and silver legal tender. But it doesn't say that the Federal Government can't.

[Trigonx]

And by the way, a quotation from one member of the House of Representatives doesn't help your case at all. He never mentioned the laws on the books and challenged them, plus have you ever stopped to think that maybe we have some dumb people in the House? I mean we have a member of the House who says this right now....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G980aLrAwoM

you are gonna have to do better than that. Give me laws and court cases to prove what you are saying, not theories or people ranting with no substance.

Honestly, I don't give a fuck what you think, I am ashamed of myself for actually trying to talk to you. I don't understand why you are here, really. I would continue to argue this, but every time you will go back to what "you" believe is factual and correct without even trying to conceive what others may say.

[TrueFreedom]

Honestly, I don't give a fuck what you think, I am ashamed of myself for actually trying to talk to you. I don't understand why you are here, really.

In other words, McFadden didn't know what he was talking about and you have nothing else to back up this claim. I mean I've only disproven it by law, Congressional Acts, and even disproving the one Representative who spoke out against it but used false facts. Hmmm, tells me a lot about the legitimacy of this argument......

[TrueFreedom]

Honestly, I don't give a fuck what you think, I am ashamed of myself for actually trying to talk to you. I don't understand why you are here, really. I would continue to argue this, but every time you will go back to what "you" believe is factual and correct without even trying to conceive what others may say.

Um I quote laws. You quote people like McFadden who make incorrect statements that have been PROVEN factually wrong.

[ThePieSwindler]

All this bickering is absurd. First, TrueFreedom coming in here and trying to argue that Keynesian economics is somehow superior and better thought out than Austrian economics is a little odd, as Keynes' proposed system was 1) nothing new, deficit spending had been used for centuries it simply had never been formally theorized and 2) has a good deal of flaws and is hardly backed up by historical success yet you claim it is the superior economic paradigm. Neoclassicism and neokeynsianism have their flaws as well, so to claim one paradigm is "flawed" without actually giving any real examples is hardly convincing. Perhaps the term "flawed" itself is a subjective analysis backed up with personal bias i.e the objectives that a single economist might have for an economy, or what he values.

But the main point of this thread is about the Liberty Dollar. The question is whether or not it is counterfeiting - the answer is that it is a grey area in the law, considering how it was marketed. It was interpreted and obviously the warrant obtained that there was probable cause of counterfeiting, so this seizure, while it sucks, is technically "within the law" and is no real violation of civil liberties, at least in a legalist sense (not an absolute sense, which we'll get to in a sec). Your assertion that it was counterfeit, while is shaky, is in a grey area and was backed up by the law and warrant in this case. So youre sorta right.

Now, TrueFreedom, your assertion that competing currency would lead to more [detrimental] inflation is not backed up by any sort of historical evidence - usually other currencies are used as a hedge against inflation, such as in countries with hyperinflation, when they switch to foreign stable currencies, even against the law, to pay for meals etc, as a hedge AGAINST inflationary currency. Even back in the US< they used to import french gold coins and use them as currency. The inflation that did exist - an expansion in the money supply - was often natural and based on the market demands. Remember, currency is simply the most liquid commodity in a market (as hayek so explained to refute socialist ideas of abolishing money)

So you are essentially righ ton this specific case, but that does not make the law right, but it does make it tehcnically "justified" in the sense that it was done legally, even if a legal grey area. But your contention that competing currencies = more inflation and worse inflation is wrong, and is a sound idea. The US government DOES have a monopoly on currency that it should NOT have, so while it is illegal to trade in other tender, it is not wholly justified, and is a rather statist proposition to force a single currency. You call yourself TrueFreedom, surely you should have identified this already. Also, you are right about the fed, it is quasi governmental, was instituted by an act of congress, and is "legal" even though it does clearly ignore the section of the constitution that says gold and silver must be coined as legal tender - my qualms with the fed are not the "conspiracies" behind it, but rather the very real issues it creates - i.e central monetary planning, expansion of government programs because of the ability to expand the money supply (aka "inject liquidity") etc, these are all VERY REAL and VERY PUBLICIZED flaws with the federal reserve.

Can we at least come to a happy little medium - that capital gains taxes should be removed on Gold and Silver? Actually id love to remove capital gains taxes on everything but, at least gold and silver, as authorized by the constitution? Would that suit your fancy?

[TrueFreedom]

All this bickering is absurd. First, TrueFreedom coming in here and trying to argue that Keynesian economics is somehow superior and better thought out than Austrian economics is a little odd, as Keynes' proposed system was 1) nothing new, deficit spending had been used for centuries it simply had never been formally theorized and 2) has a good deal of flaws and is hardly backed up by historical success yet you claim it is the superior economic paradigm. Neoclassicism and neokeynsianism have their flaws as well, so to claim one paradigm is "flawed" without actually giving any real examples is hardly convincing. Perhaps the term "flawed" itself is a subjective analysis backed up with personal bias i.e the objectives that a single economist might have for an economy, or what he values.

But the main point of this thread is about the Liberty Dollar. The question is whether or not it is counterfeiting - the answer is that it is a grey area in the law, considering how it was marketed. It was interpreted and obviously the warrant obtained that there was probable cause of counterfeiting, so this seizure, while it sucks, is technically "within the law" and is no real violation of civil liberties, at least in a legalist sense (not an absolute sense, which we'll get to in a sec). Your assertion that it was counterfeit, while is shaky, is in a grey area and was backed up by the law and warrant in this case. So youre sorta right.

Now, TrueFreedom, your assertion that competing currency would lead to more [detrimental] inflation is not backed up by any sort of historical evidence - usually other currencies are used as a hedge against inflation, such as in countries with hyperinflation, when they switch to foreign stable currencies, even against the law, to pay for meals etc, as a hedge AGAINST inflationary currency. Even back in the US< they used to import french gold coins and use them as currency. The inflation that did exist - an expansion in the money supply - was often natural and based on the market demands. Remember, currency is simply the most liquid commodity in a market (as hayek so explained to refute socialist ideas of abolishing money)

So you are essentially righ ton this specific case, but that does not make the law right, but it does make it tehcnically "justified" in the sense that it was done legally, even if a legal grey area. But your contention that competing currencies = more inflation and worse inflation is wrong, and is a sound idea. The US government DOES have a monopoly on currency that it should NOT have, so while it is illegal to trade in other tender, it is not wholly justified, and is a rather statist proposition to force a single currency. You call yourself TrueFreedom, surely you should have identified this already. Also, you are right about the fed, it is quasi governmental, was instituted by an act of congress, and is "legal" even though it does clearly ignore the section of the constitution that says gold and silver must be coined as legal tender - my qualms with the fed are not the "conspiracies" behind it, but rather the very real issues it creates - i.e central monetary planning, expansion of government programs because of the ability to expand the money supply (aka "inject liquidity") etc, these are all VERY REAL and VERY PUBLICIZED flaws with the federal reserve.

Can we at least come to a happy little medium - that capital gains taxes should be removed on Gold and Silver? Actually id love to remove capital gains taxes on everything but, at least gold and silver, as authorized by the constitution? Would that suit your fancy?

Well I appreciate the post. Finally someone who actually argues from a factual basis. And I appreciate the comments on competing currency and inflation. I will post a thought out response to the whole thing shortly. But first thoughts after hearing this, let me try to understand where you are coming from. First off, why do you think that the "gold and silver as the only legal tender" line from article 1 applies to the Federal Government when it plainly says the states? Two, removing the capital gains on gold and silver is a very interesting concept, I'll think on it:) Three, explain to me how leaving federal reserve notes in circulation and then adding competing currency on top of it will not increase inflation. I cannot, even when looking from a Hayek view, see how this will stablize or even decrease inflation whatsoever. I'll grab a drink and start to type out a more full response, but I actually look forward to your replies!

[Man from La Mancha]

It is illegal because they are passing it off in the form of a coin, their website refers to it as real money and currency and the LAW says this......

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title [1] or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.


Therefore it is illegalWhy are these being used now in the USA then?
http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/748663/2/istockphoto_748663_new_mexican_peso_bills_clip_pat h.jpg


or
http://willcad.org/images/dd/thumbs/thdd01_2007.jpg

[TrueFreedom]

Why are these being used now in the USA then?
http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/748663/2/istockphoto_748663_new_mexican_peso_bills_clip_pat h.jpg


or
http://willcad.org/images/dd/thumbs/thdd01_2007.jpg

Not sure what the Disney dollars are doing up there. No one is saying those are real money or currency. Has nothing to do with the topic......

[American]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.

Its not counterfeit, the liberty dollar had never said that is was legal tender or that it a Govt backed currency. Its a barter currency and its legal.

[allyinoh]

Its not counterfeit, the liberty dollar had never said that is was legal tender or that it a Govt backed currency. Its a barter currency and its legal.

Don't waste your time.. It's not worth it.. =)

[TrueFreedom]

Its not counterfeit, the liberty dollar had never said that is was legal tender or that it a Govt backed currency. Its a barter currency and its legal.

You might be suited to read the thread. It's not legal.

[TrueFreedom]

Don't waste your time.. It's not worth it.. =)

LOL, you've been here all day too. I know we disagree, but hope no hard feelings. We both want to see Ron win this thing lol.

[ronpaulfan]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.

Shill detector off the charts. This one is good, I can't peg him on any of his blatantly negative shill posts.

[ThePieSwindler]

Well I appreciate the post. Finally someone who actually argues from a factual basis.

No prob.


And I appreciate the comments on competing currency and inflation. I will post a thought out response to the whole thing shortly. But first thoughts after hearing this, let me try to understand where you are coming from. First off, why do you think that the "gold and silver as the only legal tender" line from article 1 applies to the Federal Government when it plainly says the states?

First, notice the section - section one. It is talking about State's debts, which are usually to other states or to congress. As is outlined, states may not trade with sovereign nations. So it is obvious that the intent was to keep gold and silver as the only legal tender circulating among states - remember, at the time of the Constitution's inception, there was no national currency, many currencies were used, but they were commissioned to be coined in Gold and Silver as apayment of debt, as it was the generally accepted currency at the time. That passage was never amended, so while it could be argued that it is outdated, to arbitrarily not follow it is the sort of action that has us where we are today, at least, as a general attitude toward the constitution. But the intent was to make sure currency was coined using gold and silver to repay debts. It does not explicitly say anything about the federal government sticking to that maxim, but it clearly ALLOWS gold and silver as legal tender for a payment of debts, which is what Ron Paul talks about when he means legalizing gold and silver as competing currency.



Two, removing the capital gains on gold and silver is a very interesting concept, I'll think on it:)

Capital gains is abhorrent in general, as it tempers investment opportunity and essentially inhibits growth of capital - which, in a CAPITALIST society, inhibiting the growth of capital hurts the society as a whole, as the less capital an entrepreneur or investor has, the less he has to invest in the economy in ventures that would be beneficial to the general public. as far as specifically gold and silver, it would allow them to be more freely traded as commodities, allowing them to compete as legal tender (but, as always, must be sent to a mint to be coined as such, which is fair enough under the current system, though i would like to take away all restrictions on such, at least it is constitutional). Which brings me to my next point:


Three, explain to me how leaving federal reserve notes in circulation and then adding competing currency on top of it will not increase inflation. I cannot, even when looking from a Hayek view, see how this will stablize or even decrease inflation whatsoever. I'll grab a drink and start to type out a more full response, but I actually look forward to your replies!

Inflation is an increase in the monetary supply, as you well know. Of course, some definitions (including the keynesian one) is that it is simply a "raise in prices". This raise in prices, is, of course, an adjustment to the ACTUAL cause of inflation ,an increase in the money supply. As far as the actual economics of how a competing currency would work, ill try to do my best not to be too abstract - though in a perfect world, money is simply the most liquid commodity (it is anyway, but right now its generally pegged only to other currency markets, rather than all markets, at least if im understanding correctly why exactly the dollar is falling in purchasing power - mainly because of the dollar being dumped on currency markets, but inflation is also a very real factor). The agreed upon market commodity would be the currency traded in most transactions, but people would be free to move to other currencies if they so wished, or price in other currencies if they so wished. While this seems like ti might cause problems, if you think deeper, everyone will have incentive to stay on a single currency so long as it is stable, as to keep themselves involved in all markets. However, if there is a more favorable currency that gains traction in markets, people will switch to that which will keep prices low (prices being valuations of commodities based on supply and demand - think outside of the $ and cents we always think of as being a "price", its really just a representation of a price, symbolism). whoops, i got too theoretical - lets move to reality. In reality, the competing currencies would still be valued in US dollars - they would essentially be market commodities that would have value rise as prices rise, such as gold. If capital gains taxes were removed on gold, any earnings on gold could be coined and converted to US dollars - but you would be able to use less gold to coin the current equivalent of a dollar. However, the capital gains tax retards this and makes it less profitable than just remaining on the inflating currency.

Thats really all Ron Paul and others mean when they talk about competing currency - using your own gold as a hedge against fiat inflation. It would still be in "US dollars" - the arbitrary symbolism of our current pricing system, but it would rise in value as inflation also rises, while the fiat currency would still be, well, backed by fiat, or debt, and would not be the unlimited legal tender that gold happens to be considered in markets. It is essentially an issue of US dollars backed on government fiat vs US dollars backed by market valuation - both of which actually have their merits, though fiat is, in the long run, going to be abused by government - always. Remember, its all subjective - you are right in that regard as gold having no "intrinsic" value, however, it has always been favored throughout time as a market standard, and markets ARE subjectivity - prices, demand, supply as a function of demand, everything - all subjective as explained by Bohm-Bawerk et al. Keynesian deficit spending is intended as a hedge against percieved inefficencies in markets, but in reality, the market tends to adjust to weaknesses, although not perfectly - why? Because the world is imperfect. But is government's involvement to try to make it perfect effective? Well, is anything government tries to do out of the "good of its heart" usually effective? I'll let you be the judge on that one, but then of course, like i said before, things we deem "flaws" in the first place are also subjective in nature, depending on the economist's views and biases.

Also, people, hes a supporter, stop trying your best to alienate him. So what if we disagree with him about some specific views, he is a fucking ROn Paul supporter - dont just drive him off or insult him or call hi ma troll - trust me, trolls are VERY obvious and will NEVER give you an inch and will be obnoxious and use completely fallacious reasoning. The fact that he has actually tried to engage in real debate shows he is not a troll, even if you (or i) disagree with him. Stop acting like assholes.

[ThePieSwindler]

Ill just post this about inflation gain, then i have to go eat, but feel free to PM me or continue to debate here or in the Issues section of the forum.

Remember, the REASON inflation of fiat currency is bad is because it tends to happen at a rate that the average consumer cannot adjust to, thus prices rise, but wages in the inflated currency do not rise as fast. A lower inflation rate benefits people because it gives them time to accumulate wealth and savings and job security, and their wages will generally rise over time at a pace to keep up with inflation (note: these wages are voluntarily risen by the companies that hire the employees, and usually go significantly above minimum wage, which, when too high, increases unemployment of entry level workers). Of course, things like the income tax etc retard savings ability, but that is a discussion for another time. Anyways - what a competing currency, a market/gold backed one would do, is allow those who desire a hedge against inflation, such as a startup business or a young married couple trying to build their wealth, can invest in market commodities that hedge against inflation, and can use these commodities as direct legal tender, without taxes, without retardation of capital gain.

Since this is not an anarcho-capitalist society and congress does have the power to regulate the value of currency to an extent (as spelled out in article 1 section 8), this would all be done as commodity/market backed currency, and thats really it. Thats really all ron paul means/advocates when he says "competing currency". I think private coining of currency is a different issue, and whilst it might be beneficial and an intriguing idea, it technically is not constitutional, much less legal, to coin money as such, as the Liberty dollars hit that grey area, although i disagree with the overall principle of the entire situation, from a more realistic standpoint, it was actually "constitutional", though I personally wouldn't mind that part of the constitution being changed.

I will say this though - the fed can potentially be seen int he same light as congress defaulting on its powers to declare war - the Fed controls monetary policy and regulates it, where as the constitution clearly designates that duty to CONGRESS. The US treasury and mints are directly tied to congressional oversight, whereas the federal reserve, while it is quasi-governmental, does not have the same oversight nor the restraints -although congress can borrow from the fed and authorize printing, the Fed can also print on its own without that oversight, as much power is vesting in the Federal Reserve Board by congress. There are certainly governmental ties, as it is indeed QUASI government, but the level of oversight and accountability is another issue, and could, in a way, be seen as congress defaulting on their own constitutional powers to another body.

Stick around and chat, about other issues too that people might agree on more, so as to show you really are here out of interest and not to "troll" ;)

[Matt Collins]

Wow - I had no idea this post would've created such a $hitstorm

[LibertyOfOne]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.

Nope

[James R]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.

Yes you can. It happens all the time, and I would bet that the most coins of this type are produced by the Disney company.

What the law says is that your motive for producing them is what determines whether or not the act of producing them or selling them is illegal.

[theodorelogan]

The fact that truefreedom uses the "necessary and proper" clause as a support for his argument is where he ultimately fails.



To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

I don't see how imprisoning people for making coins is necessary or proper in order for the US government to "coin money". The US government can coin money quite easily while private citizens do the same.

This kind of loose interpretation of the constitution can justify any government act (how can one regulate the value of money if people are saying it is unsound? Clearly we need a law that bans people from denigrating the dollar), and is precisely what Ron Paul is railing against, has based his entire political career on, and would base his presidency on.

Next you will be telling us that the "general welfare" clause gives the federal government the authority to confiscate all privately owned land to redistribute "for the general welfare" or that the commerce clause justifies interfering with any act that has any effect whatsoever on interstat commerce (such as selling marijuana since your sale influences prices, which influences interstate trade)

The authority to imprison for producing private metal disk is not given to the federal government. Please see the 9th and 19th amendments.

This troll is no Ron Paul supporter, no matter what he says. Every word he has spoken in this thread is anathema to Ron Paul.

[bmcosti]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.

Well in the constitution it says only gold and silver are legal tender. Ron Paul Dollars did use those precious metals. However, fiat money in my opinion is unconstitutional.

[fluoridatedbrainsoup]

TrueFreedom harped on the idea that Louis T. Mcfadden had zero credibility. Well, actions speak louder than words, let's see what happened to him after he spoke out against the Federal Reserve:


THE DEATH OF CONGRESSMAN LOUIS T. McFADDEN, OCT. 1936

Posted By: CliffMickelson <Send E-Mail>
Date: Friday, 20 February 2004, 5:48 p.m.

Greetings:

....So, you see dear readers....

In the days before the widespread use of small airplanes by rashly obliging members of Congress, much more crass and obvious methods were employed to quiet the squeaky wheels.

-CliffMickelson

***

October 4, 1936

Attacks on Congressman McFadden's Life Reported

....Commenting on Former Congressman Louis T. McFaddens's "heart-failure sudden-death" on Oct. 3, 1936, after a "dose" of "intestinal flu," "Pelley's Weekly" of Oct. 14 said:

....."Now that this sterling American patriot has made the Passing, it can be revealed that not long after his public utterance against the encroaching powers of Judah, it became known among his intimates that he had suffered two attacks against his life. The first attack came in the form of two revolver shots fired at him from ambush as he was alighting from a cab in front of one of the Capital hotels. Fortunately both shots missed him, the bullets burying themselves in the structure of the cab."

"He became violently ill after partaking of food at a political banquet at Washington. His life was only saved from what was subsequently announced as a poisoning by the presence of a physician friend at the banquet, who at once procured a stomach pump and subjected the Congressman to emergency treatment." /s/ Robert Edward Edmondson (Publicist-Economist)

President Andrew Jackson stated in reference to the bankers at the start of his administration:

"You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out."

***

[JarG0n]

Doesn't matter. I'm a Ron supporter, but Rand is wrong here. The law plainly states you can't counterfeit even if the coin is of original design. It's not an issue of mistaking it for Washington....it's against the law.


#1. A "coin" is a round shiny thing expelled by a government. If you don't believe that, head on over to your local library and check for a copy of Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edition (currently in 8th, where the term "Coin" is no longer defined, ostensibly to fool the lay person).


Coin: Pieces of gold, silver, or other metal, fashioned into a prescribed shape, weight, and degree of fineness, and stamped, by authority of the government, with certain marks and devices, and put into circulation as money at a fixed value. Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, Page 260.

See: http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/definitions.html for a comprehensive review of what money is, and isn't. Federal Reserve Notes are not legally "money", but are used in place of it.

If Black's Law, the authority on legal definitions for over 100 years doesn't convince you, then head on over to www.sunshinemint.com (http://www.sunshinemint.com), or www.nwtmintbullion.com (http://www.nwtmintbullion.com). You won't find they are minting private "coins", rather, they mint "bullion", "rounds", or "medallions" for individuals. They mint "coins" for governments. Northwest Territorial Mint is also a dealer in U.S. Coins. All those who are in the know, understand exactly what a coin is, and isn't. The Liberty Dollar, by definition, cannot be a coin; period.

#2: The Liberty Dollar has been used as barter for almost 10 years, without incident. All of a sudden, a political movement comes along, and bam!

#3: Section 486 is based on "intent".

Section 486: Uttering coins of gold, silver or other metal. Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined not more than $3,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. June 25, 1948, c. 645, 62 Stat. 709.

http://www.libertydollar.org/ld/faqs/disclaimer.htm

Liberty Dollar Disclaimer (2002)


In the fall of 2002, USC Title 18, Section 486 came under close scrutiny and review by the Liberty Dollar community and its attorneys. The outcome was a public DISCLAIMER, that acknowledged that the one ounce Gold and Silver Libertys were not in violation of federal law and particularly Section 486. So, I hope by this time that everybody knows the Gold and Silver Libertys are not "legal tender". Nor are they "coins", as a "coin" is something issued by a government and we are not they, nor do we ever want to be. The fact that the "Libertys" cannot be described in these terms has been enshrined in the United States Code, so it is not just numismatic, it is the law. And as the government also defines "money" and "current money", the Gold and Silver Libertys are neither of these.

There are three key points to keep in mind when researching this page: First when 486 was passed on June 8, 1864, the United States was embroiled in Civil War, legal tender was instituted, specie as payment was all but suspended, the new Greenbacks were not convertible to gold and silver. So the intent of the law was primarily a counterfeit statue. The key point is that it only deals with metals. It does not include paper currency nor digital currency. That is why the Disclaimer below mentions ONLY the one ounce Gold and Silver Libertys by name. And third the government has redefined money and current money and now specifically excludes gold and silver as money. And finally, even if the circumstances, legitimate intent, or metals were not enough, we publicly disclaim any intent to misrepresent the Gold and Silver to be anything but examples of the goods stored in the warehouse as required by law.

Drawing upon our ongoing legal and monetary research, USC Title 18, Section 486, dates from the time of the War between the States. Section 486 was originally known as the Act of June 8, 1864, which came about shortly after the first legal tender laws were passed, when Lincoln ushered in the country's first fiat "greenback" currency and drove all specie out of circulation. The Act was revised in 1873, 1909 and 1948. The current statute states:

Section 486: Uttering coins of gold, silver or other metal Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined not more than $3,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. June 25, 1948, c. 645, 62 Stat. 709.

Upon careful review of all cases pertinent to Section 486, it is the opinion of our Chief Counsel that the Gold and Silver Libertys distributed by NORFED are not in conflict because they are not "coins", nor are we circulating them as "money" as defined by the government. Please continue to refrain from referring to Gold and Silver Libertys as "coins", "money" or "current money". We can continue to refer to The Liberty Dollar as "real money" and/or "currency" because Section 486 only applies to metal; it does not apply to paper warehouse receipts, nor digital currencies. In fact, Section 486 actually reinforces our original position on these two items.

Based on independent legal research and the Legal Opinion Letter by our Chief Counsel, Section 486 is largely based on "intent". So upon advice of counsel, NORFED hereby issues this disclaimer to officially state that it is not the intent of the Gold and Silver Libertys to be in conflict with federal law. Please note this Disclaimer is posted on every page of the Liberty Dollar web site.

[JarG0n]

Also US v. Marigold upheld that the design of the coin does not matter.

1) ALD is not "coin".

2) The "intent" was proven in this case. Prosecutors will have to prove the ALD intended to circulate as current money, and defraud people into thinking they were such. Intent will be a key factor in this case.


1st. With having brought into the United States, from a foreign place, with intent to pass, utter, publish, and sell as true, certain false, forged, and counterfeit coins, made, forged, and counterfeited in the resemblance and similitude of certain gold and silver coins of the United States, coined at the mint, he knowing the same to be false, forged, and counterfeit, and intending thereby to defraud divers persons unknown.

'2d. With having uttered, published, and passed such counterfeit coins, with intent to defraud,

[JarG0n]

"current money" -- what does that mean?


Current Money: The currency of the country; whatever is intended to and does actually circulate as currency; every species of coin or currency. It is employed to describe money which passes from hand to hand, person to person, and circulates through the community, and is generally received. Money is current which is received as money in the common business transactions, and is the common medium in barter and trade. Source: Black's Law Dictionary, 6th edition. Page 383.

See: http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/definitions.html

[JarG0n]

Hmm i got this from Liberty Dollars website. I thought they weren't calling it real money.....

The Liberty Dollar is the second-most popular and the fastest-growing currency in America! It's backed by gold and silver instead of being backed by national debt like our familiar US dollars. When you hold the Liberty Dollar, you own silver. When you give this REAL money to someone as payment, they now own silver.

From: http://www.libertydollar.org/ld/faqs/disclaimer.htm



We can continue to refer to The Liberty Dollar as "real money" and/or "currency" because Section 486 only applies to metal; it does not apply to paper warehouse receipts, nor digital currencies. In fact, Section 486 actually reinforces our original position on these two items.

[JarG0n]

I am smoking nothing. Other than being shiny and making jewelry what is the intrinsic value of gold?

The value of gold and silver extends beyond purely aesthetic use as jewelry. 'm sure this is just a partial list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold#Applications

Also, silver has an ever increasing number of patents where its use is a critical component of said patent. Silver actually has more patent uses than gold.

On the other hand, Federal Reserve Notes are 3-4 cent (in labor and materials) pieces of paper. Worse yet, they are already printed on, so you cannot use them for writing on (which would probably be defacing). Also, they are not wide enough for use as toilet paper.

[llepard]

Well I do believe this has evolved into argument, but I am interested in getting this answered. And why you list some of it's qualities, like I said before, other than the fact that people like it because we are dumb people that like shiny things, and the fact that it makes jewelry, what is so great about it?

It's production is limited to 1-2% per year due to the econmics of mining it.

Your earlier example of a large gold find is unrealistic. It will never happen.

Therefore, governments cannot create it out of thin air.

So, inflation through monetary printing becomes impossible.

Gold may not be the perfect currency, but for 6,000 years mankind has accepted its value.

And you would prefer that the government have control of the supply of money.....


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, I laugh at your gullibility, stupidity and ignorance.

You need to research this topic more. You are talking Gold 101 at the Freshman level. Some of the people on this forum have post doctorate degrees in this stuff.

Do you know who Edwin Viera is? If not google him and read his stuff.

Best, LWL

[TrueFreedom]

It's production is limited to 1-2% per year due to the econmics of mining it.

Your earlier example of a large gold find is unrealistic. It will never happen.

Therefore, governments cannot create it out of thin air.

So, inflation through monetary printing becomes impossible.

Gold may not be the perfect currency, but for 6,000 years mankind has accepted its value.

And you would prefer that the government have control of the supply of money.....


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, I laugh at your gullibility, stupidity and ignorance.

You need to research this topic more. You are talking Gold 101 at the Freshman level. Some of the people on this forum have post doctorate degrees in this stuff.

Do you know who Edwin Viera is? If not google him and read his stuff.

Best, LWL

So what proof can you offer that there could be no large gold find and an influx of gold into the market?

Gold is not a perfect currency, it is just a means of exchange.

Yes government should have supply of money, read Hobbes and Locke. It is not YOUR money. You enter into contract with the government. Without them you would not have money. Without their protection you could not make a farm. You would create a farm and then someone would come kill you and take your farm. And before long people would say, well hell, why make a farm, someone will steal it, so lets just go back to picking apples off of a tree.

Yes I know who Viera is, no I do not think he has any clue what he is talking about.

[llepard]

So what proof can you offer that there could be no large gold find and an influx of gold into the market?

Gold is not a perfect currency, it is just a means of exchange.

Yes government should have supply of money, read Hobbes and Locke. It is not YOUR money. You enter into contract with the government. Without them you would not have money. Without their protection you could not make a farm. You would create a farm and then someone would come kill you and take your farm. And before long people would say, well hell, why make a farm, someone will steal it, so lets just go back to picking apples off of a tree.

Yes I know who Viera is, no I do not think he has any clue what he is talking about.

Proof, well let's see, in 6,000 years of recorded history there has never been a year when the new gold found has exceeded 2% of the existing base of gold. Now I am not saying that next year it won't happen. But 6,000 to 1 sounds like pretty long odds to me.

You sir or madam are a statist. What are you doing on this forum or supporting Dr. Paul. You need to sign up to support one of the statist candidates.

1. I did not say gold was perfect. Just that is was better than anything else.
2. It is not my money? What the fuck are you talking about? Money has value by mutual agreement. It belongs to who possesses it. What is your point.
3. Your example is a joke. Because there are criminals in the world i need the government? Hahaha ha ha .... No because there are criminals in the world people organize to protect themselves and punish criminal behavior. Some call it governement, I call it individuals acting in their own rational self interest. Just because I organize with others to protect myself from criminal behavior I did not agree to let government control my life via inflation and taxes.

I want to be free of government interference. That is why it is called the Freedom Movement.

You obviously do not get it, or you like to be a troll and argue. Either way I am done with your sorry ass.

You are entitled to your opinion about Viera, I suppose you went to law school at Harvard and to Harvard College and have written books on the subject. You are right, you know more than Viera.

You are the weakest link. Go to Rudy's forum.