View Poll Results: Should the people be free to transact unimpeded in any currency they choose?

Voters
41. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. The people should be free to transact unimpeded in any currency they choose.

    39 95.12%
  • No. The government should force the people by law or taxation to transact only in govnmnt currency.

    2 4.88%
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 134

Thread: Honest Money Constitutional Amendment

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    How about this:
    All money systems must be based upon tangible and non-perishable commodity specie conforming to Article I, Section 10 of this Constitution, at the very least. All paper currencies must denominate said commodities by either weight or volume measure and must be immediately convertible upon demand.


    Well, my concern is twofold: first if you allow the government to PRINT say gold certificates as they’ve done in the past, and they overprint it, creating more paper claims than the actual gold they have, (and if a private bank did that and there was a run on the bank it would go bankrupt), but the government cannot go bankrupt, therefore it will put taxpayers on the hook for this. So, I would put the government out of printing business all together.
    If the penalties for "over printing" are draconian as I believe they ought to be with officials spending the remainders of their miserable existences in solitary confinement, I believe that the problem will become vanishingly small.

    Secondly, you can legitimately bind the government to use the kind of money you specified (and I like that! Good work!) but not the people. Your amendment violates the Benson Principle (please see http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewt...p?f=19&t=12347 ) because it gives the government authority that cannot be delegated to it by the individual. Do you have moral right to force your neighbor to transact (or not to transact) in specific currencies? No.
    Forgive me, I have not yet read the cite you provide - dial up sucks... one of the minor disadvantages of living in the middle of nowhere. So please forgive any errors I may make here. My amendment allows for an arbitrary number of currency systems, private or otherwise. Nobody is bound to use one only or any given system. Use what works - use that in which you have confidence. In such a wildly free and competitive market, the good ones will edge out the others, will they not?

    That all said, in some way I do have the right to require a given currency. If I am selling my car and I will accept only platinum or gold ounces for it, that is my prerogative. If you do not have any or are otherwise unwilling to make that trade, then you do not buy my car. It is as simple as that. We either reach a mutually satisfying agreement or we do not. Freedom of choice cuts both ways.


    Therefore you cannot delegate this authority to your government, because you cannot delegate an authority you do not have.
    Understood and agreed, but I do not believe this to be the case with the amendment I contrived. Could you please explain to me how it would be so? I just cannot see it, for some reason.

    Freedom works. Remove government force from the realm of money, and you will allow the operation of unfettered free market; when that happens, government fiat will end because it cannot operate without government force and coercion; thus 100% commodity based monetary system will freely arise, because it is the most honest and stable monetary system known to man, and therefore it will be the free choice of the free market, because no one likes his purchasing power being stolen by government’s printing press. Freedom works. It is the only thing that does work!
    We are in violent agreement.


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    That said, I ha ve no porblem with fiat currency in principle.

    Enlighten me please. By definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fiat+money) fiat money is conjured out of nothing and then forced by the government upon the people. Therefore the government who issues and spends such fiat money is able to lay claim to peoples’ goods and services in exchange for worthless paper. How is that just? How is that not plunder? How is that not SOMETHING for NOTHING? Which is actually a definition of theft and fraud.
    Conjured out of nothing is, in principle, irrelevant. If every dollar that is printed accurately and faithfully covered precisely that much "added value" that enters into an economy, there would be no trouble at all because that piece of paper would, in fact, represent REAL and tangible value. The other side of that might be a requirement to destroy notes that represented value lost. How that would be accomplished would be anyone's guess. This, of course, is all hypothetically speaking in terms of pure principle. In practice, as I mentioned, it is not workable. We must also be keenly aware that "value" is a very subjective concept, and this is well demonstrated at the auction house where some item is put up for bids. People bid what they feel the item is worth. At the outset it is worth nothing because nobody has yet bid. If nobody bids, the value remains at zero. If an opening bid is made, the auctioneer works it until bidding activity ceases and the highest bidder wins. What was the value of the item? There was no single value attributable to it, but probably a plurality of values, each for a given bidder. Value floats and that complicates things. Nevertheless, having a measurable and stable currency takes one big step in reducing that complexity, but loss of "value" is possible in any case. When times are tough and food scarce, its value rises. Your $20MM in gold bouillion may not buy you an egg in certain circumstances... and you cant' gain susenance from eating gold.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    Consider gold coin - If I debase the specie 10% from .900 fine to .810 fine, I have upped the supply by 10% (actually a bit more) and who is going to know? How many people spend their days assaying the coinage?

    Even though 100% commodity based monetary system is not 100% counterfeit proof, it is INFINETELY more legal-counterfeit proof than fiat, because fiat itself is fraud. It is MUCH, MUCH easier to legally counterfeit in 0’s and 1’s than in gold bullion! So we must use the system that is the most stable and honest, that we know about.
    Agreed.

    Secondly, the purchasing power of say gold, tends to increase with time, so when you come out of the comma in 20 years (per your example), if your savings were in gold currency, your purchasing power has actually increased, (rather than being stolen as in fiat case)! A great thing for those who save money say for a retirement!
    Agreed with the caveat that this assumes "normal" conditions and nothing extreme such as severe food shortages.

    So 100% commodity based currency, especially gold and silver, approach your perfect system most nearly!
    That’s why I said 100% commodity based monetary system is the most honest and stable monetary system known to man!
    No argument from me.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    My first blush swag at a immutable unit of value could be "time". Thoughts?

    Problem with time is that you could get sick, or your debtor could get sick. How are they going to trade you their time?
    Forgive my imprecision. By "time", I meant units of time for which ione is compensated. A 10-hour bill denotes 10 work hours. The problem there, of course, is the differeing values in the times of different individuals. That of a garbage collector... erm, I mean "sanitation engineer" is not equal to that of a neurosurgeon. Then again, some may argue that it is. This is the inherent problem that perhaps cannot be solvable.

    The best solution, of course, would be the invention of Star Drek style replicator technology whereby a person's every material need is attainable for the mere asking.
    \
    In any event, we agree on commodity basis. Adding other precious metals may not be a bad idea, especially to combat the dullards who speciously assert that there is not enough gold to go around. Rhodium, ruthenium, rhenium, tungsten, iridium, osmium... these would all be suitable additions to the commodity pool.

    I would still insist on denominations based on hard measurement. Pounds, ounces, grains... or if we want to go all metric-***, then kilograms, decagrams, grams, milligrams...

    Each certificate would represent precisely its face value measurment in the metal it is assigned. "Ten grains fine gold" and so forth. The problem I see, however, is the inter-specie valuations. Hwo are they etablished and is it reasonable to give them an immutable rational value? for example, oen ounce of gold may be defined as 20 ounces of silver, thirty five ounces of tungsten, 1/2 ounce of rhodium, 3 ounces of iridium, and so on. Without a constant relative value, pricing of retail items would become a nightmare, and with so many commodity metals backing the notes, pricing will be tough in any event. That is the virtue and cenvenience of units such as "dollars", but they really cannot be trusted IMO due to the corrupt nature of far too many human beings, most of them occupying governmental positions wherein they can screw the pooch far too easily.

    Couterfeiting would still be a major problem and in a convertible system it becomes a far worse issue.
    Last edited by osan; 07-21-2010 at 09:26 PM.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    If the penalties for "over printing" are draconian as I believe they ought to be with officials spending the remainders of their miserable existences in solitary confinement, I believe that the problem will become vanishingly small.
    Fine, you may be right. But even if you put the guy in jail, where will the gold come from for those who are holding extra paper? In the case of government the taxpayers will be put on the hook for this. Thus the problem is not isolated by a bankruptcy of one institution, but is spread to ALL in the country, because the government does not go bankrupt without dragging everyone with it. This is why I’d prefer following current US Constitution, which only permits Congress to COIN money, but NOT to print it (under the 10th Amendment).

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    My amendment allows for an arbitrary number of currency systems, private or otherwise. Nobody is bound to use one only or any given system.
    That is not what your amendment actually says. It says: “All money systems must be …” All means all, public and private. I wholeheartedly support your proposed restrictions placed on the government (minus the printing part), but I cannot support putting such restrictions on private citizens because that would violate the Benson Principle, which is one of the Fundamental Principles of Liberty. (Please see the link when your dial-up allows http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewt...p?f=19&t=12347

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Understood and agreed, but I do not believe this to be the case with the amendment I contrived. Could you please explain to me how it would be so? I just cannot see it, for some reason.
    According to your amendment “ALL currencies” must follow certain rules you specify. And these are good rules (minus perhaps the printing part). But however good your rules are, the only entity that you may apply them to is the government, if you get a majority to agree with you, that is. But you have no moral right to FORCE your neighbor to follow these rules for the currency he creates privately. He can create any ridiculous currency he wants and use it, as long as he does not defraud anyone in the process. So if you have no moral right to FORCE your neighbor to follow these rules for his private currency, you cannot ask the government to FORCE him for you. Why? Because the only legitimate authority the government has is what you, as individual, delegated to it, and you cannot delegate an authority you do not have.
    Now, if you think your amendment does not force private citizens to follow your rules for their currencies, then you are mistaken, for it says “ALL currencies…”, which means public and private. So to square with the Benson Principle you need to reword it to apply ONLY to the government, but NOT to private citizens.

    Other then that, I think these would be great rules to follow for private currencies as well, as long as you do not FORCE them to do so. I would personally use only currencies that follow the rules you outlined! But that’s the beauty of free market, the best currency freely wins, and that without any government FORCE! Freedom is beautiful!

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    We are in violent agreement.
    Thanks!

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Conjured out of nothing is, in principle, irrelevant. If every dollar that is printed accurately and faithfully covered precisely that much "added value" that enters into an economy, there would be no trouble at all because that piece of paper would, in fact, represent REAL and tangible value.
    The problem is how do you propose that piece of paper enter into circulation? Someone has to spend it into circulation first. He who spends it first will be getting SOMETHING (goods and services) for NOTHING (worthless paper). So there is an act of plunder occurring at the point of creation of such unbacked currency, at the moment it first enters circulation! Sure, you are assigning certain “added value” to that piece of paper, but you created a claim to that added value out of nothing. Therefore he who issues that piece of paper and uses it FIRST, commits an act of plunder.

    Of course in a truly free market people will largely reject such unbacked paper, (who likes being plundered anyway). But if you make that fiat paper legal tender, you can now FORCE people to take it, and your plunder is enforced by the government!

    Did I miss anything?

    Thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Adding other precious metals may not be a bad idea, especially to combat the dullards who speciously assert that there is not enough gold to go around.
    Good point. But did you ever considered that there ALWAYS will be enough gold in the world to support economy of ANY size, even if gold supply remained constant (which it isn’t, it is growing at a healthy rate). How so? Well, if the economy expanded and gold supply did not, the purchasing power of gold will simply increase to cover new goods and services in the economy! A great thing for those who save money, say for a retirement! Your money buys more and more as time goes by!


    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    I would still insist on denominations based on hard measurement. Pounds, ounces, grains... or if we want to go all metric-***, then kilograms, decagrams, grams, milligrams...
    Good point, and I agree.

    But did you know that originally the word “dollar” meant a certain WIEGHT of silver. The word “pound” (as in British pound £) meant (surprise!) a pound of silver, etc. So originally, names of currencies meant a specific WEIGHT of certain precious metal. But gradually, the banksters succeeded in divorcing the names of currencies from weight of underlying commodity. Thus entered in the fiat fraud. The rest is history.

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The problem I see, however, is the inter-specie valuations.
    Free market will sort it out well. I wouldn’t even mind the value of different metals floating against each other depending on supply. And to those who say this is chaos, I say, this chaos is much better than the orderly theft and plunder accomplished by unbacked fiat!

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Couterfeiting would still be a major problem and in a convertible system it becomes a far worse issue.
    However bad metal counterfeiting is, it will NEVER be as bad (not even close) as legalized counterfeiting enabled by government forced unbacked fiat! The orders of magnitude of difference are ASTRONOMICAL!



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    O, forgot sales taxes on the medium of exchange. The idea here is that you don't pay sales tax when you change $5 bill into quarters, so you shouldn't pay sales tax say on gold and silver when you use them as money.

    All these are Ron Paul's ideas, I simply put them in the form of an amendment that also explains to people WHY it is important.

    Please see the updated version at the very top.

    Thanks.
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 07-24-2010 at 11:12 AM.

  6. #34

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    If the penalties for "over printing" are draconian as I believe they ought to be with officials spending the remainders of their miserable existences in solitary confinement, I believe that the problem will become vanishingly small.

    Fine, you may be right. But even if you put the guy in jail, where will the gold come from for those who are holding extra paper? In the case of government the taxpayers will be put on the hook for this. Thus the problem is not isolated by a bankruptcy of one institution, but is spread to ALL in the country, because the government does not go bankrupt without dragging everyone with it. This is why I’d prefer following current US Constitution, which only permits Congress to COIN money, but NOT to print it (under the 10th Amendment).
    Your point is well taken, but as you point out below, this is a risk we take no matter what system is set into place. One possible solution is nth-order blind redundancy in the system. Have 'n' layers of processing, each unaware of the existence of the others. Nobody knows who else may be keeping the books and each has their ass on the line such that any accounting tricks could be discovered by another operator, which would spell disaster for careers. Any such error not provably criminal is categorized as negligent and those connected lose their jobs and may never again work at Treasury. Proven criminal action sees life in prison, no exceptions, no parole, no mercy. Anyone willing to risk such stakes needs to be in prison. In any event, make crime and negligence painfully unattractive where money issues are concerned.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    My amendment allows for an arbitrary number of currency systems, private or otherwise. Nobody is bound to use one only or any given system.

    That is not what your amendment actually says. It says: “All money systems must be …” All means all, public and private. I wholeheartedly support your proposed restrictions placed on the government (minus the printing part), but I cannot support putting such restrictions on private citizens because that would violate the Benson Principle, which is one of the Fundamental Principles of Liberty. (Please see the link when your dial-up allows http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewt...p?f=19&t=12347
    I see your point. Well taken and I probably agree, though I will have to think about it a bit more.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    Understood and agreed, but I do not believe this to be the case with the amendment I contrived. Could you please explain to me how it would be so? I just cannot see it, for some reason.

    According to your amendment “ALL currencies” must follow certain rules you specify.
    Yes, I was not intending to deliver a comprehensive corpus here. I don't have all the answers - just trying to get the basic notions out there.


    And these are good rules (minus perhaps the printing part). But however good your rules are, the only entity that you may apply them to is the government, if you get a majority to agree with you, that is. But you have no moral right to FORCE your neighbor to follow these rules for the currency he creates privately.
    Now I see your point more clearly. I must agree.

    He can create any ridiculous currency he wants and use it, as long as he does not defraud anyone in the process. So if you have no moral right to FORCE your neighbor to follow these rules for his private currency, you cannot ask the government to FORCE him for you. Why? Because the only legitimate authority the government has is what you, as individual, delegated to it, and you cannot delegate an authority you do not have.
    yes.


    Freedom is beautiful!
    Indeed



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    Conjured out of nothing is, in principle, irrelevant. If every dollar that is printed accurately and faithfully covered precisely that much "added value" that enters into an economy, there would be no trouble at all because that piece of paper would, in fact, represent REAL and tangible value.

    The problem is how do you propose that piece of paper enter into circulation?
    That is the $64 question.

    Someone has to spend it into circulation first. He who spends it first will be getting SOMETHING (goods and services) for NOTHING (worthless paper). So there is an act of plunder occurring at the point of creation of such unbacked currency, at the moment it first enters circulation! Sure, you are assigning certain “added value” to that piece of paper, but you created a claim to that added value out of nothing. Therefore he who issues that piece of paper and uses it FIRST, commits an act of plunder.
    Not sure this is necessarily true, but I would have to think about it more. Right now my head hurts from too much thinking.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    Adding other precious metals may not be a bad idea, especially to combat the dullards who speciously assert that there is not enough gold to go around.

    Good point. But did you ever considered that there ALWAYS will be enough gold in the world to support economy of ANY size, even if gold supply remained constant (which it isn’t, it is growing at a healthy rate). How so? Well, if the economy expanded and gold supply did not, the purchasing power of gold will simply increase to cover new goods and services in the economy! A great thing for those who save money, say for a retirement! Your money buys more and more as time goes by!
    But this is the inverse of inflation, which is good for those holding a quantity of specie and not good for those who do not.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    The problem I see, however, is the inter-specie valuations.

    Free market will sort it out well. I wouldn’t even mind the value of different metals floating against each other depending on supply. And to those who say this is chaos, I say, this chaos is much better than the orderly theft and plunder accomplished by unbacked fiat!
    Agreed.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by osan
    Couterfeiting would still be a major problem and in a convertible system it becomes a far worse issue.

    However bad metal counterfeiting is, it will NEVER be as bad (not even close) as legalized counterfeiting enabled by government forced unbacked fiat! The orders of magnitude of difference are ASTRONOMICAL!
    I am referring to paper counterfeiting in a specie-backed paper system. A good operator prints up a batch and redeems for a few tons of gold over, say, a couple of years.... if there is a run, big poo hits the fan. Private systems may be even more vulnerable - anti-counterfeiting protection is very costly. Small operators could likely not afford it. How are holders of the legitimate certificates to be reasonably protected when the bad guys strip the small small operators of substantial proportions of their reserves?
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  7. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    One possible solution is nth-order blind redundancy in the system. Have 'n' layers of processing, each unaware of the existence of the others.
    The problem still remains of coercion. Fiat cannot operate without government force backing it up, because it is a fraud. That force violates the Benson Principle which is one of the Fundamental Principles of Liberty, without which Liberty cannot survive and prosper. (http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewt...p?f=19&t=12347)

    Free competition in currencies works much better to check government fraud, because if people notice government money losing its purchasing power, they will simply reject it in favor of a more stable currency that preserves and increases their purchasing power! And given truly free market in currencies it will overwhelmingly be 100% commodity based, interest free monetary system, -- the most honest and stable monetary system known to man! And all that WITHOUT government force! Freedom is beautiful!

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    But this is the inverse of inflation, which is good for those holding a quantity of specie and not good for those who do not.
    Extremes of deflation may be harmful to businesses, but at least mild deflation, i.e. increase in the purchasing power of money, is good for the poor people, and for those who save for, say, old age. On balance this is a MUCH more positive occurrence than having their savings stolen by government’s printing press! Inflation hurts the most the poor and those on fixed incomes, and those who save money. Conversely, deflation benefits most the poor, those on fixed incomes, and those who save money! I’d say a mild deflation is a very healthy thing to have in an economy! And that’s precisely what would happen with gold or silver as money! It would protect the old, the poor, and those who save money!

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    I am referring to paper counterfeiting in a specie-backed paper system. A good operator prints up a batch and redeems for a few tons of gold over, say, a couple of years.... if there is a run, big poo hits the fan. Private systems may be even more vulnerable - anti-counterfeiting protection is very costly. Small operators could likely not afford it. How are holders of the legitimate certificates to be reasonably protected when the bad guys strip the small small operators of substantial proportions of their reserves?
    I am not quite sure what you are talking about.
    I see three possibilities:

    a) counterfeiting of paper by criminals, (but that’s no different than what we have now, and ways to deal with that are pretty well developed).

    b) overprinting of paper gold (or commodity in general) certificates with no gold (or commodity) to back it up. In this case physical delivery demand is the ultimate check. You can even demand that bank A deliver your gold (or commodity) to bank B that you trust, and thus check bank A. Or you can demand physical delivery to you. That is the ultimate check for overprinting.

    c) Counterfeiting of the metal by diluting with baser metals. Free market will quickly come up with cost effective ways to detect that. This technology already exists and is readily available!

    All these things can be sorted out by private enterprise and free market MUCH better than the government can!
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 07-27-2010 at 12:01 AM.

  8. #36
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by robert68
    What’s the difference between 100% backed commodity “banking” and the commodity storage business?
    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    Not much. It is essentially the same. And paper and computer signals, in this correct scenario, are NOT money, but merely warehouse receipts for the real money--the commodity being held by the bank (secure warehouse).
    I’d rather be paid interest on my bank deposits than pay storage fees.

  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    ...
    That’s why I said 100% commodity based monetary system is the most honest and stable monetary system known to man!
    Could you cite evidence that an economy with a 100% commodity based monetary system, would be vibrant and growing?

    There were no bank failures in Canada or Hong Kong during the period of 1934 -1965, and I don’t think either had a 100% commodity based monetary system. http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj16n1-3.html
    Last edited by robert68; 07-27-2010 at 12:28 AM.

  10. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by robert68 View Post
    I’d rather be paid interest on my bank deposits than pay storage fees.
    No one prevents you from authorizing your bank to loan out your money at an interest! Of course there will be no FDIC, as under 100% commodity system, no one will bail you out by the printing press if your bank loses your money! So the failure will be isolated to you and your bank, rather than spread out to everyone holding fiat paper dollars, whose purchasing power would be stolen by the FDIC's printing press if it were to bail you out!

    Thus 100% commodity based monetary system enforces contracts (no bailout is possible), and isolates failure (everyone cannot be plundered to bail you out)! All these are very desirable qualities in an honest monetary system!

  11. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by robert68 View Post
    Could you cite evidence that an economy with a 100% commodity based monetary system, would be vibrant and growing?

    There were no bank failures in Canada or Hong Kong during the period of 1934 -1965, and I don’t think either had a 100% commodity based monetary system. http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj16n1-3.html
    US in late 1800's had the dollar fully based on gold and silver, with multiple competing currencies insuring integrity of money via free competition in currencies. It was the time of unprecedented growth and prosperity in the US.

    As for absence of bank failures, it is not an indicator of success of a currency (remember bank could be bailed out by a printing press). The true measure of value of a currency is how well it preserves its purchasing power. And we know that ALL unbacked paper currencies, historically, lost their purchasing power! I said lost, but I should've said had their purchasing power stolen. Because purchasing power is never lost, it is simply transfered to another by the printing press inflation. Case in point US "dollar" lost 97% of its purchasing power since 1913, when Federal Reserve Fraud was instituted!

    Conversely, gold and silver have preserved, and actually increased their purchasing power since 1913! So given true freedom to transact in anything they choose, what do you think will people choose a) fiat paper that has its purchasing power constantly stolen by government's printing press inflation, or b) 100% gold and silver (or in general any other commodity) money, whose purchasing power is preserved and actually rises over time?

    I'd say given freedom, people will choose the latter! Because 100% commodity based monetary system is the most honest and stable monetary system known to man!

  12. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    The problem still remains of coercion. Fiat cannot operate without government force backing it up, because it is a fraud. That force violates the Benson Principle which is one of the Fundamental Principles of Liberty, without which Liberty cannot survive and prosper. (http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewt...p?f=19&t=12347)
    OK, I $#@!ed up here in equating paper money with fiat currency. What I was really speaking of was value-backed paper, even where such backing is not necessarily tangible. This is, in principle, perfectly workable. In practice, the well established "features" of human behavior make it practically impossible.

    Never mind.

    Free competition in currencies works much better to check government fraud, because if people notice government money losing its purchasing power, they will simply reject it in favor of a more stable currency that preserves and increases their purchasing power! And given truly free market in currencies it will overwhelmingly be 100% commodity based, interest free monetary system, -- the most honest and stable monetary system known to man! And all that WITHOUT government force! Freedom is beautiful!
    But the problem you cited earlier still exists: how does one correct erroneous or criminal issuance of paper certificates? Once the horse has bolted, closing the barn door fails to suffice. The problem is similar to that of unringing a bell.


    Extremes of deflation may be harmful to businesses, but at least mild deflation, i.e. increase in the purchasing power of money, is good for the poor people, and for those who save for, say, old age.
    You are attempting to establish as legitimate an artificial delineation between business and "people". They are one and the same. Robbing Paul to pay Peter is no better than vice versa. The effects are effectively the same and the debilitating results will be strongly analogous, if even at all distingushable. If business suffers, the markets suffer, and WE are the markets and the businesses. No matter how you cut it, inflation and deflation are equally bad because they constitute distortions and instability in value in a very general way, and that is very bad. Localized distortions are bad enough, but all else equal, a healthy economy should be able to absorb them and find new and equally fit equilibria. But when the overall system of value representation is compromised beyond a point, bad things happen and there is no place to which one may "escape", economically speaking. The general health of the economy has degraded and people suffer loss.


    On balance this is a MUCH more positive occurrence than having their savings stolen by government’s printing press!
    Not really. It is just far less likely to be as extreme and in that sense we agree. Fully convertible, precious commodity backing imposes discipline upon those managing any money system. When I show up with $20K in certificates and the bank is unable to redeem them, there is precious little wiggle room for tap dancing around the truth. In such cases, a few very pointed questions would have to be answered, unlike in the fiat system where any of a great number of outright lies may be employed to excuse or even refuse to redeem. And yes, there is a convertibility feature even in the fiat system we currently use: the check. A check is essentially a cash-backed money system. I once loaned a friend $35K so she could buy a house. Three months later she gave me a check for a mere $10K. I went to her branch in Freehold NJ to cash it. The teler turned sheet-white, then said she would not cash the check unless I opened an account. I told her she was full of $#@!, in almost those words. Manager came and continued to refuse. Using something like Socratic method, I painted them into a corner and they finally realized I was nobody to $#@! with and they cashed the note. But the fact that they even attempted to refuse a check drawn on THAT branch says much about the way things work these days. One is looked upon with some contempt for asserting his property rights. This is a strong symptom of fascism at work. BTW, when I came in with a $25K check the following month, they cashed it right away, if with a sour look on their pusses - they remembered me.

    Inflation hurts the most the poor and those on fixed incomes, and those who save money. Conversely, deflation benefits most the poor, those on fixed incomes, and those who save money!
    There appears here a subtext that one holds greater property claims than another. I cannot agree with this.

    I’d say a mild deflation is a very healthy thing to have in an economy!
    Depends on how one defines "mild".

    And that’s precisely what would happen with gold or silver as money! It would protect the old, the poor, and those who save money!
    Maybe. A big question in all of this is bootstrapping such a system. How is the extant gold distributed? That is a key point of buggery, IMO. It is likely that there will initially be a very distorted distribution, which in and of itself may not be a problem. But if there was to be a revolutionary change in that distribution in the direction of increased entropic equilbrium, there will be very big problems in terms of deflation because of the greatly grown economy. The finite specie, being rapidly redistributed through free market activity (as assumption), the purchasing power of a unit of gold should go way up. Wages go down, the wealthy grow far wealthier yet inject no additional inherent value into the economy. IOW, the problems we see now would still be present, only in reverse.

    Another problem is hoarding. If I run John Doe Corp. and just sock the money away generation after generation, the value of specie goes through the ceiling and our economic power soars. IMO hoarding would become a core practice for some companies. I would not take too many large corporations to effectively corner the precious specie market, which would be yet another reason to expand the menu of commodities to back the currency. A problem that I see there is that there should still be a strong tendency to hoard certain backing elements.... like gold. It's human habit as observed over the past several thousands of years.

    a) counterfeiting of paper by criminals, (but that’s no different than what we have now, and ways to deal with that are pretty well developed).
    It IS different in that in a convertible system the threat of comig up short at redemption time presents problems of a very real and somewhat different nature. Fiat systems can absorb counterfeiting more readily in this respect and is an advantage, within limits.

    All these things can be sorted out by private enterprise and free market MUCH better than the government can!
    yeah, in addition to technology, life/death sentences for counterfeiters.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    What I was really speaking of was value-backed paper, even where such backing is not necessarily tangible. This is, in principle, perfectly workable.
    Again, under principles of liberty, you are welcome to use ANY monetary system you please, as long as you commit no fraud. But do allow others to do the same, to use or refuse any monetary system they wish in their private transactions. I agree with you, that given free competition in currencies value-backed paper (where value may be intangible) could still exist, but the day will be won, by far, by 100% commodity based, interest free monetary system, -- the most honest and stable monetary system known to man.


    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    But the problem you cited earlier still exists: how does one correct erroneous or criminal issuance of paper certificates? Once the horse has bolted, closing the barn door fails to suffice. The problem is similar to that of unringing a bell.
    In case of free market, if a currency producer debases his currency by overprinting, people will simply refuse it in favor of a more honest and more stable currency. Free market will put him out of business, and a court will put him in jail for fraud. Of course it is not perfect because mortals are at work, but it is much better than when there is ONLY one currency forced upon all, and you cannot escape that fraud because of government force! At least free market has a natural and robust self regulating mechanism, that does not violate principles of liberty, but rather establishes them!


    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    But if there was to be a revolutionary change in that distribution in the direction of increased entropic equilbrium, there will be very big problems in terms of deflation because of the greatly grown economy. The finite specie, being rapidly redistributed through free market activity (as assumption), the purchasing power of a unit of gold should go way up. Wages go down, the wealthy grow far wealthier yet inject no additional inherent value into the economy. IOW, the problems we see now would still be present, only in reverse.
    Gold supply in the world is growing at a healthy rate of 2%-5% per year. Gold supply is NOT finite. It is actually infinite. I have heard of enormous potential for gold mining, plus of technologies allowing to convert baser elements into pure gold. All in all, between gold, silver and 100’s of other commodities, crowned with freedom to freely use any of them, we will be perfectly fine, as far as medium of exchange is concerned! As long as we have our Freedom!


    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    A problem that I see there is that there should still be a strong tendency to hoard certain backing elements.... like gold. It's human habit as observed over the past several thousands of years.
    There is nothing wrong with hoarding. I’ve noticed that often the word “hoarding” is used as a derogatory term for “saving.” Besides, if people hoard gold, you can use silver (supply of which is much more numerous and available than gold), if they hoard silver (it is really hard to imagine silver market cornered, it’s VERY hard to do) use 100’s of other metals and commodities. The idea here is that as long as the medium of exchange cannot be conjured out of nothing, and its purchasing power determined by its intrinsic value, you should be fine. In a free environment like that, with multiple commodities competing as the medium of exchange, hoarding will quickly lose its appeal, but saving will be encouraged!
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 07-27-2010 at 12:01 PM.

  15. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    Again, under principles of liberty, you are welcome to use ANY monetary system you please, as long as you commit no fraud. But do allow others to do the same, to use or refuse any monetary system they wish in their private transactions. I agree with you, that given free competition in currencies value-backed paper (where value may be intangible) could still exist, but the day will be won, by far, by 100% commodity based, interest free monetary system, -- the most honest and stable monetary system known to man.
    You finally hit on the salient point: interest-free. Yes, unlimited printability is a definites hazard in fiat systems, but that could be controlled. The part that really screws the pooch is the interest, especially where debt levels are high.



    In case of free market, if a currency producer debases his currency by overprinting, people will simply refuse it in favor of a more honest and more stable currency.
    Insufficient. The producer has committed FRAUD and should spend the rest of his life in solitary confinement. Period. No exceptions. If we want this $#@! to stop, we have to make the cost unattractively high. Unbearably high. Once the debased currency has hit the market, those holding it have been robbed as surely as if I shoved a pistol in their kissers and gave them the "your money or your life" schtick. No effective difference whatsoever.

    Free market will put him out of business, and a court will put him in jail for fraud. Of course it is not perfect because mortals are at work, but it is much better than when there is ONLY one currency forced upon all, and you cannot escape that fraud because of government force! At least free market has a natural and robust self regulating mechanism, that does not violate principles of liberty, but rather establishes them!
    Again we agree. Jesus.... this is eery.

    Gold supply in the world is growing at a healthy rate of 2%-5% per year. Gold supply is NOT finite. It is actually infinite. I have heard of enormous potential for gold mining, plus of technologies allowing to convert baser elements into pure gold. All in all, between gold, silver and 100’s of other commodities, crowned with freedom to freely use any of them, we will be perfectly fine, as far as medium of exchange is concerned! As long as we have our Freedom!
    The big "if".

    There is nothing wrong with hoarding. I’ve noticed that often the word “hoarding” is used as a derogatory term for “saving.” Besides, if people hoard gold, you can use silver (supply of which is much more numerous and available than gold), if they hoard silver (it is really hard to imagine silver market cornered, it’s VERY hard to do) use 100’s of other metals and commodities.
    That's my argument for those who claim that hoarding will sink the economy.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  16. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    You finally hit on the salient point: interest-free. Yes, unlimited printability is a definites hazard in fiat systems, but that could be controlled. The part that really screws the pooch is the interest, especially where debt levels are high.
    That is an interesting point. When free competition in currencies exist it ENDS both fiat and interest attached to money creation, because 100% commodity based, interest free money will be the preferred choice of free market! (Who likes being plundered anyway?) Freedom accomplishes all this without government force and without coercion. Freedom REALLY works! In fact, it is the only thing that does work!

  17. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    That is an interesting point. When free competition in currencies exist it ENDS both fiat and interest attached to money creation, because 100% commodity based, interest free money will be the preferred choice of free market! (Who likes being plundered anyway?) Freedom accomplishes all this without government force and without coercion. Freedom REALLY works! In fact, it is the only thing that does work!
    If one stops to consider it, which most people apparently do not, the very concept of interest on currency, that is to say, its issuance, is absurd on its face. It is utterly preposterous, in fact. But it also lends a vital clue to the nature of our current system of "money", wholly supporting the fact that the issuers of the currency are illegitimate in that role in that they are making a profit on the issuance of the life blood of the economy. That is, by definition, issuance of debt and NOT money per sé. Out system is so hopelessly corrupt in this sense, yet so few people recognize it or even care. That is testimony of just how pathetic we are on the whole these days.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  18. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    If one stops to consider it, which most people apparently do not, the very concept of interest on currency, that is to say, its issuance, is absurd on its face. It is utterly preposterous, in fact. But it also lends a vital clue to the nature of our current system of "money", wholly supporting the fact that the issuers of the currency are illegitimate in that role in that they are making a profit on the issuance of the life blood of the economy. That is, by definition, issuance of debt and NOT money per sé. Out system is so hopelessly corrupt in this sense, yet so few people recognize it or even care. That is testimony of just how pathetic we are on the whole these days.
    In the condition of free market in currencies, when government force and coercion are removed, you are allowing anyone to create any currency he wishes, even a fiat debt based interest bearing one; The beautiful thing is that in the condition of Liberty and Free Market, such currencies will be simply rejected in favor of more stable and more honest currencies, especially in favor of 100% commodity based, interest free currency, -- the most stable and honest currency known to man! Freedom, that is absence of government force and coercion, accomplishes all that! I think that is quite remarkable! Freedom is truly the only thing that REALLY works! Wow!

  19. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    US in late 1800's had the dollar fully based on gold and silver, with multiple competing currencies insuring integrity of money via free competition in currencies. It was the time of unprecedented growth and prosperity in the US.

    As for absence of bank failures, it is not an indicator of success of a currency (remember bank could be bailed out by a printing press). The true measure of value of a currency is how well it preserves its purchasing power. And we know that ALL unbacked paper currencies, historically, lost their purchasing power! I said lost, but I should've said had their purchasing power stolen. Because purchasing power is never lost, it is simply transfered to another by the printing press inflation. Case in point US "dollar" lost 97% of its purchasing power since 1913, when Federal Reserve Fraud was instituted!

    Conversely, gold and silver have preserved, and actually increased their purchasing power since 1913! So given true freedom to transact in anything they choose, what do you think will people choose a) fiat paper that has its purchasing power constantly stolen by government's printing press inflation, or b) 100% gold and silver (or in general any other commodity) money, whose purchasing power is preserved and actually rises over time?

    I'd say given freedom, people will choose the latter! Because 100% commodity based monetary system is the most honest and stable monetary system known to man!
    The multiple currencies ended with the new federal banking laws adopted in the early 1860's, to fund the civil war. Also, from "Accounting for Fractional-Reserve Banknotes and deposits— or, What’s Twenty Quid to the Bloody Midland Bank?" by Lawrence White"

    For centuries—even before government guarantees came on the scene—Western payment systems predominantly have used banknotes and demand deposits backed by fractional rather that 100 percent reserves...

    Warehouse certificates were not a viable type of circulating currency note; in fact, warehouse certificates are inherently unsuited to circulate and are not known ever to have circulated historically.
    And from "What Has Government Done to Our Money?" by Murray Rothbard

    It is well-known that banks have rarely stayed on a "100%" basis very long.
    Last edited by robert68; 08-02-2010 at 01:36 AM.

  20. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    No one prevents you from authorizing your bank to loan out your money at an interest! Of course there will be no FDIC, as under 100% commodity system, no one will bail you out by the printing press if your bank loses your money! So the failure will be isolated to you and your bank, rather than spread out to everyone holding fiat paper dollars, whose purchasing power would be stolen by the FDIC's printing press if it were to bail you out!

    Thus 100% commodity based monetary system enforces contracts (no bailout is possible), and isolates failure (everyone cannot be plundered to bail you out)! All these are very desirable qualities in an honest monetary system!
    Paying storage fees has the same net effect as inflation, loss of ones wealth. And if a fractional reserve bank has a liquidity problem, it can sell off other bank assets or use the reserves of another branch to get past it. For the longest time, historically, branch banking wasn’t permitted in the US, hence lots of bank failures, unlike Canada, which during the same time period permitted branch banking and didn't experience bank failures (and they didn't have deposit insurance).
    Last edited by robert68; 08-02-2010 at 05:32 AM.

  21. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by robert68 View Post
    The multiple currencies ended with the new federal banking laws adopted in the early 1860's, to fund the civil war.
    Exactly! You want to end multiple currencies if you want to rob people through legalized counterfeiting and inflation as Lincoln did for the war effort. That is exactly my point. If you wish your government to rob you then forbid competition in currencies! Because free competition in currencies prevents the government from robbing people through legalized counterfeiting and inflation. Because, given the freedom, the people will reject government fiat in favor of a more honest and stable monetary system, especially 100% commodity based, interest free one, — the most stable and honest monetary system known to man!

    But mind you, after the war, Lincoln’s decree was overturned by the congress and multiple currencies were again allowed to compete. This forced the government to gold backing again. They could not conjure “money” out of nothing anymore. There was a huge spike in prosperity at that time.

    Quote Originally Posted by robert68 View Post
    For centuries—even before government guarantees came on the scene—Western payment systems predominantly have used banknotes and demand deposits backed by fractional rather that 100 percent reserves...
    True, but absent government force, if there was a run on bank, the bankers went bankrupt, or to jail! Now this restraint is removed, therefore we have unlimited robbery through legalized counterfeiting and inflation!


    Quote Originally Posted by robert68 View Post
    Warehouse certificates were not a viable type of circulating currency note; in fact, warehouse certificates are inherently unsuited to circulate and are not known ever to have circulated historically.
    You are reading bankster propaganda, my friend! 100% commodity backed currency is nothing more than warehouse receipts, and yes, it has been done on multiple occasions. Every time it was practiced there was unprecedented spike in the prosperity of the people, because 100% commodity based monetary system is the most honest and the most stable monetary system known to man!

    Quote Originally Posted by robert68 View Post
    Murray Rothbard: “It is well-known that banks have rarely stayed on a "100%" basis very long.”
    It is true, but they did stay on 100% basis at times, and when they did there was stability and prosperity in the economy without the busts of “business cycle,” which exists only because of legalized counterfeiting.

    Murray Rothbard was an adamant advocate of 100% commodity based monetary system and of free competition in currencies as the means of establishing such system! Please watch:

    The Case for a 100% Gold Dollar by Murray N. Rothbard

    YouTube - The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar (Part 1 of 2) by Murray N. Rothbard

    YouTube - The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar (Part 2 of 2) by Murray N. Rothbard
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 08-02-2010 at 10:51 AM.



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #49
    Lawrence White and George Selgin are Misean economic professors, hardly “banksters”, and they’ve produced much scholarly work on this subject, for decades now. Considering the fact you’re not backing up you’re assertions with any evidence, have got your mind made up on the subject matter, and because the subject of fraction reserve banking was discussed well in a thread by that name recently, I have no further submissions. Peace out.

  24. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by robert68 View Post
    Considering the fact you’re not backing up you’re assertions with any evidence, have got your mind made up on the subject matter, and because the subject of fraction reserve banking was discussed well in a thread by that name recently, I have no further submissions. Peace out.
    What points would you like to see backed up by evidence? I will be glad to provide the evidence. Please clarify. Thank you!

  25. #51
    Is it better now? (Added the second paragraph to the amendment. Please see at the top of the thread.)
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 09-29-2010 at 02:05 PM.

  26. #52
    This is an excellent approach to cleaning up the ambiguity that exists regarding Constitutional money. I applaud your effort!

    There are a couple of points that I think may be worth discussing in the context of your proposed amendment:

    Free seigniorage, or the free coining of metal, as a Constitutional right would confirm the commitment of the government to gold and silver (although it needn't specify the metals to be coined). Essentially what the government is pledging to do would be to buy raw metal from the public and sell the coins back without a markup, the costs to be borne by the government. For more read: http://www.professorfekete.com/artic...yAndCredit.pdf

    It might also be wise to include a protection of the right of the people to own gold and silver in any form, as this right was abolished and criminalized under FDR and needs to be restated to erase the precedent.

    While you're at it, you might include it as the duty of the government to give a full audited accounting of all moneys held in trust for the people at least every two years.

  27. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Liberty Ghost View Post
    This is an excellent approach to cleaning up the ambiguity that exists regarding Constitutional money. I applaud your effort!

    There are a couple of points that I think may be worth discussing in the context of your proposed amendment:

    Free seigniorage, or the free coining of metal, as a Constitutional right would confirm the commitment of the government to gold and silver (although it needn't specify the metals to be coined). Essentially what the government is pledging to do would be to buy raw metal from the public and sell the coins back without a markup, the costs to be borne by the government. For more read: http://www.professorfekete.com/artic...yAndCredit.pdf

    It might also be wise to include a protection of the right of the people to own gold and silver in any form, as this right was abolished and criminalized under FDR and needs to be restated to erase the precedent.

    While you're at it, you might include it as the duty of the government to give a full audited accounting of all moneys held in trust for the people at least every two years.
    Thank you 'Liberty Ghost' and welcome!

    I think free market in currencies as enabled by this amendment will force the government to make their product (government issued money) competitive. I think it was mistake in the founders to allow the government to coin money. At best they could declare a fixed standard, like "a dollar is x onces of gold," and that's it. But as the Constitution does allow them coin money, (and the States can use nothing but gold and silver coin as money) then if their product is expansive because of excessive markups etc, people will simply use the money produced by more competitive producers.

    Freedom works. Since money is just another commodity, or just another product, that just happened to be used as the medium of exchange, then Free Market will be able to perfect it just as any other product, provided the government FORCE is removed, as per this amendment.

    The problem was created by introduction of government FORCE where it had no moral right of being. Therefore to remove this inappropriate government FORCE is the only solution. That's what is done by this amendment.

  28. #54
    The whole point of a Constitution is to forge the chains that will serve to bind government most effectively. Part of that is to remind the people what the limits of government are. Ultimately, it is the ideas which live within each individual that defines both the individual and society.

    Our country is perhaps the first country in history firmly based upon the notion that the free individual is the the key to a nation's prosperity. This is not an easy thing to see, even today, for most people. There is a tendency among all classes to think that if only their neighbor would follow their ideas, that both the neighbor and they would benefit. The temptation to thus control what your neighbor can or cannot do is omnipresent. When governments are given any power, this temptation is given access to the means of force and coercion ensues.

    The fact that our country is in the mess that it is in, is testimony to the fact that we must forge stronger chains and bind government more closely than even our Founding Fathers attempted.

    Money is poorly understood by a majority of people and this fact has been exploited by those who would take away our liberties and enslave the masses. We must bind them down in such an unambiguous fashion as to make it impossible, to the best of our ability, for such conditions to prevail again.

    It is for this reason that I worry that an amendment as abstract as this proposal will not be understood by the majority of the people. That this amendment authorizes competitive currencies is good, but to the average man, is the idea lucid enough? When we speak of competitive currencies, we are really talking primarily of allowing gold and silver to resume their proper role and functions. I fear that an abstract notion may be too large an idea to plant all at once for most people.

    I think there is wisdom in strengthening the original intent of the Constitution with regard to money, I think that Congress should only be authorized to coin money. I think we should strive to remove any doubt as to what that means so as to preclude a fiat currency. I think it better if we concentrate on clauses which seek to limit the governments ability to print representations of money. We should expressly outlaw legal tender laws.

    We should seek also to define acceptable banking practices; practices which allow for competitive innovation, but which do not permit any sort of fraud. We should address competitive currencies in the light of private enterprise, not as a function of government. Let us stay with money which has proven itself through millennia.

    We should seek to make it impossible to establish any sort of central bank. I think it best if we remember in this regard that we rest money on two pillars: that money should be the property of the individual and that concentration of the control of money invites greed and corruption. If government or any power has the power to change the value of money they are causing harm to the property holder, which cannot be allowed, it is an act of violence. Counterfeiting should be dealt with very harshly. It should be considered a hostile act and listed as a possible justification for an act of war to be declared.

  29. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Liberty Ghost View Post
    This is an excellent approach to cleaning up the ambiguity that exists regarding Constitutional money. I applaud your effort!

    There are a couple of points that I think may be worth discussing in the context of your proposed amendment:

    Free seigniorage, or the free coining of metal, as a Constitutional right would confirm the commitment of the government to gold and silver (although it needn't specify the metals to be coined). Essentially what the government is pledging to do would be to buy raw metal from the public and sell the coins back without a markup, the costs to be borne by the government. For more read: http://www.professorfekete.com/artic...yAndCredit.pdf

    It might also be wise to include a protection of the right of the people to own gold and silver in any form, as this right was abolished and criminalized under FDR and needs to be restated to erase the precedent.

    While you're at it, you might include it as the duty of the government to give a full audited accounting of all moneys held in trust for the people at least every two years.
    This post is awesome! This is what I wanted to see! I know myself well enough that I get trapped and caught up in the same idea, and spin our wheels. This is exactly what an Honest Money System needs to have. And youre absolutely right. The people need to have some way to have an Unrevokable Right to have money.

    Possible Improvement and Suggestion:

    No Local, State, Federal, National, International, or Interplanetary (thinking for the future...) shall pass a law abridging the right of the people to own things of value, nor shall be allowed to impose any form of taxation, fee, or form of financial imposition on the owner, as it provides a means by which an entity can separate the rightful owner from the rightfully owned.

    Rethinking while I was blurting that out. Kind of goes along with the idea of revoking the governments power to tax things that it doesnt have the right to. People should have the right to own gold, hands down. What will happen very quickly is either that right is revoked, or they will impose an ownership tax. The idea taht the government can tax you for something you own outright means that you dont really own it outright, and since they didnt own any part of it to begin with, paying taxes on those things is a form of flat out theft. Also kind of removes the idea that we can LICENSE what you can own, tax you on it when you buy it, then tax you on it for owning it. Think of GUNS. I'd probably be fine with a sales tax, but not a Property Tax on somethign I already paid for. What the $#@! am I doing? Paying the Rent To Own Government pretty much RENT to Own what I already Own? Yeah, ya know what? Here is a Cuisinart. Go sodomize it some more you dickless thieves.

    ALL THINGS that can be owned should remain owned by the people, including Gold, Silver, Platinum, and a Baloney and Humus Sandwich.
    Last edited by DamianTV; 10-20-2010 at 01:59 PM.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.

  30. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    Indeed. Which is why I believe the first order of business is to abolish the Fed.

    I agree. I'm just not a fan of competing currencies. I see a clusterf'k with that idea.
    Ron Paul disagrees with you. Ron Paul advocates repealing legal tender law before ending the federal reserve.



  31. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  32. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Live_Free_Or_Die View Post
    Ron Paul disagrees with you. Ron Paul advocates repealing legal tender law before ending the federal reserve.
    Good point. You will notice that my Honest Money Constitutional Amendment is simply Ron Paul's "Free Competition in Currencies Act" in the form of a short amendment.

  33. #58
    I dont really care what people use for currency, they can use legal tender, gold, silver, chickens and other various livestock, but I think it should be required that when the government pays its bills, it pays with value, not IOU's, which is all the FRN's are anyway. People use em amongst themselves, but when the government can get something for nothing, it becomes dangerous.

    (agreeing for the most part with you on this one...)
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.

  34. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Live_Free_Or_Die View Post
    Ron Paul disagrees with you. Ron Paul advocates repealing legal tender law before ending the federal reserve.
    I was under the impression that he believes repealing legal tender laws would be easier than ending the Fed, not that he thinks it should be done first. In any case, both need to be done. I care not what order it's done in.
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  35. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    I dont really care what people use for currency, they can use legal tender, gold, silver, chickens and other various livestock, but I think it should be required that when the government pays its bills, it pays with value, not IOU's, which is all the FRN's are anyway. People use em amongst themselves, but when the government can get something for nothing, it becomes dangerous.

    (agreeing for the most part with you on this one...)
    Great! You got it right! That is exactly my position!

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Honest Money Constitutional Amendment
    By Foundation_Of_Liberty in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 229
    Last Post: 02-13-2017, 01:29 PM
  2. Constitutional Amendment
    By beaven in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-03-2012, 02:16 PM
  3. Democrats Push for Constitutional Amendment to Roll Back First Amendment
    By John F Kennedy III in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-20-2012, 03:46 PM
  4. 2011 Tea Party HONEST MONEY for an Honest man
    By TomtheTinker in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-15-2011, 03:08 AM
  5. What about a constitutional amendment?
    By forsmant in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-18-2010, 10:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •