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

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

    65 97.01%
  • No. The government should force the people by law or taxation to transact only in govnmnt currency.

    2 2.99%
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 228

Thread: Honest Money Constitutional Amendment

  1. #1

    Default Honest Money Constitutional Amendment

    Honest Money Constitutional Amendment

    Fiat monetary system and paper money inflation being some of the greatest enemies of liberty and prosperity of the people, legal tender laws are strictly forbidden.

    Since no individual can rightfully force his neighbor to transact or not to transact in certain medium of exchange, he cannot delegate such authority to his government. Also, free competition in currencies, by the force of Free Market, prevents the government from plundering the people through legalized counterfeiting and debasing of the currency.

    Therefore: the government shall make no law establishing an exclusive form of currency that the people are forced to use in private transactions, neither shall it prevent operation of private currencies, mints, or free competition in currencies among private citizens, nor charge capital gain, sales, or any other taxes, duties or fees on the medium of exchange. The right of the people to transact among themselves in any currency they choose shall not be abridged.

    -----------------------------------
    -------
    -


    Brief explanation of the benefits of this amendment:

    Fiat (unbacked) "money" is the single greatest instrument of plunder ever invented by the mind of man.
    Free Competition in currencies kills fiat
    , because fiat cannot exist without aggressive violence of government forced monopoly, which aggressive violence is the definition of evil, and is the opposite of justice and of Free Market.

    Again, fiat (unbacked) currency is nothing but an instrument of plunder of the people by the government, via legalized counterfeiting and inflation; therefore, Free Market, absent government coercion, will reject such a fraudulent currency, for the simple reason that no one likes being plundered!

    So, Free Competition in currencies slays fiat, and with it welfare state and warfare state, because it makes it impossible for the government to rob and plunder the people, and steal their wealth through legalized counterfeiting and inflation.

    Thus, Free Competition in currencies binds the government down with the chains of sound money, making impossible government plunder via legalized counterfeiting, and therefore, making possible liberty and prosperity of the people.

    Explanation:

    Money rules the world, and he who rules the money rules the world. No law gives government more power than legal tender law, for it creates a government forced monopoly on counterfeiting; allowing politicians and the bankers who bought them to confiscate people's property through the most insidious and deceitful tax of all -- legalized counterfeiting and inflation.

    This one amendment, if implemented, would end government fiat, because it cannot exist without coercion. And government fiat will be rejected in a free market of currencies in favor of a more honest and stable one, such as a 100% commodity based, interest free currency. As the result it would effectively end war-state and welfare state, for it would make it IMPOSSIBLE for the government to fund all these unconstitutional ventures through the evil and insidious robbery known as legalized counterfeiting and inflation.

    This amendment does not force anyone to do anything, but on the contrary, frees people up, to allow competition in currencies, so the good money can crowd out the bad. Imagine, for instance gold or silver money, competing side by side with Federal Reserve Notes. People will soon notice that the purchasing power of their gold money is constantly increasing, while the purchasing power of unbacked paper money is constantly going down. It will have the appearance of prices going up when expressed in Federal Reserve Notes, and at the same time the prices on the same items expressed in gold or silver money going down! Which money do you think people will prefer to get paid in? That money which preserves and increases their purchasing power of course! When this happens people will begin rejecting Federal Reserve Notes in favor of a more sound 100% commodity based currency! Thus once government force is removed from the realm of money and free competition in currencies is allowed, fiat debt based money will end, because they will be rejected by the free market! You do not need legal tender laws to force people to accept good and honest money, but only bad and dishonest ones. The dirty little secret is that you only need legal tender laws if you are going into government forced counterfeiting business. That is the only reason for such laws.

    The problems in our monetary system were created by introduction of improper government force into the realm of money, creating a government forced counterfeiting monopoly known as fiat; therefore the solution is to remove that improper government force, which would kill fiat, and allow Free Competition in Currencies, which will result in establishing of the most stable and honest monetary system known to man by the force of Free Market (most likely 100% commodity based monetary system like gold or silver), because no one likes being plundered.

    Money is just another product that is used as a medium of exchange. And free market can perfect that product just as much as it can perfect a car, an iPod or a light bulb, much better than the government ever can. And if people are truly free, they should be able to choose any medium of exchange they wish, as long as they commit no fraud.

    To criticism that it would produce chaos:

    Any manner of chaos is better than the forced, orderly plunder and confiscation of people's property through legalized counterfeiting and paper money inflation, that is the only alternative to this amendment. Of course, if gold and silver were the only tender used by the government (as Constitution demands) this problem would be largely alleviated, but the problem I see is that the government could (unconstitutionally) make government issued paper receipts for gold or silver to be legal tender, and then inflate the receipts. (This has actually happened in the early 1900's.) If a private bank did this and there was a run on the bank it would go bankrupt, but in case of government they will put taxpayers on the hook for this. (Hence was Roosevelt's forced confiscation of people's gold in 1930's to remedy such a run on banks, so people could not demand their gold anymore.) So it's better explicitly put government out of legal tender business all together. The free market can decide perfectly well what the medium of exchange should be.

    To criticism that these provisions are already implied in the existing Constitution, we say true, (the authority to establish a legal tender,--an exclusive monopoly on the means of exchange,--is not granted in the Constitution, therefore it is denied under the 10th Amendment), but it was already subverted and ignored by the Congress for over a century, so we are adding stronger language in the form of an explicit amendment, so that the Congress may not easily subvert and overturn it again. It's all about persuasion in the end: the more clear, persuasive and explicit the law is, the more likely the people will uphold and obey it to preserve their liberty (the need amply demonstrated by the last 100 years).

    Plus, allowing free competition in currencies is the most harmonious and the least disruptive way to restore an honest and sound monetary system. Let free market decide, or in other words, let the people decide. And then the most efficient and most stable monetary system will naturally emerge, which historically always has been gold and silver. Freedom and prosperity will win out in the end.

    If these six words, "legal tender laws are strictly forbidden" were part of the Constitution, we would've had a very different country now!

    Remember: Government forced Paper = Tyranny; Gold + Silver + Righteousness = Liberty.

    This is the key of power right here. Paper money fraud is what empowers the government to step out of its Constitutional bounds and become a tyrant through counterfeiting and theft; and Gold makes all this for the government impossible, and binds this fraud down, keeping people free and prosperous.

    The best way to restore such honest and stable, 100% commodity based monetary system, is to allow free competition in currencies which is the goal of this amendment.


    Again:
    Paper = Tyranny
    Gold + Silver + Righteousness = Freedom!

    The choice is yours!


    =====================================
    This amendment is a part of 5 amendments that were designed to bring the Constitution into harmony with the Fundamental Principles of Liberty, without which Liberty cannot exist:
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 09-07-2013 at 04:39 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Member DamianTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Banana Republic of Johnny Chimpo
    Posts
    12,760
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    As much as I really want to support this, I have to look at the actual definition of "Honest Money System", which yes, I have in my sig even, but I dont really have a clear statement of what it is. What I do is to try to understand what an Honest Money System is not.

    Reading through this, I dont believe that enough people would support the explanation. The people that would not support it would be the same people that intend on abusing the current system to their own benefit, whether their actions contribute to the downfall of all of mankind, or just that person and their neighbor. The scope and scale of the idea is beyond most self serving peoples ability to commit to. The people that would vote against it are people that we are trying to free, because they are so "helplessly dependant on the system" that they cant imagine a world without the Matrix. At the top of the list would be the anyone that is in a position to better themselves by manipulating the nature of money. It starts off with big banks, and ends up with people that barely survive on Social Security. But in the middle, you find Average Joe Schmoe that wants to buy a used car, but needs to take out a loan to acquire that car. Unfortunately for Joe, he is probably so short sighted that he doesnt get that if the value of his money has not dropped by 95%, he could afford to buy a new car without a loan to begin with. From Joe's perspective, he is trying to hold on to what little he has left, without turning the situation around.

    So lets look at the statement really quick and break it down.

    Honest. Pretty self explanitory. I dont screw you over, and you dont screw me over. I dont lie to you, you dont lie to me. Neither of us tries to make an exchange where one ends up with more value than the exchange is made for, IE, we make an exchange of two things not of equal value. For apples to apples, I sell you one shiny apple for one shiny apple, not one shiny apple for 1.5 apples, plus interest accrued.

    Money. Money is a representation of value, and that value comes from the Trust that people put into it. The phrase may make more sense if we called it an "Honest Trust System". Since money currently represents Debt, and not Value, we could call our broken system an "Honest Debt System, which we know it isnt, but an "Honest Value System" could also be used interchangably with the statement. The thing that is important here is Debt vs Value. Debt can be unlimited, and is a fictional concept, but Value is limited, and the money that represents that value needs to be limited proportionally. Since Debt is unlimited, the value of the representation of that trust can be devauled infinitely. So I do the intention of a Standard, be it Gold, Silver, or Pop Tarts. But lets move on.

    System. A standard by which all methods can interact with all other methods. Yeah, that isnt a very good definition, so I'll just kind of skip it because I am a retard and ride the short bus.

    I think that as a long term goal, Honest Money System is an excellent idea, but we need to attack what makes our current system so broken. To me, the most influential part of what makes our current system completely broken is Interest. Even if we were on a Gold or Silver or Pop Tarts standard, the exchange of any form of currency plus interest causes the creation of more debt. At least in a Debt based system. Interest creates a constant need for more and more currency to be produced, and the banks will ALWAYS come out on top.

    If we are to make the entire system honest, the entire practice of chaging interest should be prohibited. Likewise, the idea that a person can accrue interest for putting money into a bank should also be forbidden. Its how the banks got started to begin with. If banks are to make money, they may charge a fee, but not interest. I borrow a hundred dollars, and the fee is a flat rate. Say 10%. Not 10% per year, just a flat 10%. I pay off said debt tomorrow, I owe $110 bucks. I pay it off in 35 million years when Dinosaurs roam the earth again and eat candy called People Eggs, I still owe $110 bucks. No interest. But a flat fee should be the only point at which a bank is allowed profitability.

    Next up, Fractional Reserve banking. I go to a bank, they cant loan out money they dont have. Period.

    After that, The US Treasury needs to be charged with the creation of the currency, and as the same with banks, it MUST be loan free. Really, a clause in there expressly forbidding the charge or issuance of interest on the creation of that money, and it may not ever be handled by anyone else but the US Treasury Department. Effectively get rid of the Federal Reserve, and make it 1000% compulsory that the Treasury is the only one that can generate currency. And again, have that currency represent value, Gold, Silver, Pop Tarts, Platinum, etc.

    Actually, to take it a step further, I think Banking should be flat out prohibited, completely. Banking should be the responsibility of a trustworthy government, as a Government Bank could operate without the need to generate a profit. Fees could cover their operating costs, and not be intended to give any group of people a disproportionately larger ammt of influence over other people. People have a need for banks, to have what represents the value of their earnings protected. A governments greatest creative responsiblity is that of its currency, and to protect that currency and its value. The result of that statement to me says that Banks should be operated solely by the government.

    I also dont care for the clause about the competing currency, as it is too easy to create a form of fiat currency from competition. Right now, I sure as hell wouldnt trust our government to handle any form of banking of any of my money, but that is because our current system is completely corrupt, and all our debt based currency is generated by a private bank.

    If I recall, Australia tried something like this, where they did kind of what I suggested, but I dont know that much about it.

    All and all, I like what we are trying to do, but cant say my idea is perfect, but this one isnt perfect either, so lets refine it, until we make it as perfect as possible. And even then, continue to try to be more perfect. So Im not trying to totally knock the idea, but we need to look at what works and what doesnt.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintian 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

    You are Ron Paul's Media!

  4. #3

    Default Don't need an amendment, it's in it already.

    Seems it's already in the Constitution, it's just that they decided to violate it.

    Constitution for the United States of America
    Article. I.
    Section. 10. No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
    They just need to go back to following the Constitution.

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    ... we need to look at what works and what doesnt.
    DamianTV, thank you for your thoughtful reply.

    The difference between your solution and mine is fundamental, and perhaps also philosophical.

    You want to use government force. I want to use Freedom.

    Let me explain:

    Your solution violates a fundamental principle of liberty which I call “The Benson Principle” (Please see: http://ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopic...9c3a5f5c541ba4)

    The idea here, briefly summarized is that the government derives ALL of its legitimate authority from the governed by delegation. As the consequence, with regard to private property, the government cannot rightly do anything, but what you and I, as private individuals can do, and delegated to it. And we cannot delegate an authority we do not have.

    An example of this principle is: If I have no moral right to point a gun at my neighbor and force him to give money to “charity,” I cannot ask my government to do it for me, because the only authority it has is what I delegated to it, and I cannot delegate an authority I do not have.

    In the realm of money: If I have no moral right to FORCE my neighbor to use or not to use something as a medium of exchange for goods and services, I cannot delegate that authority to my government, because I cannot delegate an authority I do not have.

    This “Benson Principle” is one of the most fundamental principles of liberty, which solves many difficult problems in the philosophy of liberty; and liberty CANNOT exist without it; In fact if this principle is persisted in being violated, liberty must unavoidably perish!

    The problem with money we now have came to be precisely through the violation of the Benson Principle. The problem was created by the introduction of government FORCE where it had no moral right of being. Then the solution is to remove this illegitimate government force!

    My amendment does precisely that. It forbids government force where it has no legitimate right to be. This allows the operation of a truly free market in currencies. (If we have free market in cars or computers, why not currencies? After all, honest money is just another commodity that is used as the medium of exchange!)

    Now watch this. You are concerned with interest attached to money creation. Well, Free Market in currencies slays both monsters: fiat, and interest attached to money creation. Why? Because government forced fiat CANNOT exist without government coercion (as Jefferson put it: “It is error that needs the support of government. Truth can stand alone.”) Also given freedom to freely transact in whatever the people choose (remember the Benson Principle), a most stable and honest monetary system will naturally arise (an honest monetary system is the one that best preserves one’s purchasing power over time), and that will be 100% commodity based, interest free monetary system, the most honest and the most stable monetary system known to man. Why interest free? Because that will be the choice of a truly free market (who likes being plundered anyway?) For instance, this mint is offering silver money for goods and services without any interest; and that mint is offering silver money for goods and services but WITH interest. Which do you think the people will choose? Exactly! Since money is just another good, like milk, concrete, or computers, competition and free market will perfect it just as well as any other product, if you remove government force where it has no moral right of being in the first place (remember the Benson Principle)!

    So as you can see, Freedom works! In fact, it is the only thing that DOES work, nothing else ever will!

    Did I convince you?

    Let me know.

    Thanks.
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 09-24-2010 at 05:46 PM.

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Seems it's already in the Constitution, it's just that they decided to violate it.

    They just need to go back to following the Constitution.
    Good point Dr.3D.

    The only problem, it didn’t work. So you will say: “If they ignored the Constitution before, what makes you think they will not ignore your amendment even if you succeed in passing it?”

    Good question. The law is only as strong as the people who enforce it. The history taught us plainly, that it is the people who must defend the Constitution, because the government will not. The people cannot defend the Constitution if they do not understand it, or the reasons behind its various provisions. (In fact, I believe this is the greatest problem with the original Constitution, because it gave us certain procedures and rules without clearly explaining WHY they are important. And without the WHY the people are disempowered to defend it.) We are solving this problem by putting the WHY right into the Constitution itself, so it will be so much the harder to hide it from the people again. In the end, it is all about persuasion: The more clear, precise, explicit and persuasive the law is, the easier it is for the people to uphold and preserve it, to preserve their liberty.

    I believe this amendment accomplishes that. (If it can be made better please show me, I will be glad to improve it).

    Thanks.

    Also, the very debate and effort that goes into trying to pass it, will awake a lot of people to the truths and principles it contains! We win either way! Such is the nature of truth and liberty; they always triumph in the end, to tyrant’s eternal misery and shame!

  7. #6

    Default

    Thanks to DamianTV and Dr.3D input, I added another paragraph to the amendment.

    See if it can be made better still.

    Thanks!

  8. #7
    Member Zippyjuan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Out Of This World
    Posts
    20,269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Seems it's already in the Constitution, it's just that they decided to violate it.



    They just need to go back to following the Constitution.
    Some would point out (I guess I am) that that paragraph discusses states, not the national government.
    Article. I.
    Section. 10. No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
    The congressional portion is Section 8:
    Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

    To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

    To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
    To coin can mean simply the production of or it can refer to a metalic unit of currency.
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coining
    2coinvt
    Definition of COIN
    1a : to make (a coin) especially by stamping : mint b : to convert (metal) into coins
    2: create, invent <coin a phrase>
    — coin·er\ˈkȯi-nər\ noun
    — coin money
    : to get rich quickly
    Examples of COIN
    The coach coined the phrase “refuse to lose.”
    William Shakespeare is believed to have coined many words.
    The nation plans to coin more money.
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 09-24-2010 at 01:56 PM.
    I am Zippy and I approve of this message. But you don't have to.

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Some would point out (I guess I am) that that paragraph discusses states, not the national government.

    The congressional portion is Section 8:

    To coin can mean simply the production of or it can refer to a metalic unit of currency.
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coining
    The Constitution clearly forbids the States to use anything but gold and silver coin as money, and it lays the duty to coin money on the Congress (Article 1, Sections 8 and 10). What is the value of Congress creating money the states CANNOT use? Therefore gold and silver coin is the explicit requirement for the States, and implicit requirement for the Federal government.

    As for word “coin”, I assure you that the word “print” was also found in the Founder’s dictionary, but was NOT used in the Constitution. They used the word “coin” because the States a forbidden to use anything but gold and silver coin.

    That much is plainly obvious!

    Furthermore, nowhere in the Constitution is the power granted to establish “legal tender” i.e. exclusive form of currency all are forced to accept in payment of debts. And under the 10th Amendment (which Jefferson called the key-stone of the Constitution) a power not expressly granted is FORBIDDEN to the Federal government!

    Summary:
    Under US Constitution:

    1) States can use only gold and silver coin as money.
    2) Congress is charged with responsibility to coin gold and silver.
    3) Establishing “legal tender” i.e. exclusive form of currency all are forced to accept, is FORBIDDEN to the Federal government under the 10th Amendment.
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 09-24-2010 at 02:23 PM.

  10. #9
    Member DamianTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Banana Republic of Johnny Chimpo
    Posts
    12,760
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I want to read your earlier post, but when I get more time to give it the attention it deserves.

    The whole thing sounds like you want the gold standard, but briefly, gold can represent the same thing as paper fiat currency, depending on how it is used. For example, here is a brick. As long as you have this brick, you owe me half of your crops each and every season. The brick itself doesnt multiply, it does get multiplied by the consumption of things of value, thus the brick can represent indefinite debt. Returning to the gold standard itself is only Part of the Whole equation to return to an Honest Money System. The other two legs of the tripod have to be Abolish The Federal Reserve and Prohibit Fractional Reserve Lending. As a tripod, its pretty strong, but take out one of the legs and the whole thing falls. The legs need to be protected.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintian 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

    You are Ron Paul's Media!

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    The whole thing sounds like you want the gold standard, but briefly, gold can represent the same thing as paper fiat currency, depending on how it is used. ... Returning to the gold standard itself is only Part of the Whole equation to return to an Honest Money System. The other two legs of the tripod have to be Abolish The Federal Reserve and Prohibit Fractional Reserve Lending. As a tripod, its pretty strong, but take out one of the legs and the whole thing falls. The legs need to be protected.
    I agree with you.
    a) I am for the gold standard.
    b) I do want to abolish the Fed.
    c) I deplore fractional reserve banking for the fraud it is.
    The only place where we differ is HOW we want to accomplish this. You want to use government force. I want to use Freedom. It was government force that cause the problems; and it will be the removal of that force, as per this amendment, that will solve it.

    Both fiat, and interest attached to money creation will die by the hand of Free Market, because both will be rejected in favor of a 100% commodity based, interest free, monetary system,--the most honest and the most stable monetary system known to man! It will simply be the preference of a truly free market, (because who likes being plundered anyway?)
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 09-24-2010 at 05:53 PM.

  12. #11
    Member DamianTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Banana Republic of Johnny Chimpo
    Posts
    12,760
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I dont want Govt Force, I want the Govt to be FORCED to do what it is expected to do, as was originally in the Constitution. The Govt derives its power from the people, not the other way around, especially not today. I dont know if we did things right from the very beginning, that things would not have turned out the same way.

    One point I will debate with you on is the different or competing currencies. This part I dont really intend to apply to the people, but to the states. "...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts" So, my difference is more of a question. Debts to WHOM? The people? Other States? Other Countries? Government Contrators? Wal Mart? Is there any exclusivity in here or is this equally applied to absolutely everyone? How about foreign markets?

    Next problem is this: "To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin" So an ounce of gold in the day was worth $20 bucks, or by today's standard and with gold now breaking $1300, would it be fair to say that the value of $20 bucks back in the day is now equal to the purchasing power of $1300+ today? Introducing a competing currency is potentially a security hole, where if the decision was made by our government to set the value of a Foreign Currency to an unfair ammt, it creates a method by which the currency can be manipulated, and abused. Lets just make some shit up. An Apple is worth a Dollar. In the Euro zone, an Apple is worth one Euro. Then we get some greedy asshole in office and he wants to exploit the "exchange rate" or the Value of Foreign Currency to be that One Dollar is worth 20 Euros.

    Now I get that is where the Free Market comes into play, but the thing is, as most of us lean toward Libertarian ideals, we also pursue these ideas somewhat blindly and a certain degree of naivety, that people will actually be honest. The thing is, they aren't. Not always intentional, but there is too much trust in the Free Market not abusing the money system itself.

    Change of pace for two seconds. We know that people are not honest. You lock your car (lets just say, in case you dont) but locking your car does NOT keep thieves out. It keeps Honest people Honest. A thief is going to force what he wants out of you, one way or another. You lock your car, he will break your window, you get an alarm, he finds a way to disable your alarm then will break your window, you get LowJack, he just takes your life to steal your car. It ends up in a war of escalation. The honest person, should they see that your window is completely rolled down and there is a hundred dollar bill MAY take just the money out of your car as it is an opportunity. Its the same way as I get fucked over by grandma and grandpa every day by them taking money out of my pocket for their Social Security, a system which I doubt anyone believes will still be around 30 years from now. And for the most part, grandma and grandpa are honest people, but taking from me is theft via opportunity.

    The Free Market can NOT be trusted. The Government can NOT be trusted. And both sides will look to exploit the Language of the Law to benefit themselves. This is the same way the 4th Amendment has been abused, by exploiting the Language of the Law. And it works both ways. The 4th Amendment is referred to as our "Privacy" Amendment, although not explicitly stated, it is implied, but still the effect of being implied is an Explotation of the Language of the Law. This worked to our advantage for many years, but now, everything has shifted, to be implied that we have "no reasonable expectation of privacy", which isnt just limited to the internet, but everything. And I'm sorry but conducting lawful business, does not follow either the Letter or the Spirit of the Law, to imply that I should not have any reasonable expectation of privacy. You want to know my name and I am not committing a crime? Get a fucking warrant.

    The abuses of the 4th Amendment would be no different than from this Amendment. Free Market would take my earlier example of the unfair exchange rate of $20 Euros to $1 Dollar, even though their values are equal, in terms of Apples, the "Free" Market would take One Dollar, go exchange it for $20 Euros, go purchase 20 Apples, come back and sell those Apples for $1 Dollar, and profit by $19 Dollars, an abuse of the exchange rate. It doesnt matter who "Regulates the Value", either Govt, or Free Market, this would always be exploited by said party.

    The entire thing needs to be fucking Bullet Proof. I mean Iron Clad, Non Repealable, Non Amendable, And have clauses in it that define attempts to make changes to the Amendment as Treason, a High Crime, but not a Misdemeanor. As those two terms were not explicitly defined in the doctrines, the clause also needs to include the literal phrase " but not limited to..." to state that other crimes can be defined as Treason or a High Crime. Yeah, its another tangent, but it needs to be looked at from the point of view of "how can I exploit this law" and you will see that what we have currently is not perfect, my ideas definitely arent perfect, so I do need peoples feedback to even get a basic rough idea, and no offense to say yours isnt perfect, so lets keep working and refine it to be Bullet Proof.

    One of the things that we did get right was to separate the Branches of Government. For an Honest Money System, we wouldnt need a 4th Branch, but the 3 Tier system created a stable balanced system. The Honest Money System needs a Neutral Arbitrator. "To Regulate the Value Of..." is a fist fight between the Government and Free Market. A Balance might be achievable if Congress (which we know is so corrupt that I wont even bother to come up with a long winded euphamism to describe just exactly how corrupt it is) shouldnt be allowed solely to Regulate the Value. To Regulate the Value of, I think the system needs to always contain the Neutral Arbitrator. I dont know if this would work or not, but say Congress could set the value, which had to be approved by the Executive Branch, and Free Market Value is determined to be Fair and Just or not by the Judicial Branch. Again just tossing around the idea so no clue if it would work, an adjustment of the value of the currency MUST BE UNANIMOUS. The Judicial Branch is would be critical because our current politicans are the spend thrift Democrats, and we have a President that wants Congress to spend and spend without consequences of who is going to pay for it. The Judicial Branch would not stand to gain or lose anything by a Yay or Nay ruling that an adjustment to "The Value Of" is Fair and Legal. The 3 Tier System works OK (not great, just OK) for balance, I think it might work better than what we have, or maybe even had originally. Then again, I also dont know of any instances in history where Congress attempted to change the value of the dollar until the introduction by any of the 3 Central Banks (The Federal Reserve was only one of Three) that we have had. Then when we finally implemented the Federal Reserve, we just gave them the power to regulate the power of our money, which they have obviously done a bang up job at maintaining.

    I do understand the concept that you want the power to be held by "We The People", but you have to understand our history better than what either of us probably currently perceive. We do NOT have a Democracy. We are NOT a Democracy. We are a Republic, with traces of Democracy. The founding fathers did everything they could to prevent us from having a Democracy. When Benjamin Franklin was walking out from the Constitutional Congress, a woman asked him, "Sir, what have you given us?" to which he replied "A Republic Ma'am, if you can keep it." The Federalist Papers state "... Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." Thus, the Free Market and "We The People" can not be trusted with the valuation of the currency itself.

    There is a reason that I believe you want the Free Market, ... oh screw it, PEOPLE to have the ability to have more control over their currency, but I digress that the end result will be exactly the same and what Jefferson had feared, "The Banks and Corporations that grow up around us will deprive the people of their prosperity until our children wake up homeless on the continent that their Forefathers conquered." and that reason is a method of recourse against government abuses. I can not recall any time recently where when the people have requested a redress of their grievances, that the government has not acknowledged. My current suggestion, which might just fall flat on its face, I dont know, provides for Government Accountability within the Government itself, but not to the people. The people need a specific course of action against the Goverment for the Redress of their Grievances.

    This is something I think Britain has that we dont. A "Vote of No Confidence". I believe that giving the ability this recourse, it should be applicable to both specific actions of the government, or against specific individuals.

    Im actually getting pretty tired writing this and my thought process is definitely going south. Have to wrap up quickly and leave this open ended. Im not taking any offense to the Govt Force statement, but I do strongly believe it is their responsibility to maintain an Honest Money System, and will fight you tooth and nail to keep the money creation process out of the hands of the people, and thus, The BANKS. Government is the servant of its people, and like fire, it is an unruly servant, and a fearful master. Government cant be trusted either, and I have to keep tossing ideas around until we can solidify how to "not fuck up the nature of money", then protect the hell out of it.

    Trust no one, and write your laws like you are paranoid of both sides trying to leverage absolute control over your system, because you should be paranoid of both sides.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintian 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

    You are Ron Paul's Media!

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    The Free Market can NOT be trusted.
    This clearly indicates that you do not understand what Free Market is. Free Market is a system where an individual is free to keep what he owns, and to trade and do with his property as he chooses, as long as he does not violate the property of others. It is the expression of individual liberty in a group setting. As Jefferson put it: "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others." So, as you can see, truly Free Market cannot exist without protecting the rights of individual from force and fraud. And this is precisely the proper role of government!

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    The Federalist Papers state "... Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." Thus, the Free Market and "We The People" can not be trusted with the valuation of the currency itself.
    Free Market is NOT a democracy! Free Market is a constitutional republic. In a democracy 51% of the population can rob and slaughter 49% percent. In a truly Free Market 99% cannot deprive one of his rights and property! Key difference. Do not confuse Democracy and Free Market! They are rather opposites of each-other!

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    I .. will fight you tooth and nail to keep the money creation process out of the hands of the people, and thus, The BANKS.
    Again, your understanding is the reverse of the reality (please, don’t take offence, I simply point out the error). It was nothing but the GOVERNMENT FORCE that handed the money creation monopoly into thee hands of the banksters! This monopoly CANNOT exist without the force of government. It happened because the banksters gained the control of government, and thus granted themselves the monopoly. Money is just a commodity used as a medium of exchange. To return the money creation into the hands of the people is to break government forced monopoly of money creation (counterfeiting) out of hands of the banksters.

    Again, honest money is just another commodity, just like milk, concrete, or computers. If you can issue milk, concrete, lumber, computers, gold, silver, or aluminum, you can issue money! Because money is just another commodity that is used as a medium of exchange.

    The question at hand is that of individual liberty. If you believe in individual liberty, you must believe in Free Market, because it is nothing but the expression of individual liberty in the economy.

    It was Free Market that perfected the car, computer, iPod and cheese cake, NOT the government. All that makes life wonderful and worth living comes from the free creative action of the individual, not from the government. So if Free Market worked so well in perfecting all the goods and services we enjoy, why can it not perfect the medium of exchange, which is just another commodity?

    God gave man liberty, and truly Free Market is the expression of that liberty in economical setting.
    Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 09-25-2010 at 09:40 AM.

  14. #13
    Member DamianTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Banana Republic of Johnny Chimpo
    Posts
    12,760
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Bump

    Just because I havent posted means I disagree with your thoughts, or was offended or anything, its all good. Just havent had a lot of time to think furter on the subject. Working a shitty schedule and Im totally sleep deprived.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintian 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

    You are Ron Paul's Media!

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    Bump

    Just because I havent posted means I disagree with your thoughts, or was offended or anything, its all good. Just havent had a lot of time to think furter on the subject. Working a *** schedule and Im totally sleep deprived.
    Thanks, my friend, get some rest What's life if you cannot enjoy it?

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    I agree with you.
    a) I am for the gold standard.
    b) I do want to abolish the Fed.
    c) I deplore fractional reserve banking for the fraud it is.
    The only place where we differ is HOW we want to accomplish this. You want to use government force. I want to use Freedom. It was government force that cause the problems; and it will be the removal of that force, as per this amendment, that will solve it.

    Both fiat, and interest attached to money creation will die by the hand of Free Market, because both will be rejected in favor of a 100% commodity based, interest free, monetary system,--the most honest and the most stable monetary system known to man! It will simply be the preference of a truly free market, (because who likes being plundered anyway?)
    I agree BUT point A) is flawed:

    The gold standard, while better then fiat standard..is still a legal tender standard dictated by GOVT and subject to the whims of a ruling elite.

    Point A) in my opinion, should read FREE MARKET MONEY, definining money as a floating value commodity by which the market place at any time or another views as the most efficient means of exchange.

    Do I believe that the market place will inevitably move towards precious metals as the basic foundation for monetary exchange?
    YES. But enforcing it through legal tender laws is only a minute step forward from fiat legal tender.

    Additionally, GOVT should be forced to deal with gold, silver...but they should NOT have legal tender laws forcing them as the use of debt payment. That should be left to the contractual agreements signed by the private parties involved.

    I'm sure I am leaving out potential problems etc...but I am just adding what I see to be essential tid bits if we are to move into an honest money system. To me, legal tender laws are counter productive if honest money is to be acheived.
    Last edited by Seraphim; 10-09-2010 at 10:26 AM.
    "Like an army falling, one by one by one" - Linkin Park

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seraphim View Post
    I agree BUT point A) is flawed:

    The gold standard, while better then fiat standard..is still a legal tender standard dictated by GOVT and subject to the whims of a ruling elite.

    Point A) in my opinion, should read FREE MARKET MONEY, definining money as a floating value commodity by which the market place at any time or another views as the most efficient means of exchange.

    Do I believe that the market place will inevitably move towards precious metals as the basic foundation for monetary exchange?
    YES. But enforcing it through legal tender laws is only a minute step forward from fiat legal tender.

    Additionally, GOVT should be forced to deal with gold, silver...but they should NOT have legal tender laws forcing them as the use of debt payment. That should be left to the contractual agreements signed by the private parties involved.

    I'm sure I am leaving out potential problems etc...but I am just adding what I see to be essential tid bits if we are to move into an honest money system. To me, legal tender laws are counter productive if honest money is to be acheived.
    I completely agree with you! When I said I am for gold standard I meant that the government should be forced to deal in gold and silver only, not the people. So we agree completely.

    Thanks for your post.

  18. #17
    Member DamianTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Banana Republic of Johnny Chimpo
    Posts
    12,760
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Kind of off the point but I stumbled on our old Quotable Quotes thread, and came across something of relevance:

    “We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin and issue money is a function of Government. We believe it. Those who are opposed to it tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank, and that the Government ought to get out of the banking business. I tell them that the issue of money is a function of Government, and that the banks ought to get out of the Government business... When we have restored the money of the Constitution, all other necessary reforms will be possible, but until this is done, there is no other reform that can be accomplished.”

    - William Jennings Bryan
    I do not trust the Free Market with the creation nor valuation of Currency.

    ---

    Still too tired to wrap my head around this whole thing again tho.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintian 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

    You are Ron Paul's Media!

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    Kind of off the point but I stumbled on our old Quotable Quotes thread, and came across something of relevance:



    I do not trust the Free Market with the creation nor valuation of Currency.

    ---

    Still too tired to wrap my head around this whole thing again tho.
    The market, which in reality always pushes towards freedom and subjective valuation already does this to the degree that it is "allowed".

    Money is a commodity. Gold, oil, cotton etc are ALWAYS changing in value in relation to one another (supply/demand). The difference now is that the widely used median of exchange, also floating in value in relation to these commodities is a fascist paper empire designed to perpetually keep nations in debt.

    By removing the FORCEABLE implementation of this exchange median which distorts the value of other commodities and their utility (for example, gold) the market would be MUCH more efficient. Leaving money to "the free market" would make global trade EASIER and more efficient.

    I surmise that removal of the fiat standard and subsequent legal tender laws worldwide would DRAMATICALLY reduce the number of medians of exchange. If history is an accurate yard stick in addition to the emerging global trading trends, gold would still reign supreme.

    Gold and silver emerged as the money for MILLENIA because of their incredible monetary utility. Without the liability of it being someone elses debt plus interest, markets such at 19th century USA and 16th century England who, through REVOLUTION, EARNED their free markets and reaped the (at the time) unparalled wealth explosion BECAUSE money was free market. The efficiency of trade and market adaptation were at levels hardly ever acheived for the population- the result being a freed productive capacity unlike anything before.
    Last edited by Seraphim; 10-11-2010 at 01:30 PM.
    "Like an army falling, one by one by one" - Linkin Park

  20. #19

    Default

    Brilliant Seraphim! Thank you.

    As I said, honest money is just another commodity, so as government should not get into milk business, so it should not get into money business. It has no moral right to FORCE people to deal or not to deal in a medium of exchange, nor to punish or tax a medium of exchange that the people freely choose.

  21. #20
    Member DamianTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Banana Republic of Johnny Chimpo
    Posts
    12,760
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    If you give people the choice between what is Easy and what is Right, the majority will choose what is Easy.

    So uh, what happened in England after the 16th century that turned their monetary base into a fiat currency system?

    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    Brilliant Seraphim! Thank you.

    As I said, honest money is just another commodity, so as government should not get into milk business, so it should not get into money business. It has no moral right to FORCE people to deal or not to deal in a medium of exchange, nor to punish or tax a medium of exchange that the people freely choose.
    Based on that last quote I just had I dont think that Banks should be sticking their noses in Government Business, and the money creation process is the business of government, not banks. Banks will always inevitably want to run out the money supply by over printing. Thing is tho, that I definitely do not trust our current set of government croneys with the creation of money either, they'd print out the fiat currency as fast as the presses would allow it.

    Really, the more I think about it, I think we are just completely fucked. Its too far gone and I'm damn near at the end of my rope. Hold on, the rope just got foreclosed on...
    Last edited by DamianTV; 10-11-2010 at 01:50 PM.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintian 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

    You are Ron Paul's Media!

  22. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    If you give people the choice between what is Easy and what is Right, the majority will choose what is Easy.
    It is not “easy” to have your purchasing power stolen by the printing press.
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    So uh, what happened in England after the 16th century that turned their monetary base into a fiat currency system?
    Banksters got government forced monopoly on counterfeiting, and thus bankrupted England in under 100 years. After that they’ve done the same in US.
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    Based on that last quote I just had I dont think that Banks should be sticking their noses in Government Business,
    True.
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    and the money creation process is the business of government,
    Wrong. I think it was a flaw in the original Constitution where the government was allowed to coin money. Anyhow, the Constitution never gave power to the government to FORCE people to transact or not to transact in a certain medium of exchange among themselves.
    Again, money is nothing, but another commodity that people happened to use as a medium of exchange. Anyone who can issue aluminum, copper, sugar, milk, gold, silver or timber, should be able to issue money, because money is but another commodity!

  23. #22
    Member DamianTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Banana Republic of Johnny Chimpo
    Posts
    12,760
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    When I had a bit if extra money (yeah, i know its really debt, but...) I used to play this online game called Ever Crack. This game has its own economy, all digital, all fiat, but hey it was a game. I tried to earn money by completing quests and found that it took way too long to ever be able to afford what any of the other players were demanding for their wares. (Sell only system, no bidding or anything) So I tried to follow suit, and hoped to be able to make some in game money by selling the stuff I got on doing quests at their retarded levels. No one bought my wares, even though they were priced cheaper than anyone else on the Broker at the time. The people I was trying to undercut then undercut their prices, and so did everyone else. Eventually, the price of these not so high demand items were available by the thousands, and the price completely bottomed out. Then I got this idea, since they were so cheap at the time, I could just buy out everyone who's price was less than what I would want to sell that item for. Being that the items for sale had a price that couldnt go any lower, and although I didnt have a lot of in game currency, I could easily afford to buy everyone out. And I did. I turned right back around and jacked up the price by about a hundred times as cheap as it would go. By comparison, in real world economics, I jacked up the price of my wares from one penny a pop, to a dollar, and the sweet spot was that since I had bought everyone out, I had no competition. I couldnt set the price too high because people wouldnt buy, cant sell it too low, I wouldnt make any money. And wow did it sell. Selling at this new price with no competition, people were being forced to buy from me. I was making money hand over fist.

    After a while, I had enough money that I could afford to start getting into higher priced items. Originally, the prices that I manipulated were on extremely common items that anyone that didnt want to pay my price could go outside their city, and spend ten minutes of work collecting for themselves. With more money available now, I started getting into the price manipulation of less common items, that charged more. They didnt sell quite as often, but when they did sell, it compensated for the time it took to sell. It was quite easy. All I had to do was to make sure I didnt have any competition anywhere in my price range by buying everyone out that was a competitor, and jack up the prices. The more money I made, the higher priced stuff I was going after. I made so much in game cash that I didnt know what to do with myself. And all I was doing was logging in for about fifteen minutes a day, buying out my competitors, and jacking up the prices and cashing in. I made more money than most people made in their entire character history by manipulating the system to work for me.

    As one of the richest characters in my rather large guild, and at the time, no interest in selling what I was making to other players for real world money, I just threw in game cash at people who I thought could use it. New players, guild members, etc. I was bored with the game, but still logged in frequently enough for logging in every two or three days to result in nothing short of a couple of platinum pieces per day.

    But those days were short lived. When I got laid off, I had to cut back on all my unnecessary expenditures and had to cancel my account. So that money is still in my characters account, it is just unavailable until I give sony more money to have access to it. Not that it is actually worth anything.

    If the way the Free Market is supposed to determine the value of currency and money in the real world, then I want absolutely nothing to do with it. It is too easy for people in the right positions to manipulate.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintian 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

    You are Ron Paul's Media!

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    When I had a bit if extra money (yeah, i know its really debt, but...) I used to play this online game called Ever Crack. This game has its own economy, all digital, all fiat, but hey it was a game. I tried to earn money by completing quests and found that it took way too long to ever be able to afford what any of the other players were demanding for their wares. (Sell only system, no bidding or anything) So I tried to follow suit, and hoped to be able to make some in game money by selling the stuff I got on doing quests at their retarded levels. No one bought my wares, even though they were priced cheaper than anyone else on the Broker at the time. The people I was trying to undercut then undercut their prices, and so did everyone else. Eventually, the price of these not so high demand items were available by the thousands, and the price completely bottomed out. Then I got this idea, since they were so cheap at the time, I could just buy out everyone who's price was less than what I would want to sell that item for. Being that the items for sale had a price that couldnt go any lower, and although I didnt have a lot of in game currency, I could easily afford to buy everyone out. And I did. I turned right back around and jacked up the price by about a hundred times as cheap as it would go. By comparison, in real world economics, I jacked up the price of my wares from one penny a pop, to a dollar, and the sweet spot was that since I had bought everyone out, I had no competition. I couldnt set the price too high because people wouldnt buy, cant sell it too low, I wouldnt make any money. And wow did it sell. Selling at this new price with no competition, people were being forced to buy from me. I was making money hand over fist.

    After a while, I had enough money that I could afford to start getting into higher priced items. Originally, the prices that I manipulated were on extremely common items that anyone that didnt want to pay my price could go outside their city, and spend ten minutes of work collecting for themselves. With more money available now, I started getting into the price manipulation of less common items, that charged more. They didnt sell quite as often, but when they did sell, it compensated for the time it took to sell. It was quite easy. All I had to do was to make sure I didnt have any competition anywhere in my price range by buying everyone out that was a competitor, and jack up the prices. The more money I made, the higher priced stuff I was going after. I made so much in game cash that I didnt know what to do with myself. And all I was doing was logging in for about fifteen minutes a day, buying out my competitors, and jacking up the prices and cashing in. I made more money than most people made in their entire character history by manipulating the system to work for me.

    As one of the richest characters in my rather large guild, and at the time, no interest in selling what I was making to other players for real world money, I just threw in game cash at people who I thought could use it. New players, guild members, etc. I was bored with the game, but still logged in frequently enough for logging in every two or three days to result in nothing short of a couple of platinum pieces per day.

    But those days were short lived. When I got laid off, I had to cut back on all my unnecessary expenditures and had to cancel my account. So that money is still in my characters account, it is just unavailable until I give sony more money to have access to it. Not that it is actually worth anything.

    If the way the Free Market is supposed to determine the value of currency and money in the real world, then I want absolutely nothing to do with it. It is too easy for people in the right positions to manipulate.

    So you'd rather have say 1000 people dictate the value of money for the world (6.5 billion people) than 6.5 billion finding a market value?


    Also...when you did this on the game...Did no one have access to other armour, weapons? Did you starve the economy of everything? Could people still function?

    If you noticed that a certain commodity was undervalued and you bought up huge sums of it and made huge profits, what is wrong with that?

    Life is not fair, it never will be. All we can do is set up the societal conditions that allow people to, through merit, hard work and intelligence make strides according to the demand of the market place. Some will start with a rich daddy, some a poor daddy. Boo hoo. If the market is free, it is exponentially more likely that the poor kid become rich through merit, then if the market is regulated and controlled...The regulators and controllers will always rig the game in their favor.
    "Like an army falling, one by one by one" - Linkin Park

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    If the way the Free Market is supposed to determine the value of currency and money in the real world, then I want absolutely nothing to do with it. It is too easy for people in the right positions to manipulate.
    If you remove government force, then if there is a shortage of an item, the price will go up and give people incentive to produce it more. Your rants against free market make no sense at all!

  26. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seraphim View Post
    So you'd rather have say 1000 people dictate the value of money for the world (6.5 billion people) than 6.5 billion finding a market value?


    Also...when you did this on the game...Did no one have access to other armour, weapons? Did you starve the economy of everything? Could people still function?

    If you noticed that a certain commodity was undervalued and you bought up huge sums of it and made huge profits, what is wrong with that?

    Life is not fair, it never will be. All we can do is set up the societal conditions that allow people to, through merit, hard work and intelligence make strides according to the demand of the market place. Some will start with a rich daddy, some a poor daddy. Boo hoo. If the market is free, it is exponentially more likely that the poor kid become rich through merit, then if the market is regulated and controlled...The regulators and controllers will always rig the game in their favor.
    Exactly. Removing government force, from where it has no moral right of being, wrests the power and control from the scheming regulators, and gives it into the hands of the people via mechanism of free market where it belongs!

  27. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Foundation_Of_Liberty View Post
    If you remove government force, then if there is a shortage of an item, the price will go up and give people incentive to produce it more. Your rants against free market make no sense at all!
    I must have had a brain dead moment. I forgot entirely about that point. Thank you. Yes, if something goes into short supply and prices skyrocket, smart money invests into producing that service/product to capitilize on the market shortage. The market wins because it gets more of what it needs, the entrepeneur wins because he is rewarded for providing what is needed.
    "Like an army falling, one by one by one" - Linkin Park

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    As much as I really want to support this, I have to look at the actual definition of "Honest Money System", which yes, I have in my sig even, but I dont really have a clear statement of what it is.
    People, including most in this movement, have very little idea what an "honest money system" is or means or how to participate in one.

    If they did, they would simply start one. A gold backed decentralized currency system could be implemented by people on this forum in days. But no one is really interested in doing it because they want to see it working before they do it themselves.

    Chicken/Egg problem.

    People also don't seem to grasp around here why a tax on property is much more preferable to all parties involved than transaction based taxation (this is one thing I'd like to take Ron Paul on with, I'm curious about his position on the idea).

    People around here seem to be overly anxious to talk theory but no one is talking how to put these theories to work.
    I begin with the principle that all men are bores. Surely no one will prove himself so great a bore as to contradict me in this. - Soren Kierkegaard

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seraphim View Post
    I must have had a brain dead moment. I forgot entirely about that point. Thank you. Yes, if something goes into short supply and prices skyrocket, smart money invests into producing that service/product to capitilize on the market shortage. The market wins because it gets more of what it needs, the entrepeneur wins because he is rewarded for providing what is needed.
    Exactly! Thanks.

  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wizardwatson View Post
    If they did, they would simply start one. A gold backed decentralized currency system could be implemented by people on this forum in days. But no one is really interested in doing it because they want to see it working before they do it themselves.
    There are government laws that would charge you capital gain and sales taxes on gold every time it changes hands, which discourages people from using it. My amendment repeals this.

    Quote Originally Posted by wizardwatson View Post
    People also don't seem to grasp around here why a tax on property is much more preferable to all parties involved than transaction based taxation
    I believe property taxation is immoral as it violates some of the fundamental principles of liberty. Please see (Taxation Constitutional Amendment http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=252192)

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wizardwatson View Post
    People, including most in this movement, have very little idea what an "honest money system" is or means or how to participate in one.

    If they did, they would simply start one. A gold backed decentralized currency system could be implemented by people on this forum in days. But no one is really interested in doing it because they want to see it working before they do it themselves.

    Chicken/Egg problem.

    People also don't seem to grasp around here why a tax on property is much more preferable to all parties involved than transaction based taxation (this is one thing I'd like to take Ron Paul on with, I'm curious about his position on the idea).

    People around here seem to be overly anxious to talk theory but no one is talking how to put these theories to work.
    Don't be so sure of that, friend.



    I for one do my very best to walk the walk.

    I am gearing up for precisely what you just said. Perhaps my young age allows me to easier let go of the world that once was and grasp what is coming. But I will do my best to lead those that want to follow towards something of honesty and prosperity.
    "Like an army falling, one by one by one" - Linkin Park

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

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