Posted on 02/22/2021 12:45:11 PM PST by amorphous
So you would take $10 for a $10 bullion coin? That's some super genius stuff. Me being an idiot would want the gold value.
That sounds real exciting, overpaying your taxes for a whole year.
It plainly says, "make", NOT ANYTHING about "accepting". I see nothing which prevents states from accepting chickens for payment of taxes, if they so desired.
See what Webster says about the definition of each...
“So you would take $10 for a $10 bullion coin?”
If that $10 bullion were sliver and weighed 10 grams, sure. Today’s silver spot price is about $28. There are 28 grams to the ounce. 10 gram round, $10. It’s called “math”.
You also ignored this part of the Constitution: “and regulate the value thereof”.
Idiot.
L
Post the entire sentence.
“make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”
It’s plain effing English. A State can’t make a chicken a tender in payment of a debt. Maybe they could make chicken tenders, but they can’t make one a tender.
Geez...
L
So the State of Kansas would have to hold a huge quantity of gold and silver coins that would have a highly fluctuating value. They would have to hedge that risk. But don’t let all that “math” confuse a genius with a plan.
I would like those ‘hot’ with extra blue cheese please.
Only two posts.
FReepers rock. Even old FReepers.
5.56mm
The referenced article seems to gloss over several unconstitutional things about the constitutionally undefined Federal Reserve and so-called federal banking regulations.
First, Thomas Jefferson had clarified that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) had decided not to expressly constitutionally give Congress the specific power to regulate INTRAstate banking.
"It is known that the very power now proposed as a means was rejected as an end by the Convention which formed the Constitution. A proposition was made to them to authorize Congress to open canals, and an amendatory one to empower them to incorporate. But the whole was rejected, and one of the reasons for rejection urged in debate was, that then they would have a power to erect a bank, which would render the great cities, where there were prejudices and jealousies on the subject, adverse to the reception of the Constitution." —Thomas jefferson, Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank, 1791.
Next, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention had given Congress the express constitutional power to regulate the value of money whether Congress wants that power or not.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof [emphasis added], and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"
A related point concerning Congress's power to regulate value of money is this. Noting that ordinary legal voting citizens have aways had the specific power to elect representatives, when Congress unconstitutionally surrendered its power to regulate value of money to the constitutionally undefined, third party Federal Reserve, the following happened.
By doing so, Congress wrongly weakened the voting power of ordinary citizens to indirectly control value of money through their elected representatives.
Next, since Con-Con delegates were aware of problems with regulating the value of paper money, another significant observation about Clause 5 is that it expressly authorizes Congress to make only coin money since there is no mention of paper money in that clause.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 5: To coin Money [emphasis added], regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
But under the 10th Amendment (10A), the states could still use paper money as legal tender, right?
"10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States [hint; emphasis added], are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
W R O N G !
Con-Con delegates had also included a constitutional provision prohibiting the states from making paper money regardless of their 10A powers.
"Article I, Section 10, Clause 1: 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 [emphases added]; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."
Corrections, insights welcome.
Poor Peter Schiff. His own son is a bitcoin convert, but he still keeps playing Don Quixote with his championing of gold. Does he really imagine people will transact in a modern and digital economy with gold and silver coinage?
I realize there are still goldbugs out there, but cryptocurrency has stolen their thunder and is far more realistic as the wave of the future. We share Schiff’s criticism of government-orchestrated, unbacked fiat money and how it empowers leftist totalitarian government. But in 2021 shiny rocks are not the answer.
I have to add something. If I go into an Infiniti
dealership, I can buy a vehicle with Bitcoin, gold or silver coins.
Or a bunch of Benjamins.
Fact.
5.56mm
When you try to point out why we are not going back to the way it was 100 years, the gold bug types just keep posting ridiculous noise. No rational serious responses. This thread has some fine examples.
:)
A State can’t make a chicken a tender in payment of a debt.
Exactly!
States CAN'T make (or force) their citizens to ACCEPT chickens as payment of debt. Only the federal government is allowed to do that - tho I believe we're well on our way of seeing chicken nuggets worth their weight in hundred dollar bills due to hyper-inflation.
Even so, neither states nor the federal government can prohibit individuals, businesses, local governments, or even state or federal agencies from ACCEPTING other things of value for services, or exchange of value, instead of money.
This is clearly a Tenth Amendment right:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The distinction that must be made is MAKE, as in force, vs what is ACCEPTABLE by both parties in a transaction.
And henceforth, if "chickens" are acceptable, then any form of valuable would likewise be so, including gold and silver bullion, or whatever both parties settle upon to settle their transaction.
Ta da...
Worst trade I've made is trading BTC for gold. Lol.
But I do believe in diversifying assets once one has enough assets necessary for basic survival and subsistence.
Preppers, once considered the bane of carefree happiness, is now an important person in some hard hit areas of this country.
Agree. It should be settled at current market value at the time of transaction, I would envision.
#53
The metal content of a US Dime (for example), is based on year. Pre-1965 US coins are about 90% silver. It's fairly easy to convert their value into Fed Notes, based on the coinage, quantity, year, and current spot silver price, at a point of sale or transaction.
Yes, by silver weight. A pre-1965 dime is of far more value than a 2021 dime because of its metallic composition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.