Posted on 07/12/2023 8:48:23 AM PDT by C210N
Is it a line?
Or, is it an extremely small-font message?
This is NOT a "stupid" post. There is a great deal behind this, as our banking system is fraught with lies, and I'd like to see if FR can probe into this a bit. We're on the cusp of BRICS surpassing G7/SWIFT, and this is intended as an introduction to what may very well be the downfall of the fiat reserve currency.
Interesting topic, for which I found an article...
What Is Microprinting on a Check?
https://www.thebalancemoney.com/mp-on-a-check-315273
This is NOT a "stupid" post. There is a great deal behind this, as our banking system is fraught with lies, and I'd like to see if FR can probe into this a bit. We're on the cusp of BRICS surpassing G7/SWIFT, and this is intended as an introduction to what may very well be the downfall of the fiat reserve currency.
Can you explain what you mean and expect people to research?
I hear the rationale for counterfeit protection... and by itself does indeed make sense.
However, there is a circulating rationale that says a check is a mechanism for what is referred to as our “Strawman” corporate entity. This is ultimately tied to the fraud of the FED/IRS and how fiat is created - literally out of thin air. The FED was created as a private corporation to create fiat, to which we never pay principle (at the dollar level; we do “pay” back a fiat loan’s principle with more fiat). We (the US, and other governments with a Central Bank fiat currency) only pay interest on the ever increasing “debt”.
As part of this fraud, note that ALL, every single instance, of government interaction, all contract-based, uses your all-caps corporate “name”. You can have any name you want on your checks, with lower case if you like, but the account itself is your all-caps name. Every bill, every credit card, every drivers license, IRS interaction, is with an all-caps name. The powers that be are NOT saving ink or money using all-caps.
To use checks, the human flesh living being you, are acknowledging all the above by signing by the check signature line “Authorized Signature”, tacitly accepting that the real you can transact business with your all-caps strawman.
This would be like some regional retail chain like Dillard's replacing Wal-Mart as the largest retailer.
Our company, and several of our customers have been victims of fraud, and the banks are unwilling to protect us, until we take a stand, and then, they finally relent.
We now have to pay a fee each month for our bank to provide extra protection against fraud, and we have to do extra data entry in order to have this protection. We pay extra, and do the work!
Should be interesting to see what develops from the August 22-24 meeting. Lots of nations have varying degrees of either interest and/or joining. It does appear to be expanding by leaps and bounds, and a fiat system loses to a PM-based system, as the former is just a ponzi scheme. Still, the BRICS nations are currently just trading without petro-dollars, they each have their own stores of PMs with which to become themselves PM-based, the question remains can they agree to an “RV”, re-evaluation of PM-based currencies.
Yes, my bet is for fiat to fall, and PM to rise.
Is the ALL CAPS significant? Becuase the image of check you showed isn’t all caps...it’s bolded and in a bigger font.
It’s for the authorization, checks have to be authorized. Even if it’s just a typing of the company name.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
I’ve worked in corporate accounts payable and payroll for over 30 years.
Every company, whether privately held or publicly held, have a limited number of authorized check signers. These check signers have to submit not only their signature but also documentation from the company that they are an authorized signer on the bank account. I’ve been involved with the process of changing bank signatories, and it is an involved process.
In some cases checks under a certain dollar amount only need one signature but above a certain amount, require two depending on the internal processes of the company.
It’s been like this for as long as I’ve been working in the field.
A check cannot be signed by a company name. There must be a human, a real human person as an authorized check signer.
The bank will have that person’s signature on file along with documentation by the account holder or corporate entity authorizing them.
For a privately owned business and smaller business it could be the owner or whomever the owner designates as an authorized check signer, sometimes a bookkeeper although I don’t recommend that, but it is good to have a backup.
I worked for a small manufacturing company and the owner was the only person who could sign checks. But he was also an alcoholic who sometimes disappeared for days on end. A couple of times we were cut off by vendors and even one time had our electricity nearly cut off for late payment and while I as the office manager/bookkeeper and wanted to cut a check, there was no one to sign it so one time the production manager paid the electric bill on his personal credit card. Not good.
In a corporation, especially a publicly traded company, there are typically more than one authorized check signers, again the corporation works with the bank to get their signatures and the necessary documentation. They are usually officers of the company, CEO, CFO, etc.
And there is typically a hierarchy of how many signers are required depending on the dollar amount of the check and whether the signature can be electronically printed, or if a “wet signature(s)” are required over a certain dollar amount.
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.