Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Economists agree: Lower Tariffs good; Gold Standard bad

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Economists agree: Lower Tariffs good; Gold Standard bad
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:03 pm Post subject:

eat_yeot wrote:

Try again. It only makes metallic coins illegal.

Get real. The liberty dollar was also in bill form. Of course there is not any law in the constitution that prevents competing currencies, but the liberty dollar case shows what will happen to a person who tries to compete with the crooks running the federal government and at the Federal Reserve. Arrested, convicted, and branded a domestic terrorist.

eat_yeot

Joined: 11 Dec 2009

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:09 pm Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

visitorq wrote:

Is that the best rebuttal you can come up with? Nothing?

In response to utter silliness. Yes. Cite a credible source and I'll respond.

So you've got nothing then... As if I'm going to waste my time debating what's "credible" to you when you won't address the evidence on its own merits. Your mere dismissal of it shows you to be close-minded and someone who debates in bad faith.

We did not overthrow Qaddafi. The people of Libya did. Do you think they're in on maintaining US hegemony?

Quote:

Sure, if you're stupid enough to try to make them look like US currency.

This is ridiculous. They look nothing like US currency.

Is this a US coin or not?

https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSY80-TmWzL5AsoFxQkL_0RuF4FMZK6JiBQ03COa7okYq9y1japVw

Looks a lot like some previous US coin designs to me.

Quote:

So if you're arguing that competing currencies should be allowed, I've showed that they are. If you're arguing that countries should return to the gold standard, you need to explain your reasoning. If you're pro-free market, the gold standard requires much more government intervention than a floating currency does.

I've posted the actual law that says you're full of it, and that it is illegal to make competing currencies.

The law only applies to METAL COINS.

Therefore, your belief that a competing, gold backed currency, should be allowed, already is. So what has the market decided?

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:13 pm Post subject:

eat_yeot wrote:

visitorq wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

visitorq wrote:

Is that the best rebuttal you can come up with? Nothing?

In response to utter silliness. Yes. Cite a credible source and I'll respond.

We did not overthrow Qaddafi. The people of Libya did. Do you think they're in on maintaining US hegemony?

Absolute BULL. The people of Libya were flying the jets that blew up Gaddafi's military? Rolling Eyes

Quote:

Sure, if you're stupid enough to try to make them look like US currency.

This is ridiculous. They look nothing like US currency.

Is this a US coin or not?

https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSY80-TmWzL5AsoFxQkL_0RuF4FMZK6JiBQ03COa7okYq9y1japVw

Looks a lot like some previous US coin designs to me.

No, it's a silver coin. Who the hell cares if it looks a coin made by the US mint? What difference does it make? It's pure silver. Nobody is forced to buy it.

Quote:

I've posted the actual law that says you're full of it, and that it is illegal to make competing currencies.

The law only applies to METAL COINS.

Therefore, your belief that a competing, gold backed currency, should be allowed, already is. So what has the market decided?

You are being ridiculous. Does this look like only metal coins?

Quote:

United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/5103

Where does it say anywhere that competing gold currencies are okay? Why would the free market go for something that gets people landed in jail? Hell, the federal government even outlawed hoarding of gold under FDR, so clearly the constitution doesn't matter here (since the government is basically a giant mafia that does whatever it wants).

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:15 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

visitorq wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

ontheway wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

Some people, on the other hand, are a little bit smarter than that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_community_currencies_in_the_United_States
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1908421,00.html
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-04-05-scrip_N.htm
http://localcurrencycouncil.org/

So if you're arguing that competing currencies should be allowed, I've showed that they are. If you're arguing that countries should return to the gold standard, you need to explain your reasoning. If you're pro-free market, the gold standard requires much more government intervention than a floating currency does.

Issuing a competing currency is illegal in the US.

Still waiting for the cite.

Oh god, you are so full of it. IT IS ILLEGAL.

Stick this in your pipe and smoke it: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/486

Ithaca Hours, Bitcoins, Ven, WIR Bank, all are alternative currency systems.

Not backed by gold or silver.

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:15 pm Post subject:

eat_yeot wrote:

The law only applies to METAL COINS.

Therefore, your belief that a competing, gold backed currency, should be allowed, already is. So what has the market decided?

Competing currencies cannot be backed by precious metals or commodities.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:21 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

The law only applies to METAL COINS.

Therefore, your belief that a competing, gold backed currency, should be allowed, already is. So what has the market decided?

Competing currencies cannot be backed by precious metals or commodities.

Moreover, even if they could be Gresham's Law would ensure that the good money would be driven out by the bad, since people are forced to accept the latter as legal tender. So much for the "free market". Rolling Eyes

eat_yeot

Joined: 11 Dec 2009

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 2:52 am Post subject:

eat_yeot wrote:

visitorq wrote:

We did not overthrow Qaddafi. The people of Libya did. Do you think they're in on maintaining US hegemony?

Absolute BULL. The people of Libya were flying the jets that blew up Gaddafi's military? Rolling Eyes

Sure, we helped. But it was pretty much a popular uprising. In case you didn't notice, those things were rather popular for a while.

Quote:

Does this look like only metal coins?

FFS. He only got busted for distributing the coins. It doesn't matter that he also had bills. It was the coins that got him in trouble.

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2011/mar/19/local-liberty-dollar-architect-found-guilty/

Quote:

Bernard von NotHaus, 67, was convicted Friday by a federal jury of making, possessing and selling his own coins, said Anne M. Tompkins, U.S. attorney for the Western District of North Carolina.

Quote:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/5103

not legal != illegal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender

Quote:

For instance, if an individual owes someone US$100 in the United States, he or she can try to pay the debt in Mexican Pesos or valuable jewelry or gold metal, or even a cheque or a charge card, but the creditor is not required to accept any of those as payment. The creditor must accept US $20 dollar bills, however, because that is legal tender in the United States. An individual can try to sell his or her pesos or gold to someone else in exchange for some US legal tender, and pay the debt with that money, but the creditor cannot force any specific person to satisfy a debt with pesos or gold. In Mexico, however, pesos are legal tender, and US dollars are not. So, by Mexican law, the creditor must accept pesos as payment, whereas the creditor can refuse US dollars or gold.

eat_yeot

Joined: 11 Dec 2009

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 2:57 am Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

The law only applies to METAL COINS.

Therefore, your belief that a competing, gold backed currency, should be allowed, already is. So what has the market decided?

Competing currencies cannot be backed by precious metals or commodities.

Still waiting for a cite of the law. The one provided specifically disallowed metallic coins only.

This article suggests otherwise.

ontheway

Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:41 am Post subject:

eat_yeot wrote:

Kuros wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

The law only applies to METAL COINS.

Therefore, your belief that a competing, gold backed currency, should be allowed, already is. So what has the market decided?

Competing currencies cannot be backed by precious metals or commodities.

Still waiting for a cite of the law. The one provided specifically disallowed metallic coins only.

This article suggests otherwise.

The cited law applies to paper currency as well as coins. In a practical sense that would be true in any case: a gold or silver backed currency consists of either gold or silver coins, or paper bills backed by gold or silver coins. Both require gold or silver coins and minting those as money is illegal.

The article you cited is foolish.

Private gold and silver currency is illegal in the US, because the US has a monopoly on issuing money that is enforced by US Treasury agents. Many Americans have gone to prison for attempting to start their own private money, even some who were not actually trying to create a form of money, but the treasury decided that it was close enough to money and a Federal court agreed.

The other options are not currency at all - they are barter systems and can never be called money because they do not have any of the reguired attributes of money.

You are completely out of your league on this one.

1) You apparently don't know what "money" is.
2) You are grasping at straws provided by self-promoting marketers who are attempting to profit from various forms of barter, gift certifcates, and bonus and reward systems that meet none of the requirements of being a form of money. They use the term "currency" to increase interest and their own profits, but that doesn't make it money. Ust because something has value doesn't make it money. The fact that people sometimes use something in a direct exchange or barter exchange doesn't make it money.
3) The US Teasury knows what money is:
They prosecute anyone who tries to issue any form of real money even when the issuer tries to disguise it by calling it something else.
They ignore people who issue non-monetary paper, like play money, even when the issuers promote it by calling it a currency system. Barter systems, coupons, gift certificates, bonds, stocks, shares, checks, travelers' checks, etc - none of these are money.
They also are aware, and cannot admit, that the US dollar no longer meets all the requirements of being an actual form of money. This is one of the reasons they have to work so hard to prevent anyone from issuing real, gold-backed money. It would quickly replace the dollar and precipitate a world-wide global collapse of the world's fiat currencies.

The reason the dollar hasn't crashed completely yet is that as long as the Treasury has some gold on hand it has the possibility of re-backing the dollar with gold to end a collapse.

Since we haven't had an audit of the gold still held by the US government we can't be sure of the price point, but we can speculate that at the present time it would be at $5,000 to $10,000 per ounce of gold. (It could be higher than 10k/oz. $10,000 per ounce is the current best estimate.)

This would recognize the massive devluation that has hit the dollar since 1913 and would formally aknowledge the theft by the Fed and the US government of over 99% of the monetary wealth held by US citizens and other holders of the dollar since the creation of the Fed and end of the gold standard in 1913. (In 1913, it was fixed at roughly $20 per ounce. From 500 ounces to 1 ounce, that is a good estimate of what the US government has stolen 499/500 of the value of the dollar.)

This would give us an exact determination of the rate of inflation under the Fed since inflation is the issuance of unbacked currency and under a 100% gold standard there is no inflation.

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 8:09 am Post subject:

eat_yeot wrote:

Kuros wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

The law only applies to METAL COINS.

Therefore, your belief that a competing, gold backed currency, should be allowed, already is. So what has the market decided?

Competing currencies cannot be backed by precious metals or commodities.

Still waiting for a cite of the law. The one provided specifically disallowed metallic coins only.

This article suggests otherwise.

What are metallic coins? They are backed by the metals used to make them.

But you're right, there's no black letter law prohibiting asset-backed private currencies, only precedent, custom, and overzealous enforcement.

The OCC has cracked down on asset-backed private currencies in the US. Yes, there is a proud tradition of local currencies. But the Liberty Dollar was squashed. This has had a chilling effect on the development of private currency in the US.

Surely you remember the OCC's role in facilitating the financial crisis.

Quote:

The OCC "took 50 sheriffs off the job during the time the mortgage lending industry was becoming the Wild West," Cooper says.

This was but one of many instances of state posses sounding early alarms about the irresponsible lending at the heart of the current financial crisis. Federal officials brushed aside their concerns. The OCC and its sister agency, the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS), instead sided with lenders. The beneficiaries ranged from now-defunct subprime factories, such as First Franklin Financial, to a savings and loan owned by Lehman Brothers, the collapsed investment bank.

SCOTUS struck down OCC's preemption of state efforts to clamp down on predatory lending a few years too late.

But this is the OCC all potential alternative currencies must face:

Quote:

Citing the threat of unspecified "hostile state interests," the OCC argued in its brief that "states are not at liberty to obstruct, impair, or condition the exercise of national bank powers, including those powers exercised through an operating subsidiary."

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 1:48 pm Post subject:

eat_yeot wrote:

visitorq wrote:

We did not overthrow Qaddafi. The people of Libya did. Do you think they're in on maintaining US hegemony?

Absolute BULL. The people of Libya were flying the jets that blew up Gaddafi's military? Rolling Eyes

Sure, we helped. But it was pretty much a popular uprising. In case you didn't notice, those things were rather popular for a while.

A popular uprising that probably would never have succeeded were it not for NATO jets bombing the hell out of Gaddafi's troops. Not saying Gaddafi didn't deserve his fate, but to pretend the West acted out of some altruistic motive to help the Libyan people is pretty much the height of naivety.

Quote:

Does this look like only metal coins?

FFS. He only got busted for distributing the coins. It doesn't matter that he also had bills. It was the coins that got him in trouble.

You have no clue what you're talking about. As ontheway pointed out, the law applies to paper bills just as much as coins, by definition. A single unit of gold or silver currency IS a coin. Just like in the old days when a franc or a guinea or a thaler (which shares the same etymology as 'dollar') were actual coins of gold or silver, the liberty dollar is a single unit of silver minted into a coin. The paper money is just a certificate redeemable in greater quantities of those same coins. A note bearing $100 would be redeemable in 100 liberty dollar silver coins, not in X amount of silver bullion. Those coins are required to be on deposit by the issuer of the notes. This is what money is.

Quote:

This just proves my point. The only legal tender is the currency issued by government. No competing currencies are allowed.

jaykimf

Joined: 24 Apr 2004

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 4:50 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

Kuros wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

The law only applies to METAL COINS.

Therefore, your belief that a competing, gold backed currency, should be allowed, already is. So what has the market decided?

Competing currencies cannot be backed by precious metals or commodities.

Still waiting for a cite of the law. The one provided specifically disallowed metallic coins only.

This article suggests otherwise.

Quote:

SCOTUS struck down OCC's preemption of state efforts to clamp down on predatory lending a few years too late.

But this is the OCC all potential alternative currencies must face:

Quote:

As evil as the OCC may or may not be, I haven't seen any evidence that the OCC had anything to do with the Liberty Dollar prosecution. But anyway, regardless of whether the OCC was involved or not, I thnk you'll find this interesting: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rounds/rounds34.1.html
In particular, look at the actual Indictment http://www.howtovanish.com/images/VonNothausIndictment.pdf Regardless of whether the prosecution had a chilling effect on the development of private currency in the US, do you believe Liberty Dollar broke the law?

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 5:32 pm Post subject:

jaykimf wrote:

Kuros wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

Kuros wrote:

eat_yeot wrote:

The law only applies to METAL COINS.

Therefore, your belief that a competing, gold backed currency, should be allowed, already is. So what has the market decided?

Competing currencies cannot be backed by precious metals or commodities.

Still waiting for a cite of the law. The one provided specifically disallowed metallic coins only.

This article suggests otherwise.

Quote:

SCOTUS struck down OCC's preemption of state efforts to clamp down on predatory lending a few years too late.

But this is the OCC all potential alternative currencies must face:

Quote:

The creators of the Liberty Dollar clearly broke a malum prohibitum when it minted silver and gold coins. You could make a case that the organization resembles a petty pyramid scheme, but last I checked Amway was a legal organization. The other charges, notably those of fraud for making coins 'resembling' US currency, seem preposterous.

Quote:

�A unique form of domestic terrorism� is the way the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina, Anne M. Tompkins, is describing attempts �to undermine the legitimate currency of this country.� The Justice Department press release quotes her as saying: �While these forms of anti-government activities do not involve violence, they are every bit as insidious and represent a clear and present danger to the economic stability of this country.�

I'm wondering what kind of koolaid I'd have to drink to believe that minting coins should be considered terrorism. I don't even call the massive Wall Street fraud and predatory lending terrorism, and that destroyed fortunes, lives, and our entire economy.

You know who headed the Treasury Department at the time of the Liberty Dollar raids? Henry Paulson. If I have to choose sides, I choose the Liberty Dollar.

Anyway, its an indictment. With a single clearly valid malum prohibitum, minting coins. Something I regard as more morally ambiguous than smoking pot, but probably not as bad as hiring a prostitute.

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 5:43 pm Post subject:

It seems a jury found NotHaus guilty. It seems the conviction was almost a year ago, but I cannot find any definitive sentencing. I will find out what that may signify tomorrow.

jaykimf

Joined: 24 Apr 2004

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:46 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

It seems a jury found NotHaus guilty.

It seems the conviction was almost a year ago, but I cannot find any definitive sentencing. I will find out what that may signify tomorrow.

Why does it seem preposterous to accuse them of making coins resembling U.S. Currency? Did you read the first link I gave? http://www.lewrockwell.com/rounds/rounds34.1.html They seem similar enough to me that they could be passed off to a certain % of the population.

Quote:

Liberty Dollar actively encouraged merchants who traded Liberty Dollars to give them to unsuspecting customers as change. An unsuspecting customer might receive a "$10 Liberty Dollar" medallion instead of $10 in Federal Reserve Notes. The value of the silver in those medallions was less than $10 FRN, so the unsuspecting customer would receive less than the value they thought they were receiving. It appears that such an exchange was viewed by the prosecution, and the jury, as evidence of an intent to defraud.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Page 4 of 6

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe