CSNbbs

Cool. Hope more states follow.

Would it be up to individual creditors/debtors/buyers/sellers to decide how much $$ gold is worth, in any particular transaction?

I read about this this morning.

I kept thinking about the North Carolina man who was recently arrested for printing Liberty coins (I think they were of silver).

Why is this important? Well, I saw this article this morning...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/588ce75a-53e4-...z1HGfs2GWN

(03-22-2011 07:03 AM)chess Wrote: [ -> ]I read about this this morning.

I kept thinking about the North Carolina man who was recently arrested for printing Liberty coins (I think they were of silver).

Why is this important? Well, I saw this article this morning...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/588ce75a-53e4-...z1HGfs2GWN

He was making these:

(03-22-2011 07:03 AM)chess Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/588ce75a-53e4-...z1HGfs2GWN

Wow .... just wow. A total hit piece if ever there was one. I wonder if the person who wrote that was a former Fed employee.

(03-22-2011 07:20 AM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-22-2011 07:03 AM)chess Wrote: [ -> ]I read about this this morning.

I kept thinking about the North Carolina man who was recently arrested for printing Liberty coins (I think they were of silver).

Why is this important? Well, I saw this article this morning...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/588ce75a-53e4-...z1HGfs2GWN

He was making these:

Bernard Von Nothaus was convicted on all accounts a couple of days ago. This is another in a long line of assaults upon the tree of liberty.

(03-22-2011 07:03 AM)chess Wrote: [ -> ]I read about this this morning.

I kept thinking about the North Carolina man who was recently arrested for printing Liberty coins (I think they were of silver).

Why is this important? Well, I saw this article this morning...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/588ce75a-53e4-...z1HGfs2GWN

Glad you brought this up. I was wondering about the connection here.

(03-22-2011 08:52 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Bernard Von Nothaus was convicted on all accounts a couple of days ago. This is another in a long line of assaults upon the tree of liberty.

No. Absolutely not. This is not an assult on liberty.

Governments jealously guard the ability to mint coinage. As originally conceived, it was probably more for consumer protection than anything else; ensuring the purity and weight of coins has a very real economic function. Private currencies, in broadly general terms, are dangerous, prone to fraud and collapse, with severe economic consequences.

Thus, Congress' exclusive right to mint gold and silver coins is written right into the Constitution.

This guy doesn't have a leg to stand on.

(Also we ought to consider that this dude and his co-conspirators are conspicuously eager to take "worthless" US Dollars as payment for their "real value" gold and silver coins.)

(03-22-2011 01:00 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote: [ -> ]Governments jealously guard the ability to mint coinage. As originally conceived, it was probably more for consumer protection than anything else; ensuring the purity and weight of coins has a very real economic function. Private currencies, in broadly general terms, are dangerous, prone to fraud and collapse, with severe economic consequences.

Thus, Congress' exclusive right to mint gold and silver coins is written right into the Constitution.

This guy doesn't have a leg to stand on.

While I agree with point 1 100%, I'm unaware of a clause in the Constitution that gives Congress exclusive rights to mint gold and silver coins. Certainly they are the only ones who can create obligations of the Federal governent, but there are MANY examples of states and even businesses creating their own "currency". The stamping of gold and silver is done by artists every day, with the value of that "art" being some mixture of the value of the metals, plus the art. Coins that aren't legal tended in this country are traded here every day. There are even US minted $20 coins that are trading at a value much higher than that... yet in theory, the government is only obligated to give you $20 for it. I doubt if the Constitution gives anyone the authority or obligation to pay more than $20 for a $20 gold coin... but it happens anyway. As I understand it, you're also supposedly prohibited from melting the gold coin down... but perhaps not.

(03-22-2011 01:00 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote: [ -> ]Thus, Congress' exclusive right to mint gold and silver coins is written right into the Constitution.

This guy doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Where is that located? He can't mint his own coins and call it legal tender to be used in commerce throughout the United States, but I don't see where it says he can't mint his own coins. States used to do it all the time.

BTW, I'd love to have some of his 20 new dollar 1oz silver coins. Since it's going for 34, that's a helluva lot better deal than a f'n greenback.

I'd like for someone to show me the constitutional provision being referenced.
And while you're at it, explain how conduct contrary to such provision was allowed for the first 100 years or so of the republic.

(03-22-2011 01:00 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-22-2011 08:52 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Bernard Von Nothaus was convicted on all accounts a couple of days ago. This is another in a long line of assaults upon the tree of liberty.

No. Absolutely not. This is not an assult on liberty.

Governments jealously guard the ability to mint coinage. As originally conceived, it was probably more for consumer protection than anything else; ensuring the purity and weight of coins has a very real economic function. Private currencies, in broadly general terms, are dangerous, prone to fraud and collapse, with severe economic consequences.

Thus, Congress' exclusive right to mint gold and silver coins is written right into the Constitution.

This guy doesn't have a leg to stand on.

(Also we ought to consider that this dude and his co-conspirators are conspicuously eager to take "worthless" US Dollars as payment for their "real value" gold and silver coins.)

I would submit that how one decides to exchange the fruits of their labor is an essential part of liberty. The fruits of my labor belong to ME since I own myself. If not...then I am a slave. Voluntary exchanges between parties are not anyones business but the involved parties. Just because someone writes down sh!t on paper does not make it suddenly right.

I considered the Liberty Dollar simply another means of exchanging my labor for goods and services. Looks to me like the government simply does not like competition...especially against a form of exchange that is actually backed by more than a promise.

(03-22-2011 01:12 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]BTW, I'd love to have some of his 20 new dollar 1oz silver coins. Since it's going for 34, that's a helluva lot better deal than a f'n greenback.

Yeah. That's the part where things get really tricky.

(03-22-2011 01:26 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ][I would submit that how one decides to exchange the fruits of their labor is an essential part of liberty. The fruits of my labor belong to ME since I own myself. If not...then I am a slave. Voluntary exchanges between parties are not anyones business but the involved parties. Just because someone writes down sh!t on paper does not make it suddenly right.

I considered the Liberty Dollar simply another means of exchanging my labor for goods and services. Looks to me like the government simply does not like competition...especially against a form of exchange that is actually backed by more than a promise.

You are correct. Anyone can print their own money already, there's no law against it. Think of a casino chip, or a walmart gift card, or whatever. Those things have the properties of a currency. No one is stopping you from doing it. What is illegal is this guy marking his coins so that they can be confused as US legal tender.

(03-22-2011 01:09 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]Certainly they are the only ones who can create obligations of the Federal government, but there are MANY examples of states and even businesses creating their own "currency". The stamping of gold and silver is done by artists every day, with the value of that "art" being some mixture of the value of the metals, plus the art. Coins that aren't legal tended in this country are traded here every day.

Sure, as long as the art is not built with the intent to defraud. And the US Mint does state that US currency can be altered for "artistic" (term being broadly used) purposes, though the US Mint does not encourage this practice.

This guy specifically minted coinage designed to confuse, and to be substituted for legal US tender.

(03-22-2011 01:09 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]As I understand it, you're also supposedly prohibited from melting the gold coin down... but perhaps not.

Yes, it is illegal to melt coinage.

(03-22-2011 01:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]I'd like for someone to show me the constitutional provision being referenced.

Based on Section 8 and Section 10 of the US Constitution

Section 8, that Congress has the power:
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;

and in 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.

(03-22-2011 01:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]And while you're at it, explain how conduct contrary to such provision was allowed for the first 100 years or so of the republic.

Couldn’t' tell ya why. Probably having to do with the limited enforcement abilities and other priorities. I'm only talking about this guy, and why what he did was illegal.

This guy is in trouble because he presented coinage which was supposedly national and seems to have been created with the hope of supplanting the actual Federal monetary system. His company was called "NORFED" which was an acronym for National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve Act and Internal Revenue Code

Quote:Based on Section 8 and Section 10 of the US Constitution

Section 8, that Congress has the power:
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;

and in 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.

But they're not coining "legal US tender". Also, individuals aren't states. I'm not seeing how this is any different than coins from the Franklin Mint.

(03-22-2011 01:59 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Based on Section 8 and Section 10 of the US Constitution

Section 8, that Congress has the power:
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;

and in 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.

But they're not coining "legal US tender". Also, individuals aren't states. I'm not seeing how this is any different than coins from the Franklin Mint.

It isn't. The railroaded BVNH because they FEAR competition from a fully backed competitive currency. BVNH predicted this would happen from the start and warned his customers of such. No where on the currency does it state it is US currency and those that participated in it fully were aware of its nature. Now the government thugs have confiscated the assets that backed this currency. These assets belong to those that invested in the Liberty Dollar...not BVNH. The government essentially has committed the crime of theft if it does not return those assets to the owners. At this point they show no intention to do so.

(03-22-2011 01:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]I'd like for someone to show me the constitutional provision being referenced.
And while you're at it, explain how conduct contrary to such provision was allowed for the first 100 years or so of the republic.

This case is travesty of justice. It stabs at the very heart of what it means to "own ones self and the fruits of their labor". If that is not an assault upon liberty...I do not know what is.

(03-22-2011 01:59 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]But they're not coining "legal US tender". Also, individuals aren't states. I'm not seeing how this is any different than coins from the Franklin Mint.

He was with knowledge minting coinage designed to to confused as legal US tender. That is what is getting him in trouble. The constituion supports that by saying on the Federal Government can produce legal US tender.

He's not in trouble for making his own money, his is in trouble for making money that looks like US legal tender.

The Franklin Mint gets away with it because they "art" is not meant to confuse and defraud.