Interesting little court case I came across....

[Randall Flagg]

lol, your funny.

so states can issue and except bills of credit? the federal government can emit bills of credit?

 

[CarmelHP]

lol, your funny.

so states can issue and except bills of credit? the federal government can emit bills of credit?

You have the ever morphing argument, whenever one goofy assertion is shot down, you have another pop up to take its place and act like that was the point you were arguing all along. Tell you what, go ahead and believe whatever you want regardless of the actual text of the Constitution or the historical precedents of the guys who wrote it.

 

[Fletch]

Where's Fletch when you need him?

I'm pretty well useless in this thread, which seems to be more about the law than about economics. CarmelHP is your guy, and he seems to be doing a great job.

My only comment is that I would have answered the same way CarmelHP did early on, with the Constitutional provision for coining money, and add that this is one of the reasons I consider the Constitution to have some pretty deep flaws in it. I see relying on the Constitution to protect our rights as a hail-Mary pass.

It's not that I don't agree with CarmelHP that it's a product of its time, and served the needs of the folks who wrote it. I do agree with this, and I don't fault the founders for not having had the accumulated economic wisdom that we presently have, especially that work which has been done in the past century. But, learned men as they were, I can't help but think that they would have stripped the money coining and trade regulating out, and put into the bill of rights an explicit guarantee of economic freedom, were they writing it today.

 

[Ramen]

I was really looking forward to a discussion of the meaning of "coin money". It seems to be the part that is much more important. A strict reading of it would make the FRNs unconstitutional which would make the other discussion unneeded.

If the federal government can only create currency backed by specie then it doesn't really matter if the states can accept fiat currency.

 

[Randall Flagg]

You have the ever morphing argument, whenever one goofy assertion is shot down, you have another pop up to take its place and act like that was the point you were arguing all along. Tell you what, go ahead and believe whatever you want regardless of the actual text of the Constitution or the historical precedents of the guys who wrote it.

Really?

But if any further proof is needed that the Federal has no constitutional power to “emit bills of credit,” or print and circulate paper as money, it may be found in the debates of the Constitutional Convention. A proposal was made therein to give the Congress this very power and it was rejected by a vote of nine to two.

again, for those who did not click my link.

the original draft of the constitution had given congress the right to print and circulate paper(fiat) notes.

however after debate, our founders rejected the idea and it was taken out of the constitution.

august 6th draft of the constitution
August 6 Draft of the Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

article 7 section 1

in the constitution most everyone knows you will see no passage saying the fed can emit bills of credit.

if you are not sure of what bills of credit are, you can find the meaning at lectlaw

"Bill Of Credit" Defined
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/b099.htm


please sir, explain this one away why dont you?

 

[Randall Flagg]

I was really looking forward to a discussion of the meaning of "coin money". It seems to be the part that is much more important. A strict reading of it would make the FRNs unconstitutional which would make the other discussion unneeded.

If the federal government can only create currency backed by specie then it doesn't really matter if the states can accept fiat currency.

FRN's are unconstitutional as per congress/feds have no right to emit bills of credit, nor do the states.

congress also does not have the power to delegate it's powers to a 3rd party.

the fed being able to coin money is like wal mart regulating commerce

 

[dross]

You have the ever morphing argument, whenever one goofy assertion is shot down, you have another pop up to take its place and act like that was the point you were arguing all along. Tell you what, go ahead and believe whatever you want regardless of the actual text of the Constitution or the historical precedents of the guys who wrote it.

This reminds me of the conversations with the tax protesters. No matter how many holes you punch in the foundation of their premeses, the conclusion continues to float above the ground undisturbed. Things that can remain suspended without support can do so only because they are created from material with very little substance, like vapor.

 

[Randall Flagg]

ah, so no comment on my last posts, its good to ignore the truth eh guys?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

ah, so no comment on my last posts, its good to ignore the truth eh guys?

Sorry, we're all out earning our illegal FRNs right now. Please try again later.

 

[Randall Flagg]

then make sure you invest them in hard assets, your illegal frn's are falling in value every year.

something i'm sure the founders wanted

 

[Fletch]

then make sure you invest them in hard assets, your illegal frn's are falling in value every year.

I'm putting all mine into consumer electronics, because they really hold their value.

 

[Randall Flagg]

LOL

 

[Eddie]

ah, so no comment on my last posts, its good to ignore the truth eh guys?

As has been pointed out in more than one post above. It is a waste of time trying to reason with you, kind of like arguing with a drunk.

 

[jsgolfman]

Interesting topic. Was just surfing and found this new article on Mises. Rather appropos, no?

California Leads Nation with Sound Money — in 1865 - Brad Skiles - Mises Daily