Blended gold-fiat $ monetary system?

[Chaos]

Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution states clearly that Congress shall have 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;
​

The meaning of "coin" is unambiguous, and it does not authorize the Congress to delegate the counterfeiting of our money to unaccountable bankers, which is exactly what has happened at the Federal Reserve.

Ever heard the term "to coin a phrase"? That much for unambiguous.

 

[TriskettheKid]

No, it's a stalking horse. As with Ron Paul, as well.

Auditing the Fed is explicitly a first step on the road to abolishing it entirely, getting rid of fiat money, and using wampum beads and conch shells as God intended.

Under other circumstances, that would be a slippery slope argument --- my God, if you allow them the to audit the Fed, they'll try to get rid of it! But since that's explicitly their avowed aim (I refer you to Paul's marvelous work of fiction "End the Fed"), it's just an exercise in reading comprehension.

I don't get that, though.

They don't want to Audit the Fed. They already CAN audit the Fed. In fact, the GAO routinely audits the Fed.

What they want to do is audit the monetary policy decisions, which is the one area that I believe the GAO cannot audit. For good reason.

 

[Tippit]

I don't get that, though.

They don't want to Audit the Fed. They already CAN audit the Fed. In fact, the GAO routinely audits the Fed.

What they want to do is audit the monetary policy decisions, which is the one area that I believe the GAO cannot audit. For good reason.

What's the "good reason"? We entrust Congress to borrow trillions of dollars in our name (much of it printed out of nothing by the Fed) all the time. We entrust Congress to spend these trillions of dollars all the time. We entrust Congress to tax our income to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, and spend it all the time. God forbid politicians get a hold of monetary policy, why they will just leave the printing presses running all the time!

Except, isn't that what the Fed has been doing? Your implicit assumption is that politicians benefit from counterfeiting money. Apparently you fail to realize the obvious, which is that creating money out of thin air is extremely profitable. Your solution to prevent this travesty of politicians creating money out of nothing is to... allow bankers to print money out of nothing, with no accountability.

The position that bankers should be granted an independent and exclusive monopoly on money creation so that politicans can't "mess it up" is nutty and untenable. You either don't trust politicians to fulfill their role in legislating and collecting taxes (which is all that loose monetary policy represents), or you fail to realize that money creation is not a neutral transaction and cannot be administered impartially by bankers. Let alone bankers not subject to scrutiny, or oversight.

All of this is beside the point, however, which is that neither Congress nor its delegation of unaccountable bankers has the Constitutional right to issue fiat money.

 

[mhaze]

What's the "good reason"? We entrust Congress to borrow trillions of dollars in our name (much of it printed out of nothing by the Fed) all the time. We entrust Congress to spend these trillions of dollars all the time. We entrust Congress to tax our income to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, and spend it all the time. God forbid politicians get a hold of monetary policy....

I have to venture a comment that in today's world, with the internet and the essential shrinking of the world of commerce, there is no fundamental reason why an individual should be constrained within a single currency, and the stresses to which it is placed by those who control it, but on the contrary, that people may be able to take matters more or less into their own hands, and work outside the system.

Many countries allow banks to operate with multiple currencies, thus then the ones favored by indivduals are chosen by them, and of course those which have been debased are not. The US does not, by law, allow a bank within the US to provide accounts in other than USD.

Although I agree with the outrage regarding the abuses of the fiat money system, and agree with full auditing of the FED, at a personal level I don't agree in waiting for all of those houses to get in order before I fix my own.

 

[TriskettheKid]

I'm sorry, Tippit, but I just can't take someone's argument seriously if they're going to display obvious ignorance of basic civics.

But please, tell me some more about how the Fed prints money.

I'm also quite curious as to when the BEP folded into the Fed. What year did that take place?

 

[Tippit]

I'm sorry, Tippit, but I just can't take someone's argument seriously if they're going to display obvious ignorance of basic civics.

But please, tell me some more about how the Fed prints money.

I'm also quite curious as to when the BEP folded into the Fed. What year did that take place?

If you're going to duck the argument, at least don't use the "Fed doesn't really "print" money" line. Ok, so they tell Treasury and treasury tells the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. I'll be sure in the future to use "BEP" instead of the "Fed", so that can help obfuscate the issue of who really orders the new money into existence. Or not.

 

[TriskettheKid]

If you're going to duck the argument, at least don't use the "Fed doesn't really "print" money" line. Ok, so they tell Treasury and treasury tells the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. I'll be sure in the future to use "BEP" instead of the "Fed", so that can help obfuscate the issue of who really orders the new money into existence. Or not.

There's not much of an argument to duck.

Just to be clear, your argument is that all money should be coin, and that paper currency is unconstitutional?

 

[Tippit]

Although I agree with the outrage regarding the abuses of the fiat money system, and agree with full auditing of the FED, at a personal level I don't agree in waiting for all of those houses to get in order before I fix my own.

I would say that the Fed and the fiat money system *are* abuses. Their very existence is the problem. I don't want a government monopoly on the money supply any more than I want a private banker monopoly on the money supply. I was just addressing the idiocy of the argument for central bank "independence", and the unconstitutionality of it all.

 

[Tippit]

There's not much of an argument to duck.

So far, you've only made a pedantic argument involving who literally prints money, and you've yet to offer your "good reason" for why central bank independent counterfeiting is far, far better than government fiat money creation. I'm all ears.

Just to be clear, your argument is that all money should be coin, and that paper currency is unconstitutional?

Yes. That could have been gleaned from a few posts up, with a little reading comprehension on your part.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I would say that the Fed and the fiat money system *are* abuses. Their very existence is the problem. I don't want a government monopoly on the money supply any more than I want a private banker monopoly on the money supply. I was just addressing the idiocy of the argument for central bank "independence", and the unconstitutionality of it all.

 

[mhaze]

I would say that the Fed and the fiat money system *are* abuses. Their very existence is the problem. I don't want a government monopoly on the money supply any more than I want a private banker monopoly on the money supply. I was just addressing the idiocy of the argument for central bank "independence", and the unconstitutionality of it all.

Got it. But what I was trying to indicate was that perhaps we are seeing the beginning, in the massive shakedown of various financial systems around the work, of the end of the shakedown of the little guy in a box with a currency not of his choice, and not to his interest.

As this one and some others melt away, what then? We're not going back to gold. I'll be buying something with a credit card.

And the thieves, having wore out their welcome mat on the currency scam, and used up the KoolAid they were serving to the believers, will be looking for a new playground to run their little cons in.

Yet one must ask, for the future, is the job of currency a necessary function of governments? And by this question I don't mean a preference for a trans national "governmenet" sponsered system, such as the IMF or the World Bank, or the UN. These would be far worse.

I'm referring to something set up by capitalists in the free market.

 

[Francesca R]

Yet one must ask, for the future, is the job of currency a necessary function of governments? [ . . . ] I'm referring to something set up by capitalists in the free market.

You're welcome to use Disney dollars or (preferably) make your own. The only thing you'll have difficulty with is tempting anyone to take them for more than the paper they are written on / gold they are minted with. Do spend the next few decades prophesizing and trying though. Let us know what credit rating you get

 

[Francesca R]

Many countries allow banks to operate with multiple currencies, thus then the ones favored by indivduals are chosen by them, and of course those which have been debased are not. The US does not, by law, allow a bank within the US to provide accounts in other than USD.

There are myriad ways for US citizens to hold foreign currencies (just not so many for . . . like . . . $50 equivalent).

 

[stevea]

As much as I hate feeding the trolls ....

Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution states clearly that Congress shall have the power

Where does is say Congress can't delegate this power via the 1913 Federal reserve act ?

Clearly the spirit of this section which enumerates powers prohibited by states applies to the Federal Reserve System, because it was inconceivable at the time that the Federal Government would be in charge of issuing fiat money.

I agree, there should be an amendment so we could use fiat currency.

The idea that the supply of gold is relevant to its function as money, is another specious argument. There is plenty of gold to serve its Constitutional function, and gold will simply be revalued to reflect past debasement.

Only $6Trl in gold has ever been mined. That's not close to the requirement. The bigger problem is that the gold supply doesn't expand or contract with GDP - so it is itself a source of inflation and deflation. No we don't want wampum or shells either. We need a managed currency supply.

The real problem is the existence of the unconstitutional Federal Reserve itself.

I can think of a dozen clearer Constitutional violations - some in currently pending legislation. As much I as would prefer we return to a republic form of government solidly moored in a clearly worded constitution, that ship has sailed. Congress ignores any parts of the Constitution that hamper their consolidation of powers, and the Supreme court has used some shockingly tortured logic to justify this.

How can anyone make sense of this:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

vs the TSA warrantless searches and minor property seizures that are executed by the government at every airport thousands of times per day ?

Eminent domain, habeus corpus, various search features and denial of due process of the Patriot Act, intrusion on States rights ...

I live amongst sheeple who have already lost their freedom due to ignorance and cowardice. Your appeal that "it's unConstitutiuonal", may have some validity (tho' i think it's weak), but the Constitutiion is no longer in effect, or at best partially in effect based on the whim of the politicians. It's a pointless moot argument, rendered hypothetical by political realities.
.

 

[TriskettheKid]

Here's a question:

Let's say we go back to the gold standard using Tippit's reasoning, as well as the revaluation.

Is all gold production worldwide to stop? We're mining something around 2500 tonnes a year.

Let's also say that I stumble upon a gold vein capable of producing 500 tonnes a year. Who's going to stop me from devaluing gold by flooding the market? Or stop me getting a good share of gold mining industry and stopping production?

In short, what is the reasoning behind tying our currency to a good that can be manipulated?

 

[Chaos]

Here's a question:

Let's say we go back to the gold standard using Tippit's reasoning, as well as the revaluation.

Is all gold production worldwide to stop? We're mining something around 2500 tonnes a year.

Let's also say that I stumble upon a gold vein capable of producing 500 tonnes a year. Who's going to stop me from devaluing gold by flooding the market? Or stop me getting a good share of gold mining industry and stopping production?

In short, what is the reasoning behind tying our currency to a good that can be manipulated?

The reasoning is that we are infinitely better off being at the mercy of a bunch of greedy bastards who are out only for their own profit, rather than at the mercy of people who can be held accountable for what they do.

At least, that seems to be Tippit´s reasoning.

 

[stevea]

Here's a question:

Let's say we go back to the gold standard using Tippit's reasoning, as well as the revaluation.

Is all gold production worldwide to stop? We're mining something around 2500 tonnes a year.

Let's also say that I stumble upon a gold vein capable of producing 500 tonnes a year. Who's going to stop me from devaluing gold by flooding the market? Or stop me getting a good share of gold mining industry and stopping production?

In short, what is the reasoning behind tying our currency to a good that can be manipulated?

I think you are waterboarding the language to claim that mining gold or choosing to not mine gold is "manipulation". Any rational person would expect these activities. It's rather difficult to "corner the market" in gold, since the annual production is only ~1.5% of the supply.

I think you'd enjoy reading Milton Friedman's "Money Mischief" book, since it discusses the history of money and tracks growth, inflation, deflation, gold & silver supply esp during the 1800s. He makes your point based on evidence - gold supply does not track GDP, so use of gold as currency causes inflation/deflation. Freidman, btw won the Nobel prize in economics for his actual work in economics in the mid-1970s. This, as opposed to Krugman who won the Nobel in E' for criticizing Bush vociferously.

 

[GreyICE]

I think you are waterboarding the language to claim that mining gold or choosing to not mine gold is "manipulation". Any rational person would expect these activities. It's rather difficult to "corner the market" in gold, since the annual production is only ~1.5% of the supply.

I think you'd enjoy reading Milton Friedman's "Money Mischief" book, since it discusses the history of money and tracks growth, inflation, deflation, gold & silver supply esp during the 1800s. He makes your point based on evidence - gold supply does not track GDP, so use of gold as currency causes inflation/deflation. Freidman, btw won the Nobel prize in economics for his actual work in economics in the mid-1970s. This, as opposed to Krugman who won the Nobel in E' for criticizing Bush vociferously.

Or, y'know, for his work in New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography.

Mr. Krugman received the award for his work on international trade and economic geography. In particular, the prize committee lauded his work for “having shown the effects of economies of scale on trade patterns and on the location of economic activity.” He has developed models that explain observed patterns of trade between countries, as well as what goods are produced where and why. Traditional trade theory assumes that countries are different and will exchange different kinds of goods with each other; Mr. Krugman’s theories have explained why worldwide trade is dominated by a few countries that are similar to each other, and why some countries might import the same kinds of goods that it exports.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/paul-krugman-wins-economics-nobel/?em

Oh, no, can't be that. It's a conspiracy.

 

[Francesca R]

Freidman, btw won the Nobel prize in economics for his actual work in economics in the mid-1970s. This, as opposed to Krugman who won the Nobel in E' for criticizing Bush vociferously.

 

[Toke]

This morning I was standing in Dubai airport looking at a 1 Kg goldbrick, it is rather small.

Anyway, fiat currency is far more flexible than something involving a good, and I do want the supply controlled by the government backing it.