Fareed Zakaria: The founding fathers

[BenBurch]

Unlike the great unwashed, the Tea Party has heard of something called the Amendments. I think that's the Constitution most are referring to. You might try reading them.

You might, too. You appear to not know the first thing about them.

 

[Robert Prey]

I did do research on the word "coin." I posted a link. You ignored it. Do whatever you want, but the word "coin" has had a very broad meaning for at least twice as long as the USA has existed.

Further, "money" was used for paper money certainly by the Massachusetts Bay colony almost a hundred years before the Revolutionary war -- this money didn't even have a gold or silver exchange.

Given that the United States immediately set up a bank that issued paper currency, I find it a bit ridiculous to propose that this wasn't allowed by the Constitution. I believe you are depending on how hard it is to look up how words were used 200+ years go. It is indeed tricky to do this. I'd note that you can find people today who try to stick to highly specific meanings of certain words, despite the word having a broader meaning. You have merely done this regarding the terms "coin" and "money" with someone 200 years ago.

The issuance of notes, bonds and bills were instruments of debt. They promised to pay money. And the money they promised to pay was gold and silver.

 

[Drachasor]

The issuance of notes, bonds and bills were instruments of debt. They promised to pay money. And the money they promised to pay was gold and silver.

Not necessarily, as you would have noticed if you read my post. Paper money where the only value was the the full faith and credit of the Massachusetts Bay Colony was issued almost 100 years before the Revolutionary War. It was called money.

There's no evidence that "money" only means gold, silver, or things that directly translate into fixed gold and silver amounts. The ability to regulate the value of money that Congress possesses seems to leave plenty of room for them to define it however they want as well.

 

[Robert Prey]

Not necessarily, as you would have noticed if you read my post. Paper money where the only value was the the full faith and credit of the Massachusetts Bay Colony was issued almost 100 years before the Revolutionary War. It was called money.

There's no evidence that "money" only means gold, silver, or things that directly translate into fixed gold and silver amounts. The ability to regulate the value of money that Congress possesses seems to leave plenty of room for them to define it however they want as well.

Regulating the value of money refers to the amount of gold or silver in a particular coin. "Congress shall have the power... to coin money, regulate the value thereof..." The word thereof, clearly points back to coined money, and coined money, to gold and silver. If there be any doubt, one only has to refer to Art. I, Sec. 10 which prohibits the states from enforcing payment in any thing but...

 

[Drachasor]

Regulating the value of money refers to the amount of gold or silver in a particular coin. "Congress shall have the power... to coin money, regulate the value thereof..." The word thereof, clearly points back to coined money, and coined money, to gold and silver. If there be any doubt, one only has to refer to Art. I, Sec. 10 which prohibits the states from enforcing payment in any thing but...

"Coin" can mean to make or create. That's been true for over 500 years. "Money" can mean anything that is used as an as a generalized medium of exchange, that's been true in the West for at least 300 years. Notice that both are much older than the USA.

If one has any doubt, one can refer to Art I, Sec 10, which feels the need to explicitly talk about silver and gold. Clearly "coin" and "money" aren't sufficient.