the constitutionality of paper money

[dennis dujac]

So long as I am free to take my 'paper' money to a Federal office and exchange it for gold/silver/platinum/copper or whatever commodity it is based on, then that's a slightly different issue than fiat currency which is not accountable for anything if no one will take it in exchange for the commodity.

why make it so's you have to deal with the dreaded government for metal? as things are now, you're free to exchange money for gold, silver and whatever else you want

You claim to know the difference between plenary power and enumerated power yet you repeat this misleading question again and again. That's trolling. Negative rep.

the question i ask is an honest one and i demonstrated my understanding of plenary vs enumerated power

i'm not the only one repeating things, it happens in most debates like this

This troll continues to imply that Congress has all powers not specifically restricted.

no, i made it clear that government is restricted by the constitution

here's what i wrote:

"by definition, the current political system isn't given plenary powers, government's power is limited"

see page 5, post #49

 

[WilliamC]

why make it so's you have to deal with the dreaded government for metal? as things are now, you're free to exchange money for gold, silver and whatever else you want

You are correct, I mistakenly forgot to add 'at a fixed rate' to that statement.

My apologies, I was not trying to mislead you, I made a mistake.

Thank you for pointing it out to me.

Please continue.

 

[dennis dujac]

You are correct, I mistakenly forgot to add 'at a fixed rate' to that statement.

wouldn't it be more appropriate to allow the market to set prices for precious metal commodities?

 

[matt0611]

why make it so's you have to deal with the dreaded government for metal? as things are now, you're free to exchange money for gold, silver and whatever else you want

Not exactly, you're subject to capital gains taxes on your metals. You are also forced to pay your taxes in federal reserve notes so government creates demand for them this way. There are also legal tender laws that force federal reserve notes to be legal tender for all debts.

 

[dennis dujac]

Not exactly, you're subject to capital gains taxes on your metals.

you don't pay capital gains taxes when you buy gold or silver

You are also forced to pay your taxes in federal reserve notes so government creates demand for them this way. There are also legal tender laws that force federal reserve notes to be legal tender for all debts.

i don't really see a problem, except maybe that you just don't like dollar bills or taxes

 

[Chester Copperpot]

the federal govt was not given the power to emit bills of credit.. (paper fiat currency)


it is therefore not constitutional.

good thing the US doesnt make its own paper money but instead buys it from the private federal reserve.

 

[WilliamC]

wouldn't it be more appropriate to allow the market to set prices for precious metal commodities?

So long as the market controls the supply of money, sure.

But we both know that isn't the way money is controlled now, don't we?

 

[matt0611]

you don't pay capital gains taxes when you buy gold or silver

When you sell it.

 

[WilliamC]

you don't pay capital gains taxes when you buy gold or silver

But you do have to pay sales tax.

Gee, imagine getting taxed just to use money, what will they think of next?

Them crazy bankers eh?

 

[dennis dujac]

When you sell it.

is when you owe it

it's not like any direct labor of yours created the commodity's appreciation in price

But you do have to pay sales tax.

Gee, imagine getting taxed just to use money, what will they think of next?

Them crazy bankers eh?

what do bankers have to do with your tax obligations? the bank doesn't receive that revenue, government does, and most bankers don't like taxes any more than you do?

 

[matt0611]

is when you owe it

it's not like any direct labor of yours created the commodity's appreciation in price




what do bankers have to do with your tax obligations? the bank doesn't receive that revenue, government does, and most bankers don't like taxes any more than you do?

So? Why should you have to pay capital gains tax on money?
Its ridiculous.

Just because the price increases doesn't mean the purchasing power has increased...

Say I buy 1 oz of gold for $1000, that 1 oz of gold has a certain amount of purchasing power. At the end of the year it has that same oz of gold has the exact same purchasing power to buy goods. During that same year the amount of dollars in the economy multiplies by 2 so that all prices multiply by 2 in terms of dollars and my 1oz of gold now is worth $2000.
Now I go to sell my gold for dollars so I can buy something at the end of the year. So now I have to pay dollars to the government? Now they are reducing the purchasing power of my money through no action of my own.

Should people start paying taxes on dollars when its value increases?
Come on man...

Paying taxes on money is ridiculous and makes it prohibitively expensive and complex to use. Not to mention the sales tax on bullion you have to pay in some states.

Gold and silver cannot have equal standing as money in our society due to the government laws and regulations over it and protections for the counterfeit money that they print at the federal reserve.

 

[Acala]

no, i made it clear that government is restricted by the constitution

here's what i wrote:

"by definition, the current political system isn't given plenary powers, government's power is limited"

see page 5, post #49

Yes. But what you don't understand (or more likely choose to ignore) is that the powers are limited to those expressly granted. It is your failure to understand this (or your choice to ignore it) that causes you to post again and again asking for people to point to restrictions in the Constitution when in fact no express restriction is necessary - only a lack of specific authority. At the Federal level, lack of express authority EQUALS prohibition.

 

[WilliamC]

what do bankers have to do with your tax obligations? the bank doesn't receive that revenue, government does, and most bankers don't like taxes any more than you do?

Guess who got the FED started.

Hint: it wern't' them crazy bakers.

 

[dennis dujac]

Guess who got the FED started.

the 63rd united states congress and president wilson

 

[dennis dujac]

Paying taxes on money is ridiculous and makes it prohibitively expensive and complex to use.

what you're doing is paying taxes on income

many people take for granted the elaborate infrastructure systems that facilitate earning money

those systems are often costly to set up, regulate and maintain

Yes. But what you don't understand (or more likely choose to ignore) is that the powers are limited to those expressly granted. It is your failure to understand this (or your choice to ignore it) that causes you to post again and again asking for people to point to restrictions in the Constitution when in fact no express restriction is necessary - only a lack of specific authority. At the Federal level, lack of express authority EQUALS prohibition.

strict constructionism is a political philosophy not adopted by most people in the 20th century and later

there's nothing in the constitution that keeps congress, the president, supreme court or even citizens, from rejecting archaic interpretations of the constitution

certainly i understand what you're saying, but i just don't subscribe to strict constructionism

 

[Travlyr]

strict constructionism is a political philosophy not adopted by most people in the 20th century and later

there's nothing in the constitution that keeps congress, the president, supreme court or even citizens, from rejecting archaic interpretations of the constitution

certainly i understand what you're saying, but i just don't subscribe to strict constructionism

I'm with you buddy. Let's abandon Article I, II, & III.

 

[dennis dujac]

I'm with you buddy. Let's abandon Article I, II, & III.

i don't support abandoning articles 1, 2 or 3

i do approve of abandoning archaic clauses like the 3/5 ths compromise - article 1, section 2, paragraph 3

the original method for electing the president - article 2, section 1, paragraph 3

and other such obsolete clauses

 

[matt0611]

what you're doing is paying taxes on income

many people take for granted the elaborate infrastructure systems that facilitate earning money

those systems are often costly to set up, regulate and maintain




strict constructionism is a political philosophy not adopted by most people in the 20th century and later

there's nothing in the constitution that keeps congress, the president, supreme court or even citizens, from rejecting archaic interpretations of the constitution

certainly i understand what you're saying, but i just don't subscribe to strict constructionism

As I explained in my post. You may not even gain any purchasing power and the government will tax you, giving you a net loss in purchasing power. This undermines the purpose of even using gold and silver.
Are you even reading my posts?

Like a said, this along with legal tender laws makes it so that gold and silver cannot compete with the unbacked, unconstitutional , counterfeitted notes from the federal reserve.
So your assertion that people are "free" to just use gold and silver as money doesn't hold water, sorry.

 

[dennis dujac]

You may not even gain any purchasing power and the government will tax you, giving you a net loss in purchasing power.

that's a common misconception, if you know what you're doing, you don't pay taxes on losses, you claim tax credits

Like a said, this along with legal tender laws makes it so that gold and silver cannot compete with the unbacked, unconstitutional , counterfeitted notes from the federal reserve.

you realize that the federal reserve doesn't own a printing press, right?

the united states treasury dept is responsible for printing and coining money, so how could it be counterfeit?

So your assertion that people are "free" to just use gold and silver as money doesn't hold water, sorry.

i didn't say people are free or not free to use gold and silver as money, i said they're free to buy it

 

[matt0611]

i don't support abandoning articles 1, 2 or 3

i do approve of abandoning archaic clauses like the 3/5 ths compromise - article 1, section 2, paragraph 3

the original method for electing the president - article 2, section 1, paragraph 3

and other such obsolete clauses

Do you support abandoning Amendment 10?
Because you seem to be ignoring it.