18 Feb 11
Originally posted by no1marauderArticle I Section 10 of the Constitution forbids the States from making anything but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts. States are not required to enact legal tender laws.
If the States try to make paper money that is legal tender, it's unconstitutional. Did you bother to read Article I, Section 10?
EDIT: I'll help:
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 Payme ...[text shortened]... post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
18 Feb 11
Originally posted by Metal BrainYou said that before (actually you parroted it from the Paul speech), but you don't seem to grasp that the States can't make a currency legal tender. Granted, Paul doesn't seem to grasp it either, but the express prohibition was meant to end States printing money (which they did with gusto in the 1780's).
Article I Section 10 of the Constitution forbids the States from making anything but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts. States are not required to enact legal tender laws.
18 Feb 11
Originally posted by no1marauderWhat prohibition?
You said that before (actually you parroted it from the Paul speech), but you don't seem to grasp that the States can't make a currency legal tender. Granted, Paul doesn't seem to grasp it either, but the express prohibition was meant to end States printing money (which they did with gusto in the 1780's).
It is not in the constitution. Why do you think the states were able to print money?
Duh!
18 Feb 11
Originally posted by Metal BrainCompetition? You know the Treasury is the one in charge of printing currency, right?
Some states are kicking around the idea of printing their own currency. I doubt the Fed wants competition so what are the chances of it happening?
http://www.boston.com/news/source/2011/02/_reuters_lee_ja.html
I think it is a good idea. I just doubt the powers that be would let it happen without a fight. What do you think?
If you mean competition for bank supervision, well there already is that.
18 Feb 11
3 edits
Originally posted by telerionIt doesn't sound as good to back your money with pork bellies or cattle?
Why gold and silver? Why not a whole basket of commodities?
But the argument these guys always make is that there's a finite supply of gold on the planet -- helping to add to its stability, I guess.
19 Feb 11
Originally posted by Metal BrainHolding it's value? 😕
This is why.
http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html
Gold is holding it's value while the dollar is not. Which would you choose?
What do you think would happen to consumer prices in the new currency when gold rises by about 30% in one year (since Feb 2010)? Note that CPI inflation in US dollars was less than 2% during this period.