Comments on: New Hampshire Gold Bill

By: David Z

David Z — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 02:11:40 +0000

What a surprise, indeed! Ever hear of “Your comment is being held for moderation”?

Akismet has deleted 25,000+ spam comments, excuse me for holding first-time comments in queue.

By: David Z

David Z — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 00:22:48 +0000

@ Alex and everyone else who thinks an EZPASS or a credit card or a money order or a personal check is constitutes one of the “rare instances” where someone can refuse to accept FRNs as payment:

YOU ARE FLUNKING LIFE.

All of those media of exchange are denominated in, backed and funded by federal reserve notes.

By: Alexander Goristal

Alexander Goristal — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:42:31 +0000

“…except for rare instances nobody can refuse to accept FRNs as payment…”

Word up: EZPASS

AlexG

By: betsyross

betsyross — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 21:54:32 +0000

what a surprise the site is down.

By: David Z

David Z — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:28:51 +0000

Sounds great, in theory, but how do you answer 7 or 8 decades worth of legal decisions which directly contradict the constitutional argument. SCOTUS wouldn’t even hear the case.

With apologies to Spooner, whose quote I’m amending to fit the topic at hand, “Your constitution has either authorized such violations, or it has been powerless to prevent them. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”

By: Highlander

Highlander — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 18:38:28 +0000

USC Art. I, Section 10:
—————
No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; MAKE ANYTHING BUT GOLD AND SILVER COIN A TENDER IN PAYMENT OF DEBTS; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.
—————
So far, the USC has NOT been amended to allow the FRNs to be used in lieu of GOLD AND SILVER coin.