Washington State proposed bill to make gold and silver legal tender

You are completely accurate in this entire statement. Where I differ on the subject is I believe that in US v. Rifen and Nixon v. Philipoff they misinterpreted the Constitution in making the distinction that it prohibits states from 'declaring' what legal tender is. The wording says that nothing but gold and silver coin may tender payment of debt. To 'tender' in this context means to present payment, not to declare what constitutes payment. These relatively recent laws are making an inference I cannot logically follow, but I've been wrong before

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Is this a written state tax regulation/ruling or some individual ? I could see that if someone was silly enough to pay at an even rate, "Here is 1000 morgans for 1000 USD" , but not if the rate was not an even exchange.

Jim

 

No it's not absurd. The two cases you googled up, the one in 1965, and the one in the 1970s have never been decided on a Constitutional basis in front of the Supreme Ct. They were opinions written where people refused to accept Federal Reserve notes arguing that only gold and silver were lawful money. The decisions are only valid in the district in which they were made. The Nixon case was actually dismissed. I didn't look at the other.

But you miss the point completely. If gold and silver are declared legal tender, there is nothing to prevent a state from creating gold and silver in whatever form meets the definition. The money is the gold and silver. The coinage is simply the currency created from it. Neither of the cases you cite address this at all.

The US Dollar was originally defined as follows:

DOLLARS OR UNITS--each to be of the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy-one grains and four sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred and sixteen grains of standard silver.​

The legal tender specified by congress was 371 grains of silver which was a dollar. There was nothing stopping a state or private mint from minting a coin to this specification and then using it for commerce or debts.

 

Does the fact that a one US dollar, pre 1913, which was redeemable for a dollars worth of gold/silver; versus the one US dollar federal reserve note ,1913 and later, that was redeemable for nothing at all which is what made it unconstitutional perhaps?

 

Once more, quoth the Constitution: "No State shall ... coin Money;" Just stop.

 

This is cherry picking one sentence out of a paragraph. It doesn't work that way. (love it when people completely ignore the point made)

---------------------------------

None the less, I saw a story from several sites today that say at least 12 states were in the process of considering such move. In all cases the stated rationale was destruction of the USD at the hands of the Federal Reserve. These states are concerned about the Fed bankrupting the country and in the process ruining average citizens at the hands of the bankers and thus they wish to make gold & silver ownership more practical so it becomes more widespread.

As I said earlier, such moves would have been unheard of just a few years ago. Nobody is laughing at it now. It's very bullish for gold and silver buyers.

 

Um, yeah, I hate that too....

Well, you might have read about a few legislators proposing a bill, (of which thousands of bills every year are introduced, like naming an official state geode, or many other stupid, pointless reasons), but I have not read of state legislatures actively debating such a move. Because, basically, its simply political posturing and serves absolutely no purpose other than to solicite political contributions from a selected constituency. I view it as the modern day [fill in the blank] bill, a bill serving no purpose but to placate certain voters.

My view of it.

Chris

 

Do you really believe that?? IMO, as none of the states told me so, it is a group of politicians pandering to certain groups for their votes and support, nothing more. I will not take this argument further due to forum rules on politics, but

add 1 to the count of those laughing.


​

 

this whole thread is way into politics... but FWIW, I believe that Washington State can not coin it's own currency under the US Constitution.

 

yeah -- like gold will remain at its current price....and the Fed is a banking conspiracy, and I have a bunker in my basement.

FWIW - I'm laughing so that is at least one

 

Yes that is out of context, but is this whole question not black and white. The only thing the original post asked was how the bill would effect prices of gold,(and silver, if that was included). I have no idea how this argument could go for 5 pages. As for the original question, would it not raise prices because people think it an excuse to buy PMs? Just think of the adds!

 

What are you laughing at?

I said states were considering it. You can read SC House Bill 4501. It's been introduced and is currently in committee. The relevant section of the bill that I referenced is this:

TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 18 TO CHAPTER 1, TITLE 1 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT SILVER AND GOLD COIN SHALL BE LEGAL TENDER IN PAYMENT OF CERTAIN DEBTS.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Chapter 1, Title 1 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Article 18

Gold and Silver Coin as Legal Tender

Section 1-1-1110. The South Carolina General Assembly finds and declares that the State is experiencing an economic crisis of severe magnitude caused in large part by the unconstitutional substitution of Federal Reserve Notes for silver and gold coin as legal tender in this State. The General Assembly also finds and declares that immediate exercise of the power of the State of South Carolina reserved under Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 1 of the United States Constitution and by the Tenth Amendment, is necessary to protect the safety, health and welfare of the people of this State, by guaranteeing to them a constitutional and economically sound monetary system. ....​

This looks like English to me. i.e. The reason for the bill is they do not consider the Federal Reserve to be a sound monetary system and as a result are want to introduce gold & silver to protect the welfare of the people of SC. What more do you need?

 

Let me know when it passes so we can redo the civil war again.

 

Dear Heart, Utah's Governor signed HB 317, Utah Sound Money Legal Tender Act into law on March 2011. Utah has deemed Gold & Silver to be legal tender in that state.

"Utah Gold and Utah Silver allow individual citizens in Utah to completely remove themselves from the involuntary Usury and Lien that is the foundation of the privately owned fiat based Federal Reserve Debt Note System.

There is a Re-Publicing in Utah, a Re-Turning in Utah with the ‘Utah Sound Money Act’."​

Note that again, like SC, the reason for doing so is to counter the destruction being caused by the Federal Reserve. I haven't checked the other states, but I've proved my point.

 

I can't say that I am completely up on SC politics, except that nothing much got done there after Gov. Sanford was caught sleeping with that TV Reporter in Argentina while supposedly on a trip to the NC mountains.

But don't let it be said that fatima doesn't try to satisfy. I just posted where Utah has already passed a very similar bill. I hope this takes care of your needs. I can't really promise you that it will lead to a re-do of the Civil War since Utah wasn't admitted into the Union until 1896.

 

yeah = that won't last

 

I was very proud of the Norths ability to Burn Atlanta while using greenbacks. Who thought that an opportunity to repeat history would be available again in my lifetime!!

 

I thought you live in a high rise.


Inflexion, you are correct about the original question. Lets say that all passed, would the price of gold rise.

Yes, the issue would be pressed by bullion sellers, ebay would go crazy with the prices, but the rest of the world is not dumb, they will take little notice and play into the game, until it crashes back to reality and then the ones hurt will be the very ones who shouldn't be be playing the game as they have the most to lose. I like the furture of gold up to 1895 over this year), and have been liking the well manner changes in the price. Panic buying will bring larger margins, and the following dumps. I personally like the track of gold as it is now. Sorry for the venture into politics.

​

 

While I thank you for your opinion of Utah, it's completely irrelevant to the point made by me. I simply said the states were making such moves because of concern about the Federal Reserve destroying the USD via irresponsible and possibly even criminal monetary policy. I made no comment on whether these states were rational or whether such laws would be effective. I've simply said they were doing it and the fact that such items were now under discussion is a testimate to the general loss of faith in the US financial system. It would have been unheard of several years ago. What I posted also had nothing to do with politics as I know nothing about the political parties in these states.

Now that I've backed this up 100%, I notice the laughter (in fact a lot of it) has stopped. If you choose not to believe in this, that is your choice as it, along with your obsession of the Civil War. I have no interest about either as they have nothing to do with the price of gold and silver. However I do notice that even Idaho is contemplating gold & silver legal tender legislation. If the reference escapes you, please see this. (I hear chuckling in the back of the big room)

 

Repeating bad propaganda doesn't make it so.

Actually, you just did

Hah - Ha hah hah