Do you really own your AGE's and other government issued bullion??

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

He can pay me

He can pay me in AGE's (at Face) and I'll pay his utility bill.

Service added with a smile.:smile

 

I beat you to it... the offer is already out, see post #33. :thumb:

 

The same could be said about trying to spend 1,000 pennies, or one of those funny presidential dollars. I even recall a story in 2009 where merchants in NYC were only accepting (or claiming to accept) the Euro.

I don't think many merchants would question an ASE, however you may have trouble spending that $3 bill you got for Christmas as a kid.

 

Dang~You win

Sorry Krispy~I got distracted and didn't notice your extended service offer.:foot-mouth:

The Cedar Waxwings are buzzing about outside, Spouse is fuming because her Boss won't do what she says and I'm still pondering what branch of the legislature is considered the Judicial limb.....????

I guess I'm just old school and don't need to Twitter/Facebook/Myspace everything that needs to be done.

But I love the banter.

 

That all depends on who You`re trying to deal with.....A total stranger in a grocery/retail store......good luck with that. BUT....someone that You might know who owns their own business is the exception to the rule. (I`m talking about using an ASE for its intrinsic value, not its monetary value) I have traded almost everything under the sun (including ASEs) and I`m actually surprised at how many people are starting to embrace the "barter system."

I don`t know if We`ll ever see the day when a majority of the general public would own a more popular form of bullion like an ASE, (let alone start trading and moving them) but I can speak from experience that more and more people are starting to become aware of the financial crisis in the U.S. and are no longer in denial.

 

Correct.

Incorrect. Federal Reserve Notes are obligations of the US government, backed by the assets of the issuing Federal Reserve Bank. You're thinking of Federal Reserve BANK Notes, last issued in the 1930s...those were direct obligations of the Federal Reserve Banks.

Wildly incorrect. Those constitutional restrictions apply to the States, not to the federal government. The federal government has been making government-issue paper currency legal tender since the 1860s, with some types such as United States Notes being unbacked by any specific assets. The creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 didn't somehow allow the government to do anything it couldn't legally do before.

The Eagle coins were made legal tender because that's the only way collectors are interested in them. Their predecessors, the American Arts Gold issues, were very unpopular since they were just bullion, with no legal tender value. (Bullion investors needn't care about the difference, but there are a lot more *coin* collectors than *medal* collectors....) But that has nothing to do with the issuing authority of the coins: Like all U.S. coins, they're issued by the U.S. Treasury. The Federal Reserve doesn't issue coins; it buys them from the Treasury at face value. *Currency* doesn't have value until the Fed issues it; *coin* has value as soon as the Mint issues it *to* the Fed. (Basically, coin still has the same status that United States Notes used to have in the old days.)

This is nonsense. If you buy a 1794 silver dollar, certainly a government-issue coin, the tax is based on the purchase price, not the face value ($1) or the bullion value ($15-ish). Where did you get the idea that the face/bullion value of a coin somehow prevents tax from applying to any other value it may have? Not from anything in U.S. law....

 

Thanks this is what i was looking for, something that clearly says the government can prevent the exportation and melting of all U.S. coins.. Anyone Know if there is any law that say the government can make you turn in coins?

 

I think that when someone is paying off dept, you have to accept any form of legal tender offered including penny's. I would think that would also apply with ASE's but i dont know why you would want to spend one.

 

Canadian Maple leaf coins have a face value of $5 anyone know if many of them calculated in the 1990's when the silver content was less then the face value?

 

An Exercise I n Futility

I must commend you for your patience/diligence in responding to this thread, and for the majority of your factual/logical presentations. Upon viewing the initial post, I was tempted to cite a legal response which would have been in agreement with an individual who was almost immediately verbally confronted by others who expelling irrelevant tripe. I considered a mediating post, but realized that logic often isn't a meaningful tool for establishing objectivity on this site. I viewed the heated meandering thread until I saw your original post which was virtually totally what I would have stated.

I knew from previously viewed idiotical subjective statements by some thread principals who seem to enjoy ridiculous responses, that you would be virtually urinating against an overpowering breeze, in presenting truths. Your following arguments, regardless of subjective responses by some "critics", were of value/logic/patience, for which I have appreciation. I agreed with the majority of your presentations, and would probably have posted similarly.

I must take exception to the argument that mint issued items (e.g. ASE, AGE, etc.) aren't acceptable monetary exchange. Whether the mint has constructed the "monetary item" of Gold, Silver, Steel, Paper, Plastic, or any other material, I believe you will find that if the government has "authorized" issue, the items are acceptable monetary exchange media. It is especially acceptable if the monetary value is embossed/printed, regardless of whether the recipient recognizes the item. A typical example of questionable "currencies" are the numerous intermediary stamps issued by USPS which don't have a face value shown. I've gone to the post office on several occasions, being challenged by postal employees about the worth of my unvalued stamps, where a lengthy search ensued to determine postage value. Several items of U.S. currency were issued with questionable value (e.g. three cent, half dime), and probably wouldn't be recognized today, yet are acceptable monetary media. Regardless of recipient recognition, I believe you'll find the aforementioned items to be acceptable payment exchange.

I'm known by many in my community as having an understanding of monetary exchange items, and I'm often asked by local individuals to identify payment items received as exchange, tips, etc.. I've seen some unusual payments, as a postal employee asking me about the 3 ASE she received for a $2+ payment, or waitresses who had received Indian cents, Buffalo nickels, Barber or Mercury dimes, etc.. I know businessmen who constantly acquire Franklin and Kennedy Silver coins that aren't recognized by bank employees, showing me their unrecognized treasure.

Thanks for trying to guide/mediate a seemingly hostile meandering thread.
:bow:

 

In regard to the original question - Only time will tell.

I am not sure why, but it seems many of the threads I am getting caught up on today have made me think "Get a shovel - Dig a hole."

 

Indeed. It's interesting you agree with me and then disagree in the next comment. A contract, is an agreement between two parties and each party has an obligation based on it. Hence if the dollar is a contract between you and the Federal Reserve, as you just agreed to, then it's the Federal Reserve that has the obligation.

Nope. Explained above. Federal Reserve Notes (dollars) are obligations of the Federal Reserve. The law requires the Federal Reserve to hold assets equal to the number of $s issued. These assets include liabilities of the US Government but are not limited to them. As we all know, the FR claims to hold ~7000+ tons of gold as an asset. This is listed on their balance sheet. They also hold various other assets. The Federal Reserve does create dollars based mostly on borrowing by the federal government but none the less, these dollars are obligations of the Federal Reserve.

Actually the issuance of this money was in fact declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1870. A party refused to accept payment for a debt with this paper currency claiming it was not lawful money and demanded gold instead. The court agreed by declaring paper money to be in violation of the US Constitution. This decision was later reversed by other cases brought forth in front of the Supreme Ct. and subsequent acts of Congress. However the key point isn't the gold and silver clause which I was only responding to, the Constitution specifically defines how the federal government is to fund currency that it issues. This is why, instead, they allow the Federal Reserve to do it instead now. The primary purpose of the Federal Reserve, is to avoid the constitutional requirements on borrowing and taxation, so that the government can borrow in an unrestricted manner, without having to raise taxes. My statements are not wildly incorrect and I also stated in my original post that much of it has not been properly adjudicated because of fears of what the court would do. The 1870 decision was overturned only after Grant stacked the court.

This is an opinion but not fact. First the AGE and ASE were not created for collectors, which you state. They were authorized for bullion investors. The art bars were not their predecessors. Second on your other point, Krugerrands have been bought by bullion investors in the USA since the early 1970s and they have no legal tender status in the USA. Furthermore Krugerrands, the original bullion coin, have no face value printed on them. These coins have been sold to bullion investors since the 1960s who have no issue with the lack of face value or legal tender status. (and to further prove my point, these coins are legal tender in S. Africa, but with no currency denomination). Your statement is not proved out by the facts. [/quote

You are paying the tax on the numismatic as a collector of an historical item. This shouldn't be that hard to understand. As further proof of what I stated, you can take a AGE to the IRS or FR Bank for payment of taxes or as a deposit. By law they will gladly accept this coin for the face value of $50. However if you receive the AGE as income, the IRS demands full intrinsic value. The paradox should be clear and as I state again, has not been properly handled in the judicial system.

 

Back to the OP's question, basically the legislative and executive branches of the government (Congress & President) can pass and sign any law into force that it pleases. But any law they pass is subject to being declared unconstitutional by the judicial branch of the government. (ultimately the Supreme Ct.) This requires that the law be challenged on the basis of denying one of their constitutional rights. So there may be unconstitutional laws on the books because they have never been challenged.

For an extreme case related to the subject at hand, the 1792 Coinage Act, stated the following penalty for anyone working at the mint who might debase a coin.

"...every such officer or person who shall be guilty of any * * * of the said offenses, shall be deemed guilty of felony, and shall suffer death."
​

 

But this is in a section limiting rights of states, not the federal government. Not sure it has anything to do with this discussion.

 

I don't know about that. The mint has a gallows on the grounds.

 

Yeah they are... WILDLY. First, you said that Congress can create a private enterprise...NONSENSE. It is legal nonsense, and just plain nonsense. Only private individuals, or private corporations owned by private individuals can create such private enterprises. This is not Venezuela, Congress can't, for example, nationalize the oil industry and give it to their favorite donor. That is what the Takings Clause in Article 5 of the Constitution is about.

All Congressionally created agencies that Congress creates, whether independent or under direct executive branch control, is paid for through the tressury and get paid with those little checks with the Statue of Liberty on them that you see.

As for the assets issue, you seem to be lost about how the Federal Reserve distributes money. On the expansion of the money supply, Private Banks BORROW money from the Federal Reserve. They exchange a paper note to the Fed for Cash. That is how "assets" are balanced. The purpose of this is to maintain control of the money supply as economic policy, AND to create a smooth continence of double entry accounting for auditing purposes. It has NOTHING to do with the Fed being a private organization.

It is LOCK, STOCK and BARREL a federal agency. Until you admit that, there is really no point to further this conversation, because your proposing that the world is flat. The world is not flat and the Fed is a Government Agency, no different than NYC's MTA.

Ruben

 

There is no Paradox. The opening discussions of the Jewish Mishnah of Bava Maziah discusses what happens when you sell Silvers Coins for Gold Coins, or Gold Coins for Copper Coins, and who is legally the buyer and who is legally the seller. For for as long as Civilization has coins money and created currency, there has ALWAYS been an acknowledgment that different currencies have different values or desirability beyond their face values.

They still have a face value...

and they can have an intrinsic market place value.

What do you think the court needs to rule on?


Ruben