Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;frech001, post: 2456198, member: 20616&quot;]Well, I wouldn&#039;t say your &quot;other words&quot; didn&#039;t reflect at all what I said, but rather how they probably were interpreted by someone who just opposes any government control.&nbsp; To the effect that this regulation put some dealers out of business, they either couldn&#039;t pass the background check, couldn&#039;t get a bond because of their record or were so small they couldn&#039;t afford a $25.00 registration fee and the price of a bond, generally 1% of the bond amount for a business with a good record.&nbsp; For the first year of this law, that was maybe $75.00 total.&nbsp; If someone went out of business over that they really didn&#039;t have much of a business.&nbsp; If you drive a car you need a driver&#039;s license, a license plate on your car and liability insurance.&nbsp; I suspect that is standard in all states.&nbsp; Do you object to those &quot;taxes&quot; as well?&nbsp; And I suspect those laws keep many people from driving.&nbsp; Would you prefer something less?&nbsp; Probably not.&nbsp; Then the issue is about whether or not things were bad enough in Minnesota with bullion dealers to warrant this new approach.&nbsp; That is up to Minnesotans to decide and we did through our elected state senators, representatives and Governor.&nbsp; And apparently our elected officials listened to people who wanted that original law modified and they did that.&nbsp; That is how government functions in a democratic republic, at least that is how it should function.&nbsp; Unfortunately, and increasingly so, since the Supreme Court ruled on Citizens United, many of our elected officials seem to be listening to louder voices than yours and mine.&nbsp; But that is an issue for a political blog.</p><p><br /></p><p>An alternative is for coin and bullion dealers to form a professional association and police their own members and for states to recognize the integrity of their association as a means to limit practitioners of this trade.&nbsp; I was in three such professional associations in my career and nationally registered by each professional association in a different field of service.&nbsp; Minnesota and most other states recognized and accepted my credentials in lieu of their own requirements.&nbsp; I paid annual dues to my associations and not what some consider taxes to a state.&nbsp; I had a voice in my associations about what it should take to be registered by them and they provided ongoing training opportunities required to maintain my registration.&nbsp; Both systems eliminate some people from business, both increase the cost for those who acquire the credentials necessary and both provide some assurance to the &quot;customers&quot;.&nbsp; Another advantage of the recognized professional credentialing is that those so credentialed don&#039;t need to pay separate fees to each state they practice in or deal with different requirements.&nbsp; The ANA could offer such a service and negotiate with states for recognition and reciprocity.&nbsp; What do those of you who object to &quot;big government&quot; think about this approach?[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in