Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;fatima, post: 1364127, member: 22143&quot;]No it&#039;s not absurd.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; &nbsp; They were opinions written where people refused to accept Federal Reserve notes arguing that only gold and silver were lawful money.&nbsp; The decisions are only valid in the district in which they were made.&nbsp; The Nixon case was actually dismissed.&nbsp; I didn&#039;t look at the other.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>But you miss the point completely.&nbsp;&nbsp; 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.&nbsp;&nbsp; The money is the gold and silver.&nbsp; The coinage is simply the currency created from it.&nbsp;&nbsp; Neither of the cases you cite address this at all.</p><p><br /></p><p>The US Dollar was originally defined as follows:</p><p><br /></p><blockquote><p>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&nbsp; &nbsp; of a grain of pure, or four hundred and&nbsp; sixteen grains of standard silver.</p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>The legal tender specified by congress was 371 grains of silver which was a dollar.&nbsp;&nbsp; There was nothing stopping a state or private mint from minting a coin to this specification and then using it for commerce or debts.[/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