Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site teldata.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!ihnp4!zehntel!tektronix!uw-beaver!teltone!teldata!tac From: tac@teldata.UUCP (tac) Newsgroups: net.legal Subject: Re: Paid in Dollars? Message-ID: <257@teldata.UUCP> Date: Thu, 8-Mar-84 15:55:41 EST Article-I.D.: teldata.257 Posted: Thu Mar 8 15:55:41 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 21-Mar-84 08:44:31 EST References: <243@teldata.UUCP>, <1047@proper.UUCP> Organization: Teltone Corp., Kirkland, WA Lines: 42 Gordon Moffett seems to be confused on the issues of the constitution as it applies to gold, silver and money. The Constitution denies the states the ability (right) to make other than gold and silver coins legal tender (i.e. they cannot say that for debts in the state of Idaho we will accept potatoes as legal tender). The reason for this is that during the mid-1700s there were many states making laws which allowed only their own notes (printed "money") legal tender. When you came into that state to conduct business you were forced to exchange the currency of the state from which you came for the new currency at an extremely unfavorable rate. This made interstate commerce next to impossible. Therefore, the framers of the Constitution very carefully worded this section of the document (as they did all sections) so as to preclude this possibility in the future. The Constitution was written at a time when paper money had been inflated to the point where it was worthless (as Warren Shadwick and others pointed out), so as a remedy to this the wording was put in that one of the powers given to the Federal government was to "coin such moneys as are necessary." The purpose of this phrase was to prevent use of paper money again, and to allow for coining only enough gold and silver to supply the need, not to over-supply (thus leaving plenty of it for rings and teeth and other ornamental and utilital uses). If the world still used gold as a standard there would not be as much stockpiling of gold as there is. If you have no paper money you need not have a store of gold to back it with. Only something with intrinsic value could survive as a medium of exchange, since both the buyer and seller would be receiving something of obvious value and worth. Unfortunately, governments forget where power comes from and where it goes to. People create governments, not vica versa, and so we should see in whom the actual power is supposed to lie. It is an axiom of history however that a people get the government that they deserve and are willing to work for. We must be eternally vigilant (gosh that sounds trite these days) that our government not try to take onto itself powers which we have not invested it with. Finally for Mr. Moffett, you have said that money buys what it is worth, and given various examples of value (eggs, cars etc. vs the FRN), but you did not seem to listen to what you were saying. Calculating the value int the world today of the listed weight in gold which makes up one COINED dollar, we find that if we were on the gold standard we could buy that car for $400.00, and the dozen eggs for $.05. In light of that, how can you ever say that paper money is better? From the soap box of Tom Condon (!teltone!teldata!tac)