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)