In 2011, Utah was the first state in over 80 years to pass a law making gold and silver coin legal tender. Its passage sparked articles in the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post and a host of major internet news sources. After decades of obscurity, Utah’s historic measure put sound money back on the map. Not satisfied to rest on their laurels, Utah passed a companion bill in the 2012 session, and it was signed by Governor Herbert.
The bill clarifies several tax measures and more importantly, expands the available specie to include gold and silver coin approved by the state.
Gold or silver coin or bullion, other than gold or silver coin that is issued by the United States, is considered to be specie legal tender and is legal tender in the state if:
(a) a court of competent jurisdiction issues a final, unappealable judgment or order determining that the state may recognize the gold or silver coin or bullion, other than gold or silver coin that is issued by the United States, as legal tender in the state; or
(b) congress enacts legislation that: (i) expressly provides that the gold or silver coin or bullion, other than gold or silver coin that is issued by the United States, is legal tender in the state; or (ii) expressly allows the state to recognize the gold or silver coin or bullion, other than gold or silver coin that is issued by the United States, as legal tender in the state.
By allowing additional specie to be used as legal tender, the Utah legislature has freed its citizens from potential supply constraints imposed by the use of only United States minted gold and silver coin. More importantly, the people of the state of Utah now define what specie is considered constitutional tender, further distancing themselves from potential control of their competing currency by Washington D.C.
Many who subscribe to Austrian economic theory applaud Utah’s leadership. They clearly see a sovereign debt crisis looming on the not-too-distant horizon and understand the importance of having in place a hard currency system to fall back on. Choice and competition in currency has never been more important in this nation. Well done Utah. Keep up the great work. The rest of the nation may soon thank you.
@onetenther This language of “illegal alien”, which has no place in a democracy and is unconstitutional as a bill of attainder under 1/9 of the Constitution is the language of ethnic cleansing, a violation of human rights, by people who cannot qualify for competitive jobs world-wide because they are incompetent.
@onetenther There is no such thing as “illegal status” under the constitution because in practice, the use of the phrase, in punishing the children of undocumented immigrants (withdrawal of school and health care), punitive state immigration laws which target “illegal aliens” are in violation of the United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 9: “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”, where a “bill of attainder is punishment which effects “corruption of blood” by punishing one’s descendants for a crime.
The U.S. Constitution prohibits the original jurisdiction states from making anything but silver or gold as legal tender. In 1971, when the U.S. authorized its currency not to be backed by gold, which the U.S. is not prohibited from doing, there was a constitutional crisis in the several states of the union, namely, they were all operating in violation of the U.S. Constitution. To remedy this crisis, the federal government approached and explained this situation to each state. Having no choice to operate lawfully, every state enacted legislation that authorized the creation of state agencies to perform the functions of each state. These new state agencies applied for and received EINs (Employer Identification Numbers) from the IRS thereby making each of them an agency of the federal government, that is not restricted from the limitations imposed by the U.S. Constitution. Each of the states may pass laws that authorize the use of constitutional money as legal tender for the federal agencies they operate.
@EdwardNilges That means that illegal residents are entitled to equal protection of the laws which is another way of saying that it is a crime to steal from a citizen of any state or non-citizens. The equal protection clause does not change their status as illegal.
@onetenther There is indeed “something” in the Constitution forbidding states from controlling entry. It’s called the Fourteenth Amendment and guess what, pal, it applies to a so-called “illegal immigrant” as soon as he enters the United States, since “equal protection of the laws” applies in the wording of the Fourteenth to all PERSONS “in” the United States. The Federal Reserve IS covered by full faith and credit and Federal supremacy. Money mad LOSERS cannot change this.
I’m kind of curious about whether or not the prohibition on states that they can’t make anything but gold and silver is a mandate or voluntary. I think if a state has no law about this then it is saying that everything is legal tender but wouldn’t that be in violation since it is allowing other things other than gold or silver to be used as legal tender? In my mind that would seem almost like a requirement on states that they must make gold or silver of some kind legal tender.
@EdwardNilges That applies to public records of other state like driver’s licenses, court decisions, and so forth. That does not apply to money since the truthfullness of a dollar bill isn’t an issue. It is not a public act, record, or judicial proceeding. The federal reserve notes are a federal creation so this clause wouldn’t even apply to this.
States are prohibited by the constitution and there isn’t anything in the constitution that tells them they can’t control who has the legal right to enter into a state.
@onetenther This is an absurd misreading, see above. The Founders were the liberal elite of their time. They could UNDERSTAND and CRAFT a complex sentence and hoped that the educational level of ordinary Americans would rise to the task of understanding the Constitution. To the end, George Washington willed a considerable part of his fortune to the foundation of a national university but Congress refused to use the money because ignorant slave-owning wealthy bastards, who controlled Congress in the Democrat-Republican era, didn’t want anyone around smarter than them.
In fact, their damnable Nullification required that free labour not understand that (1) it is NOT in the Constutution, (2) it is NOT a reserved right under the Tenth Amendment and (3) its function is that of the Supreme Court by virtue of the SCOTUS decision of 1801, Marbury v Madison.
YOU HAVE HERE FAILED to understand as I have described. Andrew Jackson invented the filthy, foul, stupid and lower middle class idea that the uneducated man has special insight into the Constitution and it’s destroying my country and the Constitution itself. If you cannot understand the Constitution I suggest you read it and reread it until you can pass a good online test before you post another word.
The constitution PERMITS but does not DEMAND that states make specie legal tender. Because of the Tenth Amendment, the powers prohibited need to be enumerated and ONE of them is making ANYTHING legal tender EXCEPT specie.
THE CONSTITUTION. EVERY WORD, EVERY PHRASE, EVERY SENTENCE. NO EXCEPTIONS. NO EXCUSES.
@onetenther Nor can the states exclude Federal Reserve notes unless ALL states without exception do so at one time, for this would violate IV/I: “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.”.
@onetenther No, read the Constitution, Article I Section 10 (Powers Prohibited of States): “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”.
This logically simplifies to: “No State shall…make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”.
This does not REQUIRE the states to mandate legal tender, it instead RESTRICTS the tender power to specie coin. Since the section is entitled “Powers Prohibited to States” and not “what the states must do”, the state in I/10 does not have to make specie legal tender but it may do so.
The section is entitled Powers Prohibited. These are all exceptions to the Tenth. States may not conduct foreign policy (which is why Arizona’s new immigration laws are unconstitutional, grant letters of Marque and Reprisal, and they may NOT NOT NOT “coin” money where the usage of “coin” as a verb means “create fiat money”.
However the states may, but do not have to, require creditors to accept gold and silver. This is a dead letter today since most creditors are engaged in interstate commerce and, if they don’t want some clowns paying with gold, can simply locate the payment center in a different state.
@EdwardNilges The states are hereby forbidden to do something, not to “make gold or silver the legal tender of that state”. The states CANNOT make ANYTHING except specie (gold or silver) legal tender, but they do not have to.
This is a mandate that a state must make something as legal tender within their own borders and the condition is that it must be gold or silver.
@onetenther Men, specifically white men, are being gulled as fools by this clown, this marketeer, this Tjaden and not so much their careful wives, for in modern American society, men, specifically white men, go off to jobs, for example at silver saver and other investment firms, where the relationship of what they do, typically the installation of software, its crafting, its use, has no real relationship to human needs, whilst their wives produce value 24/7, having children, caring for them, cleaning house, making food…and often also working for paychecks.
This is why Tjaden’s Silver Saver Web site presents the white wet dream. “Nice” (white) couples peer at the husband’s laptop with religious awe and joy to see their holdings, with the white male restored to control, for in the playbook, he’s been a smart cookie and has an ATM card based on specie.
Of course, the reality is more often tears, the children cowering in terror because as in the case of the financial bubble and the housing bubble, the white male has invested in a business which has temporarily escaped condign regulation by the Federal and state governments, the senior members of the investment or real estate or specie firm have made their killing and retired to Boca, and the dull fool is left with an ATM card that DOES NOT WORK.
Just as derivatives of derivatives were popular because their shills escaped regulation, this Silver Saver madness, which is causing these fly by nighters to lobby state governments for silly, meaningless and unConstitutional laws so that gold and silver stop bouncing along at a level price as they’ve been doing since 2008.
And just as husbands wasted their families’ life savings in Samuel Insull’s, Ivar Krueger’s and Bernie Madoff’s schemes, you’re wasting your families’ life savings and endangering your children and your children’s children if you “invest” in specie.
Warren Buffett is right. Long term, you need equity. You need to start a business that meets human needs. You need to invest in such a business. You needed in 1982 to see the value that Jobs was creating, in 1996 to see the potential of Yahoo. Oil is going up? Loan a bike mechanic money so he can go into business.
Any “value proposition” that is based on our fears
Or our hatred for our brother
Is certain, pard, to end in tears
Because you hope to gain at the expense of the Other.
Smirk no longer at the foolsWho voted for Obama and want to adhere to the rulesFor your “bank” is in the tank and there is no deposit insuranceYour only money is what you have in your pants.
@onetenther FALSE.Article I, Section 10: “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.”
The states are hereby forbidden to do something, not to “make gold or silver the legal tender of that state”. The states CANNOT make ANYTHING except specie (gold or silver) legal tender, but they do not have to. This recognized the money scarcity of 1789 when farmers used their grain to make non-perishable whiskey that was then a form of money. Near the seacoasts, various gold coins from other nations were informally accepted and the Constitution wanted the states in this one case to protect contracts by forcing creditors to settle for these old “pieces of eight.”Cf Gordon Wood, “Empire of Liberty”, a history of the United States between 1789 and 1815. Don’t watch crap on You Tube.
Beyond that creditors have always been able to accept other forms of payment such as a crate of booze, as they have been free to forgive debts.
In the above, states may NOT coin money but the Federal government can: Article I section 8. The clear meaning of “coin money” consists of two things. The Federal Government can make physical objects and call them money. But implicit here is the power to make it legal tender and to force a creditor to accept the “coin” as legal tender.
Now, there MIGHT be a problem. Perhaps the privilege to Coin does NOT mean the privilege to Print. Well, note that the Constitution uses “coin” not as a noun here but as a verb, and prior to the introduction of paper money, coin was metallic.
However, all sovereigns had the power to use what metal they whist: our pennies as kids in the 1950s were copper, and the poor have always relied far more on base metals than on silver or gold. Therefore, the use of the verb MEANS “create money by fiat”.
It is a barbaric superstition to say that this sovereign right is restricted to gold and silver. The Indian tribes encountered by Cortez had a Sovereign who’d not made this fiat, therefore for them, gold was use value and not exchange value and suitable only for ornament. Whereas Cortez’ government and the other sovereigns of Europe had said that gold was valuable. NOT their ordinary people: for them, shelter and food as the products of their labor had value.It was the custom in Europe for isolated homes to succor the stranger in the Dark Ages owing to the influence of Christianity, and the value of the Stranger (still extant in Oceania in the 19th century) as a source of labor and news from afar. Gradually these proto inn-keepers accepted gold from the thankful stranger and so by 1492 gold was considered “naturally” valuable by European men.Whereas in South America it was the custom to befriend the stranger save in areas of scarcity without expectation of reward and an economy based on specie was unknown as was the wheel. The claims of the merchants of overpriced gold bars are without merit: there is nothing god given about the value of gold.
Read the Constitution. I believe that because unprincipled politicians have used public education as a cash cow, raiding it when they want to give favors to their thug pals in the form of unneeded airports and the like, the typical Tenther (a man often, often in his fifties in the processed of being downsized, in an America where a man’s fifties have become a dangerous decade because of the low regard and contempt in which he’s held) simply hasn’t the reading comprehension.
So when he says “it’s not in the Constitution” he’s being honest, for to him, the condign complexity of the Constitution is incomprehensible and a grayish paste or blur, and he cannot find what to him are increasing demands on him to shape up and cowboy out, therefore he reasons that Obama=Hitler, and shit.
Can you frigging pass an online TEST on the Constitution with a score in the 90s? I can, most of the time, and when I don’t I don’t blame the liberal establishment!
@onetenther FALSE.Article I, Section 10: “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.”
The states are hereby forbidden to do something, not to “make gold or silver the legal tender of that state”. The states CANNOT make ANYTHING except specie (gold or silver) legal tender, but they do not have to. This recognized the money scarcity of 1789 when farmers used their grain to make non-perishable whiskey that was then a form of money. Near the seacoasts, various gold coins from other nations were informally accepted and the Constitution wanted the states in this one case to protect contracts by forcing creditors to settle for these old “pieces of eight.”Cf Gordon Wood, “Empire of Liberty”, a history of the United States between 1789 and 1815. Don’t watch crap on You Tube.
Beyond that creditors have always been able to accept other forms of payment such as a crate of booze, as they have been free to forgive debts.
In the above, states may NOT coin money but the Federal government can: Article I section 8. The clear meaning of “coin money” consists of two things. The Federal Government can make physical objects and call them money. But implicit here is the power to make it legal tender and to force a creditor to accept the “coin” as legal tender.
Now, there MIGHT be a problem. Perhaps the privilege to Coin does NOT mean the privilege to Print. Well, note that the Constitution uses “coin” not as a noun here but as a verb, and prior to the introduction of paper money, coin was metallic.
However, all sovereigns had the power to use what metal they whist: our pennies as kids in the 1950s were copper, and the poor have always relied far more on base metals than on silver or gold. Therefore, the use of the verb MEANS “create money by fiat”.
It is a barbaric superstition to say that this sovereign right is restricted to gold and silver. The Indian tribes encountered by Cortez had a Sovereign who’d not made this fiat, therefore for them, gold was use value and not exchange value and suitable only for ornament. Whereas Cortez’ government and the other sovereigns of Europe had said that gold was valuable. NOT their ordinary people: for them, shelter and food as the products of their labor had value.It was the custom in Europe for isolated homes to succor the stranger in the Dark Ages owing to the influence of Christianity, and the value of the Stranger (still extant in Oceania in the 19th century) as a source of labor and news from afar. Gradually these proto inn-keepers accepted gold from the thankful stranger and so by 1492 gold was considered “naturally” valuable by European men.Whereas in South America it was the custom to befriend the stranger save in areas of scarcity without expectation of reward and an economy based on specie was unknown as was the wheel. The claims of the merchants of overpriced gold bars are without merit: there is nothing god given about the value of gold.
Read the Constitution. I believe that because unprincipled politicians have used public education as a cash cow, raiding it when they want to give favors to their thug pals in the form of unneeded airports and the like, the typical Tenther (a man often, often in his fifties in the processed of being downsized, in an America where a man’s fifties have become a dangerous decade because of the low regard and contempt in which he’s held) simply hasn’t the reading comprehension.
So when he says “it’s not in the Constitution” he’s being honest, for to him, the condign complexity of the Constitution is incomprehensible and a grayish paste or blur, and he cannot find what to him are increasing demands on him to shape up and cowboy out, therefore he reasons that Obama=Hitler, and shit.
Can you frigging pass an online TEST on the Constitution with a score in the 90s? I can, most of the time, and when I don’t I don’t blame the liberal establishment!
@onetenther FALSE.Article I, Section 10: “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.”
The states are hereby forbidden to do something, not to “make gold or silver the legal tender of that state”. The states CANNOT make ANYTHING except specie (gold or silver) legal tender, but they do not have to. This recognized the money scarcity of 1789 when farmers used their grain to make non-perishable whiskey that was then a form of money. Near the seacoasts, various gold coins from other nations were informally accepted and the Constitution wanted the states in this one case to protect contracts by forcing creditors to settle for these old “pieces of eight.”Cf Gordon Wood, “Empire of Liberty”, a history of the United States between 1789 and 1815. Don’t watch crap on You Tube.
Beyond that creditors have always been able to accept other forms of payment such as a crate of booze, as they have been free to forgive debts.
In the above, states may NOT coin money but the Federal government can: Article I section 8. The clear meaning of “coin money” consists of two things. The Federal Government can make physical objects and call them money. But implicit here is the power to make it legal tender and to force a creditor to accept the “coin” as legal tender.
Now, there MIGHT be a problem. Perhaps the privilege to Coin does NOT mean the privilege to Print. Well, note that the Constitution uses “coin” not as a noun here but as a verb, and prior to the introduction of paper money, coin was metallic.
However, all sovereigns had the power to use what metal they whist: our pennies as kids in the 1950s were copper, and the poor have always relied far more on base metals than on silver or gold. Therefore, the use of the verb MEANS “create money by fiat”.
It is a barbaric superstition to say that this sovereign right is restricted to gold and silver. The Indian tribes encountered by Cortez had a Sovereign who’d not made this fiat, therefore for them, gold was use value and not exchange value and suitable only for ornament. Whereas Cortez’ government and the other sovereigns of Europe had said that gold was valuable. NOT their ordinary people: for them, shelter and food as the products of their labor had value.It was the custom in Europe for isolated homes to succor the stranger in the Dark Ages owing to the influence of Christianity, and the value of the Stranger (still extant in Oceania in the 19th century) as a source of labor and news from afar. Gradually these proto inn-keepers accepted gold from the thankful stranger and so by 1492 gold was considered “naturally” valuable by European men.Whereas in South America it was the custom to befriend the stranger save in areas of scarcity without expectation of reward and an economy based on specie was unknown as was the wheel. The claims of the merchants of overpriced gold bars are without merit: there is nothing god given about the value of gold.
Read the Constitution. I believe that because unprincipled politicians have used public education as a cash cow, raiding it when they want to give favors to their thug pals in the form of unneeded airports and the like, the typical Tenther (a man often, often in his fifties in the processed of being downsized, in an America where a man’s fifties have become a dangerous decade because of the low regard and contempt in which he’s held) simply hasn’t the reading comprehension.
So when he says “it’s not in the Constitution” he’s being honest, for to him, the condign complexity of the Constitution is incomprehensible and a grayish paste or blur, and he cannot find what to him are increasing demands on him to shape up and cowboy out, therefore he reasons that Obama=Hitler, and shit.
Can you frigging pass an online TEST on the Constitution with a score in the 90s? I can, most of the time, and when I don’t I don’t blame the liberal establishment!
@EdwardNilges The power to coin money is simply the power to create money and the constitution demands that states make gold or silver as the legal currency of that state Any federal law that attempts to tell the state that they can’t is in violation of the constitution since it reqiures states to do so and it violates the tenth amendment.
Hayek and von Mises advocated sound money because like Keynes they saw that unsoundness in the form of changing the rules generated economic activity and profits for insiders and shills such as Silver Saver. But this was not important in Austrian economics. Their theme was to get the central government out of the economy EXCEPT as creating the laws of legal tender. The very concept that this is evil “fiat” is not found in Austrian economics. They applauded the German government’s 1920s measure to revalue the Reichsmark despite the fact that it impoverished the middle class because the substantive story then was reparations, not currency.
Congress, and Congress alone, has the ENUMERATED power to coin money and these silly, stupid new laws will be struck down, or are found upon close reading to do nothing new: they are smoke and mirrors.
Sound money is fiat money. You want to get laughed at? You want to get arrested? Take your Krugerrands to Walmart. The minimum wage checker has NO WAY of telling whether the Krugerrand is gold or fool’s gold, and NO WAY of detecting clipping and adulteration.
It has long been a tenet of CONSERVATIVE theory that minimal government should be strong albeit minimal. It should run a strong national defense and dictate legal tender as part of its duty, in conservatism, to enforce contracts. That is why Article I of the United States Constitution ENUMERATES, in a way not superseded by the Tenth amendment, the power to coin money, which is the power to tell a private employer to pay his employee in US dollars, not scrip, and the power to tell a company to pay its suppliers in dollars.
But Tea Baggery is a real sick twist for now it’s attacking this conservative core. Ron Paul is irresponsibly calling for a unilateral military stand down unaccompanied by any peace conferences or any new treaties. And these idiot state laws weaken the state’s power to enforce private contracts.
Employees WILL BE UNPAID. Suppliers will stop delivery if you start giving them Silver Saver Monopoly Money.