Sunday, August 28, 2016

#0: Why in the World Are Taxes Levied on Money Itself?

Source 

This passed across my desk and begged for a comment or two. The author's words in blue, mine in black:

By Jeanpaul Cortez

Imagine if you asked a grocery clerk to break a $5 bill, and he charged you a 35 cent tax. Silly, right? After all, you were only exchanging one form of money for another.

But try walking to a local precious metals dealer in more than 25 states and exchanging 20 Federal Reserve notes for an ounce of silver. If you do that kind of money exchange, you will get hammered with a sales tax. That’s the price you can pay for bucking the system and picking up a piece of the only true money mentioned in the U.S. Constitution.

So quick, students. Where has he gone wrong here? Can you name the ways?

Of course, sales taxes haven’t been around forever.

Revenue hungry government officials in the 1930s brought us the first broad based, general sales taxes. Kentucky and Mississippi were the first adopters, and it spread rapidly from there.

Unlikely as it may seem, these two states deliberately soaked their residents of more money than had ever been issued during those times when the Federal Reserve actually called in a third of the circulating money within about two years.

Today, sales taxes are part and parcel of any shopping experience, in 45 states in the Union. Whether you buy a shirt or a hamburger, tax collectors want a piece of the action and force merchants to collect anywhere from 2.5% to 7.5% on top of your transaction total and forward it to the bureaucrats and politicians in your state capital.

Putting aside whether taxes on consumer goods is right or wrong, charging sales taxes on money itself is beyond the pale. In effect, those states that collect taxes on your purchases of precious metals are inherently saying gold and silver are not money at all.

Come on students, who have we identified as an official of the Federal Reserve whose statements actually support this?

It’s not difficult to see how these laws negatively affect those who choose to protect themselves from inflation and financial turmoil by saving some of their money in precious metals. Investors won’t want to pay, for example, $100 in taxes on purchase of a $1,350 one-ounce gold coin. It’s a competitive marketplace, so buyers will often purchase online or even travel out of state to obtain their precious metals.

So pay attention, he's trying to save you some money.

Diversifying into precious metals tax free from an out-of-state national dealer such as Idaho-based Money Metals Exchange is a good option, because states are restricted in attempts to regulate interstate commerce. But state sales taxes reduce investors’ options and thereby have the negative effect of causing local dealers to lose business, threatening jobs and, even reducing those states’ overall tax revenues.

We're not sure exactly how this is correlated or verified as trade in precious metals is actually a lot smaller (though growing) than trade in more useful items.

Your Nominal “Gains” from Owning Precious Metals Are Taxed as Income

But the tax problem doesn’t stop at sales taxes. Income taxes are another way in which government bureaucrats penalize holders of precious metals. If you own gold to protect against devaluation of America’s paper currency, you may end up with a “gain” when priced in dollars. Not necessarily a real gain, mind you. It’s a nominal gain on which the government will assess a tax.

And what students did we say was our answer and why the proposal throughout this blog really is the ONLY real solution? Look, there are plenty out there with this rugged outdoorsman, rugged individualist mindset that imagine they can go it alone or the system has made them lose such confidence in themselves and in others that they think ditching civilization itself would almost be preferable to enduring any more of the present system. A lot of this sounds like whining to us. Real men devote themselves to devising their own realistic means of exchange, which does not require precious metals even if it is based on their prices. They band together to thwart the interests and desires of the destroyers.

At the federal level, your nominal gains on precious metals are taxed at the discriminatorily high 28% long-term capital gains tax rate. (Capital gains on other assets are taxed at 15% or 20%, depending on your income level). And the “gain” you receive from owning our constitutional money increases your taxable income at the state level too. Shame on you for diversifying away from those paper Federal Reserve Notes!

What have we told you all? Come on students, figure it out. The author surmises correctly that THEY deliberately want you to use THEIR preferred brand of THEIR money and if you do not, THEY will tax you for not doing so. How do we honestly regard this tax policy (instigated by the banking cartel from behind the curtains) whether we're a “gold bug” or not? As an act of war! On whose part though? Who is the alleged perpetrator of a cause for war? The monopolists in charge of THEIR money, which is falsely claimed to be ours and is not. It is the same with some people who claim to be something or someone they are not. Just the same.

States Are Eliminating Sales Taxes
on Precious Metals

Utah is the leader in rolling back unfair taxation on precious metals. Not only did the Beehive State repeal sales taxes, but it also exempted gains on certain precious metals from the income tax.

Mormons tend to be “gold bugs” anyway. It makes sense for this kind of resistance to get started there.

Indiana lawmakers have also taken steps to roll back taxation on money. Effective July 1 of this year, House Bill 1046 became law, and Indiana will no longer collect a sales tax on purchases of precious metals by its residents.

E. C. Riegel was from Indiana, but he was certainly not a "gold bug" and neither was Arthur Kitson, whose work Riegel probably never even knew about. This state tends to favour certain kinds of independence from outsiders.

State Senator Brandt Hershman (R-IN) argued that the removal of the sales tax also encourages people to save for their retirement by investing precious metals into Individual Retirement Accounts, or IRAs. He highlighted one of the many reasons for the bill, saying, “If you buy a stock or bond or put money into a savings account, you don’t pay sales tax on those items. But you were paying sales tax on these.”

Again we have to ask the basic question; just what in fact are precious metals coins?

Following in Indiana’s footsteps, Tennessee is eying similar changes. Two bills, HR1627 and SB1610, are working their way through the Tennessee legislature. These bills aim to “exempt the sale of gold, silver, and platinum coins and bullion that are used as mediums of exchange from sales tax.”

The "Volunteer State" has similar independence minded residents.

States that have decided not to subject their citizens to this onerous tax are acknowledging an important distinction. Sales taxes are taxes on goods that will be consumed, often called consumption goods, or final goods. With this understanding, consider the fact monetary metals like gold and silver bullion coins, rounds, and bars are not consumed. They are nothing more than stored purchasing power which is unlocked the next time they are exchanged for something else of value. They are held for the purpose of investment or wealth preservation.

What did we say here, students? What do we say of the purpose of investment or of wealth preservation?

Louisiana Reverts Back to Pillaging Its People

Prior to 2013, Louisiana charged a sales tax on constitutional money. Representative Paul Hollis, a first term member of the Louisiana House of Representatives, led the charge to make the sale of precious metals exempt from sales taxes. Unfortunately, a so-called Republican representative named Jim Morris promoted a bill that reinstated the draconian sales tax on precious metals purchases and many other things. That will cost Louisiana jobs and drive investor money out of the state.

Note the take on this. Who is spinning what? Louisiana is strategically important to whose interests?

As more states reduce the costs and barriers to precious metals ownership, those who diversify some of their savings into hard money will continue to grow, and the concept of sound money will become more widely accepted.

Every day we are seeing the American people open their minds to the historic role that sound money has played. We’ve seen a few presidential candidates talk about it. A few state legislatures, too, have recognized the danger of being totally reliant on a monetary system based on debt and unbacked fiat money, and they’re taking concrete steps to liberalize the laws surrounding gold and silver ownership.

Emphasis mine: How well do you really fully understand a monetary system based on debt or of unbacked fiat money?

While there is a tremendous amount of work to do, we should be encouraged that the stranglehold central planners have over our money is beginning to loosen. People are taking notice that something about the debt-laden economy and their money isn’t right. And people are realizing that money backed by nothing isn’t actually money at all.

What, student, have we said about this?

The Sound Money Defense League is building a grassroots bonfire of opposition to federal and state policies that undermine the dollar and steal purchasing power from the American people. Please make your most generous gift today to support Sound Money. 

So what is this? It's an offer to start some political action to get states to repeal sales taxes on precious metals sales. What would it accomplish? If we say, and we do, that we do not need any thing to back our money but ourselves, some out there faint for want of more economists' bait to pass along as some kind of authorized truth from acceptable and of course trustworthy sources. This is like one more of Gerald Celente's strong BS warnings: WE determine the terms of OUR own money. We do NOT base it on what THEY say THEIR gold and silver are worth in some other of THEIR money. We do not care. All we care to know is what THEIR money, all of it, including any commodity, might be worth in OURS. It's really just that simple.

Thursday, August 25, 2016

#95: Of Needs & Principles

This is to begin the process of enunciating some of the basic ideas surrounding the proposal:

1. Everyman (an ordinary individual) has a right to contract

Please see or re-read this: the basic law of the money contract.

This was an elegant piece Riegel wrote to prove that government issue of money was a violation of the money contract. Their issue is still money in that it is used to spit-barter. Riegel said,

When a money exchange system is instituted, the participants enter into it per force of the necessity of escaping whole barter. They have found that to split barter into two halves, namely, the process whereby one trader (the buyer) receives value and the other (the seller) receives an interchangeable credit instrument, exchange is facilitated and as exchange is facilitated, so production is promoted and wealth increased.

I'm sure Riegel intended wealth here to mean mere stuff that could be traded rather than our narrower definition of only that capable of providing income, but ours is a reasonably large subset of the whole anyway.

We infer that all potential members, who would be owners of this private monetary system, are of majority age and qualify as everyman (ordinary individuals).

2. The structure of the proposed institutions determines their function

A central but supporting organization we have called the International Valun Exchange Society (IVES), supports all validation functions for all of its independent exchange customers. It is a de facto B member of each exchange. It may contract to print out the proposed V-Check blanks or not. But it will certainly maintain the standards for them and they will preserve the designs for each and every one of them. IVES would certainly maintain a list of all distributed V-Checks (and later the Exchange Notes when they are allowed). The V-Checks are purposed to be issued from each exchange by its A members as circulating money. They will have a six month expiration date and will be invalid without one. Each exchange will inform IVES which V-Checks are active. This makes verification easier. 

We have off the shelf technologies that can make all of it much cheaper to run -at least to begin with- and we will want to take advantage of as much open source material we can, though we expect that we will have to devise the simple programming needed to manage transactions and accounts databases, where all the money really resides anyway. That's right, and before there were computers there were great books of double entry bookkeeping. Recall what we say: economics is in large part almost certainly bunk, but accounting is essential. Knowing what I know now, if I could advise students at any level which course to take, between economics and accounting; you can live without economics, but accounting is essential. In fact I fully expect that in order to get this thing off the ground at all, we'll need to secure the help of some accountants.

Each independent exchange is owned by its A membership. Each member would pay a nominal V1 dues each year in their local “public” currency. If that were today, it would be $2.65 -hardly a cup of coffee and a donut in some places these days- and more than likely this “public” money would have to be rigorously accounted for at all times and in all places.

Riegel mentioned a “sinking fund” but his ideas about implementation needed the most update as times and customs have changed somewhat. THEY do NOT appreciate it very much if you do something without being in debt to them. That part of the scenery has not changed. If it were not so, then there wouldn't be so much attention given to credit scores. I want you to let all that certainty to sink in real well too. 

Your first response might be, “well who gave them the authority to FORCE people into accepting their debt?” Look on the money and it says right there what it is, a debt instrument (that's all right as all money is that), which says it belongs to some bank with some government's name and stuff on it too, as a “brand” of THEIR money. What have we said? The music stops whenever anyone says either, “I will no longer take your money” or “I have none of your money to pay you.”

All money lending businesses would be B members of each exchange in the territory in which they operate. These separate businesses would contract with people to borrow money or arrange financing of larger items. In most instances the “pay in advance” method for all money borrowed would be used and nothing but 100% reserve financing is ever allowed; you cannot create money to lend from credit, not in this system. All the money paid for rental of the money must come from already existing money, as too must all of the money which is to be lent.

3. The proposal banishes poverty and war.

Poverty banishment has always been simple. All one ever needed to do was start valuing people rather than what they consume. Turning it upside down and giving the indigent a guaranteed income (our “natural socialism”) only works so long as the most productive in society end up with the excess money, because that's where most of the only excess money will ever come from in this system. Knowing that there is a limit to “free money” is an incentive to work. What is work? Oh yeah, that's time taken out of the rest of your life to earn your existence in money terms. Got it? If you do something productive, helpful, provide a good or service, grow something, etc. you should get paid for it and what you're worth too. Riegel maintained back in his day that most labour was greatly underpaid. That's still the case. What excuses do the capitalists have? Never mind. It's THEIR money, not yours or mine.

Here's where I want to say a word about “backing” for money. A Valun is largely issued by an employee in the act of buying his employment from an employer as an interest free loan to the employer. Under the terms of the LC, on various pay dates, the employee's Valuns are paid back to him, thus canceling the debt. 

The Valuns the employee has in his account are really his, they do not belong to anyone else and cannot be pledged for loans against them, etc. There is no need for deposit insurance. He may have them as V-Checks stuffed into his wallet along with his “public” money and cards, etc. Cards leave a trail and are not cash. Our V-Checks will provide familiar cash instruments and anonymity. Small farmers and shopkeepers have no particular reason to know with whom they trade except that they tender Valuns in payment so they must be a member of a local exchange.

The V-Check represents Valuns that the employee worked for; his time backed those Valuns. They cannot henceforth participate in any spurious price increases. The same is true of Valuns traded for precious metals through “public” currency exchange. Those Valuns are added to the supply, but they were “backed” by the precious metals (held in the IE's vault) that were exchanged for them. They cannot really be a source of price inflation. Recall what we have said, NOT ALL MONEY PARTICIPATES IN BIDDING AT EVERY SALE. So more money does not automatically lead to hyperinflation. There is speculation involved too as a cause. Why do people prefer money to have something to do with precious metals? Riegel called it a superstition and we agree. We fully expect that since 9/10ths of all Valuns will be issued from work, that none of them will enter the money supply “unbacked” by what purchased them. By comparison, better than 50% of what any government spends is unbacked simply because what it buys cannot be sold for what it was paid for. It has depreciated, sometimes rather quickly. These untaxed back spurious notes simply by their very abundance eventually result in general inflation. In theory, money that is taxed back and then re-spent would be “backed” but clearly no government ever does that; they'd rather preserve the status quo through price inflation, as much that they say things are worth “mark to model,” when they clearly are not, “mark to market.”

What everyone wants, and Riegel and Kitson before him discovered, is that if you want your money to preserve its purchasing power you design it to do that. You do that by choosing a relatively large chunk of purchasing power at a particular point in time, and then determining the current value of the chosen transaction. That piece of purchasing power worth $2.16 at the time is currently equal to $2.65 so it is their money that has changed against ours. We expect all of it to inflate against ours too; their prices for OUR money rise, prices in our money remain stable.

What “gold backed” means to a banker is not what you imagine it to be. The way THEIR institutions are currently set up and allowed to run, they need your money (which is really theirs) to swindle even more out of you, else they would … perhaps find some other business to be engaged in.

We base our Value Unit (Valun) on a dated transaction representing a good chunk of purchasing power related to the core of THEIR money; gold. Now there have been many others out there who have monkeyed around with all kinds of potential alternatives to central bank (STOLEN fiat) issued money that's then lent to captive (debt slave) governments, and their enslaved citizen populations with endless taxes, all THEIR money systems. Many of these would be money system creators have neglected or shunned gold and precious metals. This is a fatal error. Gold and silver may be superstitions, but they are also the enemy's dragons of conquest. If one does not secure them one way or another, the enemies of mankind will use them to further destroy and enslave us. Basing the Valun on a transaction involving gold is deliberately taking the bull by the horns. If one does not see this, one is most definitely a coward … or perhaps something worse.

But we don't base our money on what they say THEIR gold is worth from day to day, oh no. We base our money on what they said it was worth when it was near its record high. That's when THEIR money, their oldest brand, gold, achieved its greatest slice of purchasing power in terms of all other of THEIR brands of money; dollars, euros, pounds, yen, bitcoin, etc. Since our reference point does not change, all the prices in Valuns would remain very stable, only varying from area to area as real economies of scale and supply and demand work themselves out.

When the Valun began in 2011, it stood at $2.16 and for a time recently it was nearly $3. Right now it's at $2.65. What does this tell us? It tells us what the rest of THEIR money is worth to us. It tells THEM what OUR Valun is worth in the only brand of THEIR money we care to hold; precious metals. There are NO refunds either. This is not some get rich quick scheme or some “buy and hold” investment vehicle, although it is designed to hold its value relative to all else. It's a way to save the planet from what's at the root of killing it and us.

Our money is issued by us. It is not issued by a government, corporation or bank.
It doesn't have to be paid back once it is issued. It is issued based on worth rather than debt. If it were the only money available, just how much of it would we willingly pay for 50% of what the US government currently spends money on? Very little. There would not be war without funding for it. This has been the point down through history too. So anytime someone pigeon memes about wars being caused by religion or something other than money, you can call the person on it. No one goes to war and fights and dies without being paid for it, period!

What would be the point of any war aimed at stirring up trouble so some rich bastards can make even more money without working for it by stealing resources form someone else if the only money to pay for it was ours? What they do is assuredly capitalism, which has been sold to the rest of us as what we could expect if we … just worked hard enough, knew the right people, went to the right schools, etc. etc. Most of us know by now that it's all largely BS, as more and more people are waking up to understand where we are and what brought us here. We design our system and our institutions not to be broken by criminal minds with criminal intentions. We will hence discriminate! This means throwing the criminal out; the precise meaning of the word. Since we cannot do so in THEIR system, we will most certainly do so in OURS!

4. It used to be that a man's word was his bond. That was fine as long as we were dealing with mostly honest men and women. The system, THEIR system has largely spoiled some, ruined others, devastated many more, especially made it seemingly worthwhile to cheat, steal, avoid work, waste time and resources, wear people out needlessly, etc. One cannot travel through one burned out village or town across America or for that matter increasing parts of the developed world without wondering just how so much wealth could have been destroyed. Meanwhile one sees that the stock market is high. Where's the prosperity to back it up? Oh, it's still out there for the few who can afford it. But that number is growing smaller all the time.

This is all well researched and verified and certainly tied together because most people badly neglected their basic reading and writing skills and preferred spending too much time in front of a television set. Good thing most don't anymore. To some people, the internet is just interactive TV. But it isn't. If I were sitting across from you right now, I would say things exactly as I write them.

We have neglected money because it was never ours. If we knew that we had some and knew that it was ours, and there would be opportunities opened up because of it, then more work would get done and these neglected assets would be recovered, repourposed and even with the present burdens of taxation lifted, more real wealth capable of providing an income, would be possible.

Where is the money going to come from? Not from THEM. Not without strings attached. You need your own money and you need your own self respect. These go hand in hand. It's not particularly funny how the fiat to issue money and self-respect have both been STOLEN by THEM and what we're given to replace it is some politically expedient victim status! No, our proposed very simple Labour Contract (LC) is the method to achieve your money. But we need to recruit as many as we can. What are the basic rules

1) Must be 18 or older
2) Must be able to prove legal residency (3 witnesses -could be documents- will do)
3) Must be approved by two already existing A members 

and now we add a fourth,

4) Must agree to pay a once a year V1 dues in “public” money. That would be a minimum of $2.16 and right now it would be $2.65. This secures an A membership/ownership in their local independent exchange.

We need membership. We need to start membership drives. Deciding to have your own money is not something someone does and Abra-cadabra presents it to you. That's THEIR way. In fact, anything that's ever presented to you, if you never issue it, it cannot be yours. Think for a moment just what that rules out.

We need to think short term and long term. We may need a simple very direct one page Manifesto drawn up to announce to the world at large just what we intend. Our organizations will be private, but a lot of people are eligible to form exchanges, own and use them, etc. We'll need legal minds that run way outside the box, back to basic common law. Other matters we will be working toward as well, such as our own land registry. That's very important. It was suggested by a chap over in Britain who's given quite a lot of himself to the cause. What's the cause? Ultimately it amounts to a longstanding economic redress of grievances, getting what's been stolen from us back, but doing it so as not to uproot the current crop of tares among the wheat. Much of what we may end up with may be badly ruined, but with our money, we will have a chance of bringing it back. Without it, there's literally no chance at all. So it really kind of is up to you.


David Burton
venlead2013@aol.com

Current Hypothetical Value of a Hypothetical Value 

[8/25/16: Q: Mr. Burton. What exactly would each V-Check say on them? 

A: We presently anticipate the ready need for V-Checks in the following denominations: V½ (the half Valun), V1, V2, V5 & V10 identified below by an *. Here presented with current comparable purchasing power in USD's (8/23/16) would be a complete list of intended V-Checks and eventually Exchange Notes:

*1/2 Valun = $1.32
*1 Valun = $2.64
*2 Valuns = $5.29
*5 Valuns = $13.22
*10 Valuns = $26.44
20 Valuns = $52.89
50 Valuns = $132.21
100 Valuns = $264.43
500 Valuns = $1,322.13

Of course people would be entitled to write personal checks for any amount in Valuns and cends.

Obverse side:

V-Checks would have the word V-Check, the name of the organization forming the local independent exchange (IE), the IVES symbol, some large numerical designation ½ Valun, 1 Valun, 2 Valuns, etc. The obverse side would have the words, “Bearer herewith tenders (whatever #) International Standard Value Units.” Obviously the language would change with the territory. This side would also have a place for the expiration date (always 6 months from the day they are presented to the member) and the number identifying the check. The expiration date must appear (and probably a particular standard for the stamp or whatever is necessary too) or the V-Check is invalid.

Reverse side:

Around the edges, it would indicate the number of Valuns; ½ Valun, 1 Valun, 2 Valuns, etc. Inside would be an advertisement for a B member business in that independent exchange. B member businesses would buy spaces on these reverse V-Check sides in “public” money, for now because we will need to pay for printing runs of V-Check blanks using THEIR money until we have what it takes to make them ourselves and pay for them in our own money. 

V-Checks only need last 6 months, but we want the ink to be indelible. The paper they're made of could be based on the value and the number desired; we'd probably print the ½ Valun on cheaper paper than the other V-Checks and probably each would get larger, the V½ would be slightly larger than a dollar bill and each successive V-check would be slightly larger than its predecessor. After all, look at the comparable numbers in dollars.]

[8/26/2016: Q: I have read your blog and I still don't get how any Valuns could ever be taxed as income? Please explain.

A: All right. First let's be clear that when it comes to governments, it makes very little difference how we see things, it matters how the governments see things, and what the governments are compelled to do because those behind the curtains who run THEIR money are in control

The business with the work to be done is paying taxes. They may be a B member of your local exchange, but they still pay taxes. Under law they are required by THEIR labor laws, to handle employment in THEIR money and make sure that, as far as possible, all taxes are paid. Governments never consider the requirements of their citizens, in fact they usually consider more ways to rob the public. They consider their own requirements ahead of those of all others. If you happen to feel otherwise about it, you deserve the eventual slap reality will render you for your insouciant assumption. It's time to grow up! Being a child forever is not bliss. A government's first mission is to prevent being overthrown. That has been the very substance of governance as an institution since from however far into the past you wish to go.

We have governments that have chosen to tax the labor of all working people everywhere -a idiotic and dangerous policy- and to use what are called “progressive” income taxes as part of this policy. The policy is always dangerous because it amounts to deliberate theft from the public instigated by those who actually own the money, so it proves the money does not belong to you.

You can usually assume that regressive is the actual intention everywhere you see the word “progressive” used – political “progressives” are actually political “regressives.” Taxing income accomplishes not only STEALING DIRECTLY FROM LABOUR (and they get to “withhold” too) and thus causing a deliberate disincentive to work, it preserves the status of the rich; those with so much money they'll never have to work for the rest of their lives!
 

Progressive income taxes preserves the elites. That was the REAL intension behind “progressive” income taxes, to “regress” the working people taken as a class of people by all the sociologists, economists, political theorists, etc. for the last 250 years or more, all those people paid generously, or not, in THEIR money, to say and print and distribute their ideas too. By the way, Karl Marx had a banker appointed handler (a Scotsman I believe), and was paid by the bankers to publicize his ideas. Income taxes come right out of the Commie Manifesto which in turn was paid for by elitists to bilk the working people everywhere out of their FIAT and their SELF RESPECT! OK? Just because someone thinks they're smart does not give them the right to STEAL, CHEAT or LIE and get away with it. Not forever anyway.

Any government will see that a business paid its employees in “public” money, and they must also see that Valuns were paid its employees too. There will never be any attempt to hide it from them. Any alternative or supplementary money operating anywhere must still account to its government for any taxes owed, to be paid of course in “public” money not alternative or supplementary money.

Now, it's certainly bad enough that most people have not awakened to understanding that literally NONE of the existing money out there is in fact theirs. The hasty child rushes to the conclusion, “I have a chunk of gold and it's worth something.” Fine, want to barter that away? It will then be gone and you'll cry like the child that you are, attempting to preserve purchasing power, but unable to recognize that all real value comes forth through yourself (innate wealth) and those people around you (their innate wealth), not things.

So income taxes will be required. Anyone paid in Valuns that they issued, receives them as payments in response to the loan (at 0 interest) of the money issued by the employee to the employer on the first day of work. The employee's payments in Valuns show up and are voided on the businesses' books. But they show up as income to the employee nonetheless. In the United States, the rules require that a comparable dollar amount (usually based on the last date in a taxing period) be figured for the income upon which taxes are due. That's easy enough for everyone to comply with. 1099's will do. What is probably also required is that more taxes be withheld to cover the projected extra taxes. We reiterate that it would become second nature to all VEN members (our market, our Valun exchange network) to save “public” money for all that requires payment in THEIR money and reserve Valuns for what we really need from the rest of us to live on.

Recall that the proposed Valun is right now approximately 2.65 times the purchasing power of a dollar. Here's what adding Valuns gives you in comparable purchasing power:

V1,000 = $2,650
V5,000 = $12,250
V10,000 = $26,500
V20,000 = $53,000
V50,000 = $122,500
V100,000 = $265,000 

A Labour Contract (LC) would specify how many Valuns would be paid any when. The total paid out at the end of the tax period is income subject to taxes in THEIR money. You'd need to make sure you have enough of THEIR money to pay the extra taxes.

[/28/16: Q: I get that the organization of this thing matters. You say that each exchange is owned by its A members. Then you say you want some service organization called IVES. These are all grass roots democracies. Each exchange would then I suppose select delegates that would represent them at IVES. Something like that. So IVES is owned by who or what?

A: IVES is the servant and the creation of the independent exchanges (IEs) the nodes of the monetary system: the entire collection of IEs being the VEN or Valun exchange network, our grand market with the single ledger Riegel identified as a prime factor in deterring dishonest or discreditable behavior of members. This is not to be a lawless monetary system. It is to be based on a few very simple agreements.

A members that own each of the local exchanges would also own IVES and the relationship would likely be considered on a per capita basis; each member getting one vote in any and all IVES related elections. Thus the entire VEN is a private institution based on democratic ownership with IVES perhaps serving functions better served by one institutional function than having to provide these functions at each exchange. For instance, in previous posts, I have tasked IVES with certain juridical functions, to serve as an arbitrator concerning any possible disputes between members, should they arise. Our intention is to promote honesty and discredit, expose and dispose of dishonesty.


So how big a thing must this be to get off the ground? Pretty big. We'd need a minimum of 3 exchanges in each of the 50 states in the US for example. That would be 150 exchanges supporting 1 IVES which might task the buying and selling of advertising to local B member businesses but whose business is to ultimately support trade in Valuns using V-Checks, with a population of say 6 million. They could be printed anywhere, but they must follow certain predictable standards and someone has to maintain a catalog of all the active and inactive ones. This is all IVES functions. They don't care about who does what with any of the monetary tokens circulating through the VEN. They only care if they are active or have been cashed out; deposited. In cases of replacement, the old V-Check is expired and so its number is retired and -in accounting- the local money associated with the expired V-Check is reassigned to a new V-Check number. IVES maintains the codes and catalog of all valid and invalid V-Check numbers. Aps are devised to convey a question, whether a V-Check number is valid. The IVES hub would know. Also, since we like redundancy where it can add useful function, it would be assumed that each IE would know the valid numbers of its own open circulating V-Checks. Verification should be made as easy as possible with open source materials only.]

Friday, August 19, 2016

#94: Q & A – Various Topics

Q: Concerning banks, what's your particular gripe with them?

A: Banks do two things which, were they allowed elsewhere, would be deemed criminal;

1) they lend what they do not have and employ their “credit” to do so (So Riegel was right, they don't lend money and furthermore since the loans are straight create and repay plus interest, the net result is less money – money lent this way takes money out of the system) and further

2) they take back that which was never created / issued the interest on their loans. It's the subtlest con in the world that has been going on and allowed to go on since forever, because some people don't have any money and the only thing the rest of society seems to think appropriate to do about it is that even the poor should go into debt borrowing money at interest to live on. Let all that sink in, if you please.

The former fraud we call fractional reserve lending and the latter fraud is usury. We cannot do anything about either of them, sorry. Railing about them, getting angry, getting politically worked up about them, studying them in minute detail so one knows the particulars of this or that financial crime, emotional or intellectual entanglements of any kind, none of that amounts to … anything productive or positive. It's THEIR system and THEIR money. That simple perception is what literally separates men from boys.

From now on, we draw a line in the sand between the “children” and the grown-ups. There aren't many grown-ups either. Read Quigley's Tragedy and Hope and perhaps get a few lessons in real history. Some of you might even have a “right of passage” kind of mental experience. There's too much THEY have invested at every level so that people remain children. The hasty children are the “gold bugs” who continue to say things like that there could ever be a free market in precious metals, or that if we just priced them high enough we could “back” our money with them and that would somehow stop inflation, etc. all without the slightest consideration whether in fact banks and governments should have the right to issue money in the first place. These people envision a world where pieces of metal actually circulate in trade and people carry them around in sacks. They would also carry loaded firearms around in such a society.

When it comes to designing the honest monetary system for a future civilization, these people are jackasses, and idiots! I do listen to them to follow their take on the present system however, because they are critical of it. It doesn't make them right about their solutions, because they are cursed by idealistic thinking which is a waste of time and they usually do not know the innermost workings of the present system and to what lengths THEY will go to keep it from failing. These “children” may be capable of providing news, and that is all. They have NOTHING TO OFFER as a replacement monetary system for the present one.

We do. The precious metals in our system would exist as a buffer between us and them, makes us buyers in THEIR rigged markets (and we don't care about any of that since those are THEIR markets). It may allow us to remove more precious metals from THEIR system as perhaps THEIR money is dumped in favour of ours. But clearly all that is a maybe, as there are probably a thousand children to one genuine grown-up these days.

Since we never consented to it, the present monetary system we all use is a tyranny. There is no sensible explanation otherwise. Anyone coming forth who professes that the present system is “scientific” or otherwise deserving of some unwarranted awe and respect are likewise … rather immature characters. Since the present means of exchange (including bitcoin which has just been identified as a CIA toy) is decidedly a tyranny, that means there's no reasonable concessions, no possible repairs, and certainly no compromises at all possible. THEIRS has to go its own way and OURS another.

It's one further reason we really do need our own parallel system and our own parallel money. It's only parallel until theirs fails, because, both of these time old banking practices are in defiance of natural law and make any organizations built upon them subject to failure due in often part to the exposure of the inevitable corruption required to keep it alive and a fatal loss of confidence among the public, plus the looting, plundering, and war that it all causes as a result. They and their system have failed before and they will certainly fail again. According to Jim Willie and others, the biggest banks are already dead.

We cannot do anything about THEM. So what do we propose for our system?

The proposed remedy to fractional reserve lending is to forbid it within our own institutions; our exchanges, our VEN, IVES, etc. We also separate the transaction clearing and money lending functions, so that the latter take on their own risk and should they fold, the entire system is not affected. The Valun remains the same and all ordinary transactions remain uninterrupted. In all cases, fulfillment of Credit Contracts within the VEN raises one's reputation. These would be credit scores available to all members throughout the VEN, enabling each of us to determine our credit worthiness, a very important factor when anything bigger than just buying your daily or monthly subsistence is concerned.


We address usury chiefly by outlawing it – since it is against natural law anyway - and substituting in its place the practice of paying the price to borrow the money up front. If you do that then obviously that price, whatever it is, has come from already existing money and if you can't come up with the rental fee up front, you don't get to borrow the money. Maybe we should call this the “down payment method,” since the concept is similar; one puts down “earnest money,” which is in fact the fee for borrowing some larger sum of money and that sum is tendered based on the lender's appraisal of the borrower's credit rating within the VEN. As we say, this is more than about money, this is about building real reputation in a community and who knows? perhaps extending that worldwide; establishing the renown of your own innate wealth throughout the VEN.

We'll say it again. What paying up front, the “down payment” or “earnest money” method does, is cause borrowers to obtain, from already existing money, the price of borrowing additional money, rather than being asked to pay back that which was never created. If people knew how much it costs to borrow, they would perhaps be less likely to borrow excessively and get themselves into serious debt. Our Credit Contract rating system, and there will also be one for Labour Contracts successfully completed, will give each of us an idea of our various reputations.

A few details; Labour Contract (LC) ratings would have no Valuns listed. We don't care how many Valuns someone issued. That's private. We care how many LCs were successfully completed. Perhaps a lender would like to know the current income in Valuns of the borrower. That's reasonable. The way one acquires credit worthiness is the same in our system as in theirs, except we make the information available as part of the business of each exchange, to members only of course.

Q: Since a healthy economy requires inputs of additional money as you say, where's this money, in sufficient quantities to borrow, to come from in your system?

A: Simply put, finance (buying something you can't afford, taking your “time preference” and paying for it, etc.) would be raised from each member's excess Valuns; savings and ONLY if any when they are pledged to receive a return from being lent by a financial business.

This relates to what we associated with electrical force or water pressure, the pools of liquidity, setting in motion the functional momentum of the monetary system.

Under the proposal, Valuns come from a few sources:

1) Each A member gets V200 to start. Believe it or not, someone in a discussion early on about the proposed Valun system called it the “Monopoly grant” to each member, a reference to the Monopoly board game: You pass go, collect V200.

2) Each A member may elect to begin running LCs and generate/issue more Valuns as they work their present jobs. Unfortunately the limiting factor is income taxes, which all must be paid in THEIR money. So you will need to be paid in THEIR money at least enough to pay THEIR taxes.

3) Each A member falling below the subsistence level adopted by each exchange would issue Valuns for subsistence.

4) A and B members may decide to trade in their dollars, euros, pounds, yen, yuan, rubles, etc. for Valuns. Each instance of this adds more Valuns to the supply. The precious metals are retained against taxes, etc. by each exchange. Valuns issued through this kind of exchange are non-redeemable, as you would be exchanging your “public” money, for the monetary base itself (Valuns issued by us) and there is no exchange out of it. This prevents ALL money laundering and other dishonest speculative practices, such as daunt all crypto-currency efforts (bitcoin, recently revealed to be a CIA toy), etc.

But of course those other misbegotten attempts at money, yeah that's right, every last one of the crypto-currencies out there, are based on things not people and they are commodities pricing all other commodities, like measuring with an elastic measuring stick that gives you different lengths for an inch each day, so they aren't by literal definition very good money at all, not reliable to measure value in any way, though they may be money in the sense of performing the usual split barter function of money; only that someone may be paid or be receiving income in them.

Q: You said that you would allow all Social Security recipients and those with other kinds of pensions to issue Valuns. Would you allow these same people to issue even more Valuns for their subsistence? I'm confused. 

A: If you receive Social Security (excluding Medicare, etc.) or receive distributions from a pension, or both, it would be the policy of each exchange to allow you to issue a comparable number of Valuns, usually determined on a monthly basis. If this amount exceeds the subsistence level set by the exchange, then no further Valuns would be issued.

We even suggested that these members would have the right to what would have been their allowed issuance of Valuns right back to inception. But in order to do that, they would have to provide the comparable dollar, euro, etc. amount that was allowed them on or around 11/2/2011 and they would have to agree to accepting that amount for all the months since, not an amount that might have gone up over the years due to cost of living adjustments. We realized we were giving the elderly, retired and disabled somewhat of an edge in this regard, but we would rather these “pools of liquidity” be in these people's accounts.

Q: Somewhere you mentioned museums as sources of income for an exchange. Please explain.

A: This was a speculative idea I had when we discussed the proposal years ago, but I never wrote it up because there were other matters I considered more important to understand about the proposal first.

A museum is after all a treasure storehouse that people visit to get to look at the treasures inside. In various countries they have collections of the treasures of their cultural heritage that are preserved usually in state museums, though occasionally one finds great private museums too. In discussion, we advocated a means to add more Valuns into a community through the appraisal and democratic judgement of various treasures to be housed and preserved in a museum. Each exchange could have one, or perhaps a few exchanges could sponsor one.

Objects would be submitted for inclusion that would be appraised as worth at least V1,000 (at 8/11/16 V1 = $2.64 or $2,640). These objects would then be judged by all members and perhaps the top 10 only would be selected. Those members whose objects were selected to go into the museum would be rewarded the proceeds in Valuns. Then when the museum gets some notoriety, members pay in Valuns (less, perhaps ½ Valun), non members in “public” currency (slightly more, perhaps $3) to visit. That money which is not Valuns gets turned into the exchange, sold for precious metals and the Valuns from that used to pay the staff of the museum. Treasures in the museum might be sold to members for the number of Valuns that placed them there; if the original owners were paid V10,000 for their artifact, if the same thing is sold it should fetch at least V10,000. The Valuns would go into the account of the museum to perhaps add more to the facilities or add some other treasures, or for whatever the museum proprietors might require. See, I'm assuming this is a private enterprise business.

Some museums may specialize in some particular kind of thing like classic cars / trucks, or a museum of geologic or mineral displays, or an old farm equipment museum, or a regular art museum, or something perhaps quite different. It would sort of be up to the community that sponsored it to determine what it would be.

Much better to have such places adjacent to or associated with larger “members only” or “members preferred places,” perhaps resorts, where recreational facilities are close by. For most of this, members get very reduced fees compared with non members. These museums and possible associated resort parks, etc. would probably be B members of each exchange; independent private enterprise businesses.

Q: Just how do you ever see Valuns breaking into being used to pay rent?

A: This was the question the young man in Tacoma asked professor Tom Greco. It may come slowly. The older and more secure the properties would probably begin using Valuns first, and once and if the Valun economy gets traction behind it, perhaps some split payment in some “public” money and some Valuns is possible, rather than the entire rent in “public” money. The landlord might like to see your LC ratings or CC ratings (Credit Contracts) to determine whether you're good for it, etc. A lease is even possible in some instances of course.

Q: Could you see Valuns perhaps used in occasional employment around a neighbourhood as long as some of their money is paid too?

A: Perhaps. The minimum wage jobs would see the greatest benefit as they could raise their relative income without changing the amount of “public” money they were receiving. You can see though that it amounts to much more than just having and sharing your money. Your money has to be spent for things you really need. People have to get back to finding needs and filling them as the Valun system makes that once again a realistic possibility for more people because OUR money creates OUR markets. It could do all of that, but It takes organization, because basing money on people requires people to know about it and enroll and begin using it.

Q: Could you provide the relationship between a Constitutional dollar and a Valun?

A: Yes, that's possible.

The stated 1792 Constitutional dollar ($1 Const.) consisted of 731 ¼ grains or .7734375 troy ounces of silver. So we're talking a coin about ¾ of an ounce, slightly larger

We have for 8/16/16 V1 = $2.64 and silver at $19.85 the troy ounce spot and up to $24.81 bid or V9.43 (9 valuns 43 cends) per oz of silver. Now take the Constitutional dollar size and one gets V7.29.

Therefore 1 Constitutional dollar = V7.29 on 8/16/16 – or $19.25 which gives you almost 20 to 1 between an FRN and a Constitutional dollar. On this date, V7.29 = $1 Const.

Q: I would have you consider that by your suggested terms, no one would be trading any money for Valuns as they could never get any of it back out. You would nevertheless adhere to the exchange rate even if little or no exchange ever takes place? And also have you ever considered the effect of some individual member with a lot of money exchanging it for Valuns and basically owning the entire community through this alternative money?

To answer the first question, of course we would. To answer the second, we may indeed desire to limit such exchanges for just such reasons. It had indeed occurred to me that this could be a real problem. It isn't that we are fans of the usual three apocalyptic little frogs; liberty, equality and fraternity; it's just that we have adequate experience to know that those with a whole lot more money than all the rest of us put together might cause us some amount of trouble. We recently heard, not that we're surprised, that the CIA is heavily involved with bitcoin. Need we have to say any more about this affront to an honest solution involving real money that comes from us and not from some elites? We certainly do not want our system to be invaded by these types, though we assume some will anyway, as they seek survival as much as any of us.

There is something about our members occasionally wanting to exchange some of their “public” money for ours, and quite another for a single member to want to exchange several hundred thousand dollars, euros, pounds, yen, etc. for Valuns. We think as a matter of fact that there may be tax implications these days for moving more than $10,000 through their system. You do that and you alert the IRS. I'm sure there are similar arrangements in other countries. So there will definitely have to be exchange limits.

Because of this, one implication of accepting this proposal is that all “public” money is automatically determined to be used to pay for “public” bills, including all debts in THEIR money, public or private. For all the rest, including a growing share of your living expenses, you'd spend your Valens. They would mostly circulate in your own local community and spur small business in ways that would be otherwise impossible.

But there is one way someone could invest in Valuns and end up with dollars, euros, etc. It's basic, want to know what it is? First a member makes an exchange of dollars, euros, pounds, yesn, etc. for Valuns. We'd say that the member could not be a B member (a business) because we'd have no way of knowing (and we really can't know anyway) the origin of that “public” money. So for now we limit money exchange to A members only. The “public” money is immediately exchanged for precious metals by the exchange and the Valuns are presented to the member as either a deposit to his/her account or as V-Checks. Now that member pays for something (materials) in Valuns, the labour in Valuns is self financing but participates in determining the finished product price in Valuns – but then that product is sold instead for dollars, euros, pounds, yen, etc. and then obviously through the production process, the “investor” might get their “public” money back.

Those of you who have been following the discussion will instantly see the incredibly stupid nature of this line of reasoning; that we habitually believe that any money we have on us or in accounts with our names on them is really ours. Someone could actually do as described. What do we do if we don't like it? We let it happen, because eventually THEIR money will be no more and then everyone will be using OUR money. That's the intention.

After all, E. C. Riegel certainly deserves credit for first enunciating the clear proposal to eventually renounce the use of all “public” money as inherently illegitimate by the nature of its issuance (and we include here all silver and gold and platinum and palladium, etc. ), as we identify it as issued from STOLEN FIAT by the bankers, if blame be necessary (though as we see it, absolutely pointless), and perhaps (not certain this case can always be made) through the unwitting connivance of certain kinds of people who fancy themselves “change agents,” or otherwise gifted to be leaders of society to push and prod us, usually “the masses” to them, into doing some fairly ridiculous things, like making weapons and going to war, when we aren't otherwise being subjected to a full spectrum dominance free range slavery; yes, politicians and the rest of the government and those interests immediately behind them. Who benefits? Who controls the money? That's right.

I'd like you to ponder one thing before we leave: the actual mode of banking has always been to lend money into existence from their own credit. The money they lend out is repaid by the money paid back (and canceled, so it cannot add to inflation directly) - PLUS INTEREST, which was never created and ends up in the pockets of the bankers. This frankly proves beyond any reasonable argument the parasitic nature of the present monetary order. Your money? No, THEIR money, stupid! Really, it's time to be getting our own.

David Burton
venlead2013@aol.com

Current Hypothetical Value of a Hypothetical Value Unit

[8/22/16:Q: Perhaps I'm getting that the price stability that matters would be in Valuns. What then would the price of gold be in Valuns? Silver too?

A: Yes, price stability only matters in Valuns, that's correct. We expect that prices in all THEIR money will rise as that's what their monetary system is designed to allow to happen; ALL THEIR money tends to inflate. Gold and silver inflate as well as judged in any of THEIR other money. At inception V1,000 = 1 oz Au BU and so even if $2,160 = 1 oz Au is ever exceeded, a new inception is started above the old transaction, never below it. The price for 1 troy oz of gold in Valuns should remain around V1,000.  Should gold reach $3,000 spot close, we allow up to 25% for bid making it $3,750 and at that new inception V1 = $3.75 instantaneously; all Valuns in existence assume the new valuation. Then as the price of gold falls, if it ever does again in dollars, the value of Valuns increases. And if dollars are ever incapable of pricing gold or silver they become instantly provincial and parochial money and lose instantly their worldwide reserve currency status. Then the properly constituted IVES seeks another of their strongest currencies which is capable of pricing gold and silver for us and we set a new inception by this stronger money, whatever it is. It could be Chinese Yuan.  In any case, the price for a troy oz. of gold should remain at or close to V1,000.  Silver being based on the gold price is going to fluctuate more in price, because that's how bimetalic systems must work.  Silver began at V19.55 and might stay close to there, though I would expect a little more price relativity in Valuns for silver than for gold. 

Q: I had a question concerning residence and VEN membership. If I lived somewhere but traveled a lot on business, would I be able to be a member of lots of different exchanges, anywhere I went?

A: Good question. You would be an A member of one exchange, where you would have your A membership account. Any other exchange you would do business with as a B member; if you wanted to set up an account to hold Valuns for you locally while you were there, which could be convenient for you. Assuming there are exchanges in any of the places you would normally go, you could establish B membership accounts in as many as you wanted. You would only be able to issue Valuns from one account, your A membership account and all your B membership accounts would be required to maintain a positive balance.

Q: If I took some V-Checks from one exchange and wanted to spend them in the vicinity of another exchange would they be accepted? What about local redemption/deposits?

A: Every V-Check would have an ID# and there could be simple aps designed to detect and verify these numbers. As Riegel said, it's all one ledger, not thousands of them. If you're in Minneapolis (and an A member there) and visit Acapulco and there is an exchange there, you go in and present your ID to the clerk identifying you as a member. They can open a B member account for you in Acapulco, temporary or permanent, arrange all typical money transfers, etc. They can exchange your Minneapolis V-Checks for Acapulco ones too. If they're expired, you'll probably have to run them through a B member account, which could take a few days. There is only one ledger, though it is scattered and decentralized.]

[8/23/16: Q: You say that your Valun is based on people but it's based on a transaction involving dollars and gold. Please explain.

A: THEIR money is all based on the quantity of THEIR money; the things themselves, while ours is based on how much of OUR money each A member gets to issue literally on the credit of the community; how many so called “free” units of exchange, money, would be allowed in this proposed Riegel based system, how many each exchange would allow an A member (a human being, an everyman only) to claim for indigence, etc.

All circulating Valuns will identify themselves from whence they are issued on the obverse sides of circulating V-Checks with things like The People of Someplace or perhaps some other identifying acronym chosen by the local members to distinguish themselves as an independent exchange, an IE, a private business whose members will all be its owners, as they will be issuing and backing their own money. 

You nearly got the basis of the Valun correct. You omitted the TIME of the transaction and details, which are important. We stated the transaction as 1 oz. Au = V1,000 where 1 oz. Au = $2,160 on 11/2/2011. This gives our initial fair market value for the Valun of $2.16. Now what's the current value of that Valun?

We've given it to you in US dollars, you'd have to determine what it is in your own currency and have that recognized by the properly constituted International Valun Exchange Society (IVES).

We offered that 1.57 (EUR) = V1 at inception
that 1.36 (GBP) = V1 at inception
that ¥170 (JPY) = V1 at inception

Now what about today's gold and silver prices? We arrived at the initial prices the same way. You want to find out what the nearest close on the price of gold in your “public” currency is and then add 25% to that as a possible bid to actually acquire the gold or silver. All our calculations take this into account. We want to be acquiring gold and silver if we take in any of THEIR money. If we end up acquiring more simply because we are willing to pay more, then so be it!

We take that bid price and divide it by 1,000 and that becomes the current thousandth part of an oz of gold (our how much current gold is in our Valun; the CGP or current gold portion). We then compare that with the inception. Subtract this latest number from the initial amount. In most cases you'll have a negative number. If it's a positive number, then the latest gold close has exceeded inception and a new inception may result. Now you take the negative of the initial Valun (always -2.16 unless a new inception happens) and add the negative difference to it (you will have a larger negative number) and multiply the sum by -1 to reverse the sign and you have today's Valun.

Today's Au spot close = $1340.40
Inception Au spot close = $1,728.00

Today's Au bid = $1,675.50 (8/19/16)
Inception Au bid $2,160.00 (11/2/11)

Today's 1/1000th of an oz of gold = $1.68 (This the current gold portion or the gold content of a Valun – the rest is purchasing power represented by the extra gold or silver required to achieve inception of $2.16.)

Inception = $2.16 (until a new inception which would always be higher not lower.)

$1.68 - $2.16 = -$.48

The difference = -.48
Add the negative initial Valun -2.16 (a constant until new inception, if ever)

-.48 – 2.16 = -2.64 (x -1) = $2.64 The present Valun in their money.

Today's Ag (Silver) price is $19.30


Today's Ag bid = $24.13

Simply divide this by the present Valun
24.13 / 2.64 = 9.14

The present value of 1 oz. Ag = V9.14

Multiply that by .7734375 to get your $1 Const. In Valuns on 8/19/16 of V7.07

Q: Could you give us your opinion of the work of Eustace Mullins?

A: Well, Mullins was the secretary to Ezra Pound, who was in fact one of the most important literary figures of the 20th century. Pound was responsible for the literary making of both Ernest Hemingway and James Joyce and others. Pound tasked Mullins with researching the Federal Reserve system. His torch has been picked up by others such as G. Edward Griffin and Bill Still. 

Despite his deep research, Mullins had an imperfect understanding of money and certainly would not have quite understood where all of the arguments must ultimately lead; if a monetary system is really nothing but a huge accounting machine with one ledger where the tokens are mere instances of this exchange system, and since money is destroyed hence it must be issued, ELSE ECONOMIES DIE, then tell me, who has the real first right to issue money? That's right; you and I do. It's called OUR fiat; we issue money on the proviso that we would work or trade to acquire back what we have issued: that is called “backing.” Doing that, one cancels one's issue and hence one's issue cannot contribute meaningfully to inflation. Mullins wouldn't have understood much of that. He was probably a committed “gold bug.” We would contend as he did that making wars to create debt does a lot more to actually squeeze more money out of the river of money that flows at interest from the banks, than letting the poor have their right to issue by their own fiat for their subsistence. But you asked me about Mullins.

As far as I know, Eustace Mullins was as honest a researcher as we have had and that goes for those who picked up his torch too. These men all seemingly believe that what they report is the truth. Their revelations and evidence have been conclusively substantiated by the work of many others. Richard Grove, Stefan Molyneux and Texe Marrs, to name just three, would know all of this evidence and even more by now. People are waking up to the central bankers' tremendous bloody scam. What the people at large (everyman) have yet to convince themselves of, is that there is not a thing wrong with money issue by fiat and that in fact others have, with or without intent, stolen that right from everyman. We have shown that the fiat we consider in our proposal would in fact result in far less excess money issued than is generated now by the present system.

A big difference between THEIR system and our proposed one, perhaps the actual biggest difference, is that each A member is an actual owner of the entire system. The money it affords you the right to issue really would belong to you. This is authentic democracy because no matter how rich the richest A member might become, they are still a single human being. Every A member has one vote at elections of all exchange officers, etc.] 

[8/24/16: Q: Did you happen to catch James Corbett's interview with a man in Japan running a bitcoin group?

A: (Gosh darn-it! I did not want to have to say another word about bitcoin.)

The most important things these gentlemen said (and both are assuredly gentlemen) were that bitcoin was still in the development stage and was viewed as a way forward. We have made our points quite clear and consistent (and we would easily breach the confidence of some by changing course in any way whatsoever from what we have always advocated):

1) bitcoin, and believe me, most if not all crypto currencies, are commodities pricing other commodities and since that is so, there are no advantage over any other money. In fact what on earth is any money good for, if prices fall while the money becomes or remains scarce? Any quantity of anything capable of being counted (that's what it means) is capable of attracting speculators, who will gladly wager, play guessing games on the future prices of this or that; making money on their money without having to produce or provide anything in return; capitalism. Commodities speculation is capitalism and those doing it are capitalists. If you aren't rich enough, forget it, you can't be one, by definition.

2) Stretching the possible definitions of capitalism, an ism with capital, is for the most part strong delusion and is done chiefly to sucker as many narcissistic “investors” as possible, fleece for the wolves. Promising talent is talked into playing along with “the system” all the time, when the system is all about central planning, “big useless plans,” and “build it and they will come,” idealism, without any slight concern about what money is and what it must accomplish and why exactly it doesn't. And bitcoin wont matter.

3) Speculators (who bet on the rises and falls in bitcoin by employing the typical buy and hold strategies) sometimes speculate having little or no real information, but are merely using their often tremendous capital (cash in whatever money) to “make a market” where one is weak or may not even previously exist. There are quite a lot of people out there promoting bitcoin; trying to drum up business for it, etc.

4) The principal objection to money as a quantity measuring the trading value of any other commodity is that this makes the price determination mechanism flexible, like having a different increment for an inch every day, utterly useless in making real long term financial decisions. If one switched to something bankers have a lot of, like gold or silver, well the bankers will be happy to oblige. They'll merely be returning to their older version of their dialectic; either THEIR credit or THEIR gold. They'll of course run their fractional reserve and usury scams (all “Austrian” economists certainly agree with and approve of these) and applying these only to partial stores of value in precious metals (not even their own money) and the other end of the bankers' dialectic will be in play and they can do as they please. How will that solve anything? It wont of course.

How could you have gotten so easily fooled? You took THEIR word for it, and you had no right to do that. Don't ask an “Austrian.” They all believe in usury as a natural right, when it is in mathematical certainty, stealing. If you don't happen to see it our way, check yourself into the criminal social parasite category, as that's where you belong. How can you ever get an “honest” monetary system from a bunch of dishonest economists

And so help me, when is anyone else going to see the obvious? Showing us a worthless Zimbabwean trillion dollar note proves nothing about fiat currencies, absolutely nothing, since ALL OF THEM, EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE YOU CAN NAME, WAS ISSUED BY A BANK OR A GOVERNMENT AND NOT BY THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES! All fiat to issue money has been stolen from us.

Our proposal is based on a unit of purchasing power defined by TIME not some quantity. So far, the experiment, established on principles specified by E. C. Riegel and Arthur Kitson before him, has proven correct; the proposed international standard Value Unit (Valun) has since its inception held its own against ALL of THEIR money including precious metals because it was designed to accomplish this

Since a Valun is not a quantity, any unit of it is always going to be the same worldwide. It is based on a transaction involving gold not on gold itself. It is not “backed” by gold at issue, it is “backed” by the people (everyman) that issue it. It is based on people not things! It proposes a solution to the money problem, including the certainty that all money eventually dies in depreciation, therefore money must be issued or all economies die! The reason all THEIR systems eventually fail is that they purposely play games with the supply of money, causing economic booms and busts, bubbles and wars. The Valun is issued by its membership, all private, never issued by any business, government or bank. As you work, you earn Valuns which you previously loaned to your employer without interest so that he pays you back in money you actually issued.

If at inception V1,000 would secure you a troy oz. of gold, then perhaps today, with gold being 24% below its price at inception, you might get an oz. gold coin for fewer Valuns. Who determines that? Supply and demand. Who makes the market? Anyone with something to sell.

What are the natural limitations?

FORCE: how much money is available to buy gold at prices below V1,000? At V900? At V800? … when the fair trade exchange is at V762.64 (Seven-hundred sixty-two Valuns, sixty-four cends, fen, etc.)? An oz. of gold bullion will likely not trade below V763 and likely would not fall much below V1,000. 

RESISTANCE: the prices above which little moves. V1,000 is probably the top end of the prices for 1oz gold bullion coins within the VEN. VEN here means Valun exchange network, our market in Valuns. 

CURRENT: is the universal flow made possible by a currency representing a method of settling barter transactions (which is all money ever is, so yes all money must be inherently worthless else it is a commodity and not money) by adoption of the same first transaction as its basis: currently 1 oz Au BU = V1,000 = $2,160 on 11/2/11, an easy day to remember. 

There would be a different inception amount for each currency capable of pricing gold (and silver). All exchanges from their money into ours will be handled ultimately in gold and silver only and all of these transactions will be one way, non refundable. That kills the prospects of speculators and all money launderers. This does NOT make the proposed Valun a “gold backed” money. The subject of “backing” for all money is woefully misunderstood. Tell me what “backing” does any bank have for its notes if the money it lends exceeds the amount of other people's deposits (reserves) it claims it can come up with to clear its paper? That's all any “gold backed” solution really gets you, PLUS the determination of what any gold and silver can actually buy is made by other people, not you or me. 

Gold backed money? What a stupid solution! Sorry! You can't come up with anything better than that? You all really need to give this blog's proposal your serious attention. It's cheaper, private, better, more honest, more likely to succeed, doesn't demand anything from any government or bank, cuts out certain kinds of dishonest business practices, gives everyone a fresh start, provides a basis for growing community economies and reorganizing skill sets, levels and pay scales, provides a real economic lifeboat system independent of any state, corporation or bank. 

SORRY, not, but we are fast losing the ability to trust, worship or want to serve or work for any state, corporation or bank. We regard with healthy suspicion any economist that still wants to support, repair, reform or otherwise disguise the brazen criminal structure of the present order, including who owns gold and silver mines, controls markets for precious metals, determines who gets preferential treatment when it comes to making sizable bids for it on their markets, who actually gets delivery, etc. 

Now we do advocate everyone having some gold and silver coins, but who recommended that you buy your first gold and silver? I bet it was someone forty or fifty years back talking about the imminent crash of the system, right? Hoping everyone sees the obvious dialectic; either THEIR credit or THEIR gold. NONE of it has EVER belonged to you or me. It doesn't even belong to the governments whose name is on most of it, just as the money in your bank accounts doesn't really belong to you; it's just “assigned” to you, that's all.

No, in order for you to have your own money, you have to issue your own money. The only possible way of accomplishing this is through joining together with everyone else who wants to accomplish the same thing. This would be taking our fiat back. Where did the governments and banks get their fiat? They took it from us. What right do they have to it? They don't. Understood? Let's hope the gentlemen in Japan read and understand this as well.]