It is the purpose of the future to be dangerous, what some call interesting times. Whether what's playing are the prophecies of Holy Writ or planned deliberate dystonias as fantasies of whom we have wasted space on this blog discussing only the apparent facades, will not concern this piece.
We will instead center on the remarks of an associate we'll call Dennis. I don't know him personally at all, but I have been following him for some time and we share a similar outlook on a wide variety of issues. He has been interested in monetary reform for as long as I've followed him. His remarks will be in blue, mine in black.
The current model of banking and currency is based on the Bank of England model, founded in 1694. Benjamin Franklin stated that the main reason for the American Revolutionary War was the insistence by George III that the American colonies accept Bank of England banknotes, which were issued as promissory notes, rather than use the increasingly successful American fiat script, issued by the colonies in the CORRECT quantity and not bearing debt!
Colonial notes were certainly a form of debt instruments. I've seen them in the collection of one of my mentors. Each colony had public works that it would fund through these notes. The amount had strictly to do with the prices for materials and labor listed in contracts which would be retired as soon as a project was completed. Each colony taxed back these scripts and paid down the longer term debt instruments with them. Many roads, canals, ports, wharves, jails, customs houses, public buildings, schools, libraries, armories, etc. were constructed in this way and goods and services moved throughout the colonies by use of these paper notes.
But even while this took care of a large swathe of commercial traffic, some items – usually slaves and livestock - could only be procured using coins made of precious metals and before 1825 more than 90% of the coins circulating within the British colonies were made of silver and the most common of the circulating silver coins were the Spanish dollars (pieces of eight) that were about 75% of a present day 1 troy oz silver bullion coin, in fact they were 371.25 grains of silver = .7734375 of a troy oz. This exact weight was fixed by Congress in 1792 as the first official United States dollar. These were minted by the US Treasury and drove the Spanish dollars out of circulation.
Colonial monetary issue was based on contracts. Contract law was still in its infancy back then but the Bank of England goes back to 1694. William III (House of Orange with connections to the bankers in Holland) was the king from 1689 to 1702 or around 14 years. The bank was just getting going, financing trade between the continent and what would eventually be the unified power of Great Britain (England and Scotland combined) under William's successor, Anne. The European drama included a war and the ascension of the Hanoverian dynasty, all of which demanded more silver. Increasingly the British colonies in America were expected to supply it. But the central bank was behind everything right from the beginning including the founding and expansion of the various trading monopolies, which at the time dealt in weapons, commodities (contraband and drugs) and people (slaves) around particular trading triangles, etc. This is the real history that needs to be taught to the young coming up. They have to get the sense of the importance of moving things and people around within countries even more than among countries or around the world. Huge swathes of the population just take everything for granted.
As we discuss further, I'd draw particular attention to one critical portion of all of this; organization. These people were organized. I can't stress this enough. For any who think seriously about monetary reform, it is useless and unsound to consider piggybacking any improvement on their organization, because we suppose it to be either more practical, advanced, adaptable, essential or necessary to the endeavor than any we might put together ourselves.
To
put it bluntly, as I have done countless times before, since none of
the money in existence fundamentally belongs to we the people, we
have no business trying to do anything using anything including
organizations that belongs to them. Ultimately this proposal is to
be able to have something so that we can renounce them and
move on with our lives. We will decide what the new normal will be,
not them and we will have our own money that we actually own, to back
up the FORCE of our will and our claims.
I also remind the
readers here that Riegel himself attempted the same thing or at least
drew the roughest sketches of the proposed organization based on
their organization models and offices. Riegel never saw what we can
see clearly; that the great divide that has always existed has been
between those who own and issue the money and the rest of humanity.
We either decide henceforth to organize to have our own money
or we admit that we are monetary slaves to THEM and prepare for what
THEY have always said THEY would ultimately do to us. THEY want most
of us dead. So this is a serious proposal that really could get a
lot more attention than it has received to date. There are the usual
town criers out there prophesying doom. Do you know how many do that
down through time? Many make a reasonably good living doing it. I'm
not even suggesting that they are wrong for doing what they're doing.
At the very least they tell us what our enemies are up to, whether
their plots succeed or not. But this blog's proposal places a higher
value on the skills, drives, wills and purposes of real people, not
those puffed up by their own visions of self importance. As we said
a long time ago, when it gets close to the top one is dealing with
essentially a bunch of usually very old and of course very rich
ruthless babies. Oh they're dangerous to be sure, but essentially
ruthless babies is what they become.
Dennis marches right
into it.
We must be prepared for a new monetary system, an honest one, when our present debt-based banking cartel collapses. Kindly read and critique this proposed Constitutional Amendment. But first, a little background...
Students, what has Dennis already done? Where is he taking this discussion? What did I just say about organization? What did Dennis miss about all of the present money? Why does that impossible to ignore reality matter? But no, we are truly going to follow Dennis' discussion, because there are a lot of people who need to look squarely at what Dennis proposes, because they would agree with most of it.
From "The Truth in Money Book" by Theodore R. Thorsen and Richard F Warner:
QUOTE Someone had to borrow at usury to bring that money [checkbook balances, bills and coins] into existence. The money goes out of existence as the usury and the debt principal are paid back to the bank. These amounts are huge: several billion dollars go out of existence each day. [Actually this money goes into the reserve accounts of the Federal Reserve Banks, out of the hands of the public! This book was first printed in November 1980. The amounts which are withdrawn presently are much larger.] If the money is not replaced with new loans, a shortage occurs. Soon individuals and businesses experience serious cash flow problems. These result in more and more loan applications to banks---the only place where money is being created to replenish the supply" UNQUOTE
All
right. Let's examine things accordingly. In the United States we
have a central bank, the Federal Reserve. It's name is on all
American paper money. What are those tokens? They are paper tokens
of a monetary system which ultimately resides on accounts. The paper
tokens do not represent all the money, but they do allow buyers and
sellers to deal with one another anonymously, which is why cash is
king.
But anyway it says on all that paper money that the
tokens are notes, which are BY DEFINITION (which means you
can't argue your way around this) short term debt instruments
of the Federal Reserve – usually to circulate no longer than seven
years. No matter how anyone chooses to cut it, none of it belongs to
you or me. It all says right on it that it belongs to the Federal
Reserve. But it was called into existence by being borrowed from the
Federal Reserve, which issued the money based on bonds traded to them
by the said corporation (after 1871) of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
again not you or I. So we have literally no say in any of this. But
let's continue what Dennis proposes. It's an amendment to the US
Constitution;
Here is one possible solution----To Hell with Fractional-Reserve Debt-Based Banking Constitutional Amendment
(1)
[a] Rescind the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and
So
in the absence of a central bank would be the US treasury department.
[b] rename existing Federal Reserve
notes and check book balances, in all U.S. banking and
credit-creating institutions as well as foreign holdings of dollars,
on a 1-to-1 basis, as U.S. Treasury Dollars and
U.S.Treasury-Denominated bank balances.
Would be easy
enough to do but printing and replacing one set of notes with another
still costs something.
[c]
All currently existing financial contracts of the Federal Reserve
Banking System, including United States Treasury Bills, Notes, Bonds,
and Inflation-Protected Securities, remain in effect.
Nebulous,
especially the municipal bond markets. They were supposed to be
inflation proof, but took a beating during the various popped
economic bubbles. Right now, all the banks participate in these
markets, from the central bank all the way down to the smallest local
banks. Taking the trust and placing it in the hands of government
bureaucrats supposedly more accountable to the people hasn't worked
very well, has it? I think what Dennis has in mind here are that
upon acceptance of the amendment, any existing contracts of the
present Federal Reserve would be taken over by the US Treasury
department. But the Treasury is going to do essentially what any
bank does; hire a Wall Street firm to handle equities and debt as
portions of an investment portfolio and from thence to operate
business.
(2)
[a] Henceforward, ex nihilo credit creation by banking and financial
institutions in the United States is prohibited. Loans are required
to originate from previous savings of U.S. Treasury Dollars and U.S.
Treasury-Denominated bank balances, which for each loan are held in
and paid from specific sequestered loan accounts by the various
financial institutions, with interest charges and term limits for
each loan to be determined solely by the contracting parties.
Ex nihilo is out of nothing. From an accounting standpoint,
Dennis wants all the lending institutions to lend only money that
they have, sometimes called 100% reserve lending. There's just this
little problem. The lending institutions lend money they don't have
all the time. Yes, it's due to very old concepts that go back into
ancient times. They lend what doesn't belong to them, but what their
customers have banked with them may not require to be paid out while
someone else might be using it. We have eliminated this problem in
our proposal by suggesting that funds for prudent lending are or
would be available if they came from the WILL of certain members with
the issuance capabilities in excess of present needs and contracted
with certain business that would spring up to make loans to maintain
certain kinds of business. But there is something more to consider
here.
If a government is the first buyer in any economy,
it is the first issuer of the money it spends, but it has nothing
with which to back that money because it has nothing to sell back to
society that anyone wouldn't rather buy from a private source for all
kinds of practical reasons.
Governments
produce nothing but they do provide useful services that do back any
payment for them. The chief reason and responsibility for any state
is to uphold the law. Governments provide for the armed forces that
prevent attacks from would be enemy invaders and law enforcement to
uphold the rule of law and order without which commerce and
relatively free markets are impossible. Yes, one could have no law
and order and commerce by monopolies and various kinds of public
disorder and dysfunction maintained by private criminal gangs.
That's essentially what people on the political extremes advocate;
anarchists, libertarians, etc. And not much changes in the present
financial world to discourage any of this as a social trend. Why?
Because even if said government issues the money, none of us had
anything to do with it. It's still not our money. Prices for things
we might need and however much money we happen to have at the time of
sale pretty much determine whether we will decide to buy whatever
anyone is out there selling.
[b]
Non-cash reserves held in the regional Federal Reserve Banks in
accounts of the member institutions of the Federal Reserve System no
longer form the basis for credit creation and are extinguished via
accounting erasure.
Notice that these balances are
assumed to be accruals from the practice of usury, which Dennis
certainly understands as the demand of rent for money from money that
was never issued in the first place, so a great deal of money departs
the general money supply as interest. This happens to be true from
the central bank all the way down through the banking system. Each
bank is sucking money out of the general money supply so what this
practice produces is a money supply that no matter how huge it may
become is insufficient to pay back all debts.
From an
accounting standpoint, we have always viewed usury as theft and
advocated a return to renting money by paying the rent up front cost
from already existing funds. Compounding of rent for money deserves
to be outlawed as another swindle. But we can only assume to do
any of these things outside of anything that belongs to them
including their peculiar arrangement with our governments. Real
monetary reform must understand the fundamental of member
ownership of any money that would be indisputably ours. So
Dennis essentially proposes to bankrupt the banks by erasing their
credit. Right. As we've said money does reside on accounts. But
this isn't going to happen. Again, we are expecting to reform
something that doesn't belong to us. How does that change your
perception of what needs to be done?
[c]
Any further payments of principal and interest on currently-existing
promissory notes owned by any bank are required to be distributed to
holders of savings accounts and checking accounts in that bank in a
manner to be determined by each bank, such procedures to be
transparent to savings or checking account holders at that bank in
terms of amount and frequency of payment. Regional Federal Reserve
Banks continue to provide check-clearing operations for the member
banks.
All right, so his proposal is to redistribute
the grifted claims of the banks among depositors probably based on
some proportion of cash assets on account basis. OK. Again, it wont
happen because they own the system and you have only consented to use
their system based on issues of monopoly and convenience, never
knowing or expecting the obvious, that the actual money itself
whether represented as pieces of paper in actual notes or as digits
on computer screens representing accounts, none of it belongs to you.
So you are a slave and how can you expect to direct the people who
own it on how to run it more honestly? According to who? But let's
go on.
(3)
[a] Monetary transactions of the regional Federal Reserve banks or of
its member banks with international banks, including the Bank of
International Settlements and the International Monetary Fund, can
not include ex nihilo credit creation.
Oh, it's mostly
created based on bonds, promises to pay that are driven by taxes.
Somehow I never understood how anyone could miss the connection
between central banking and income taxes. Most people who say that
governments are the only legitimate issuers of money, like Bill Still
for example, who still imagines that Washington DC is the citadel of
world freedom, never get the importance of governments having nothing
legitimate to sell to anyone, therefore they must take by FORCE what
they require through taxes. If they don't get it through direct
taxation, indirect taxation through inflation does just as well.
As a dutiful slave, you are required to use their money,
which depreciates in purchasing power by the week, so you'd better
spend it on some appreciating asset soon because savings are useless
when appreciation of assets is what propels most people from rags to
riches (and simple reverse economic osmosis often brings the same
from riches back to rags again). So even with so much money being
generated, what we observe is that money disappears and brings
economic calamity with it. And just how does most money disappear?
Dennis has seen one way which is by usury. But there's one glaring
us right in the eyes everywhere; through depreciation of assets, not
even usury can match the amount of money lost as the brand new
depreciates in price every time it changes hands until whatever it is
becomes worthless or nearly so or only sells for scrap.
(4)
The U.S. Treasury supplies Treasury Dollars as needed to any member
bank of the Federal Reserve system to satisfy demands for cash by
deposit and savings account holders in excess of cash reserves held
by banks at the time of enactment of this amendment.
How
long does that last? We have had stimulus packages galore and
usually with the promise that eventually they wouldn't need to keep
doing it. Then came a certain medical emergency and the government
was paying us directly just to keep the economy and the fabric of
society from coming apart. Will any of this ever end? What is our
solution? Organization! If no one is interested enough to organize,
not to agitate government but to create our own monetary system,
then expect slavery to continue. Businesses would organize an
alternative means of doing business using the proposal described on
this blog; using Valuns. They would begin to understand ways of
doing business outside of their system using their money to pay for
those things that must be paid in their money – taxes - and develop
other stores of purchasing power in the proposed international
standard value units or Valuns.
(5)
[a] Fund the U.S. government and its agencies and projects directly
via Treasury Dollars authorized by the Congress in its yearly federal
budget.
Right. This can never work because the
government cannot tax back all the money it spends without crashing
the economy. What's wrong? Two things. First, the government does
not have the right of first purchase in any economy, even if
according to the present monetary order, they exercise this right.
Sure, plenty in this world is stolen, usually rights, obligations,
freedoms and WILL [fiat]. No, sorry, governments don't have the
right of first purchase. YOU DO. Natural economies to scale grow
according to matters of BARTER as well as supply and demand.
One
of the most erroneous concepts presented by standard economics,
itself mostly bogus, is that which claims that transactions using
money do not involve barter. Riegel had this one correct; the
exact basis for money was and is as a vehicle to split barter among
traders. The government produces nothing with which to barter
for what it requires therefore it deserves no special economic
consideration.
Second, since the government is necessary as
we have said to uphold law and order, the money it requires must come
from somewhere. It must be borrowed from someone. So the second
issue is from whom must the government borrow money and under what
terms? Obviously since we consider the proposed Valun a whole lot
more sound than any government STOLEN FROM US fiat money, we
eventually see government borrowing money directly from the voters
and taxpayers who would be borrowing from a new set of financial
institutions that would change their accounting and structure to
support the realities of each natural person being the only
legitimate issuers of any money, that taxes demanded in our own money
will face open conflict unless we ourselves control the government,
not the other way around.
We are currently faced by an
opposition to really about 97% of the human race who sees their
continued rule – yes they are in power already, they are driving
the car of international affairs and all the money out there
including precious metals and cryptocurrencies belongs to them, not
you of I. So accordingly, they have decided they don't need any of
this any longer so they'll proceed with their genocidal intentions
via technology. We'll see whether it works or not.
Our
proposal has far more congruence with the organic Constitution and
Bill of Rights of the United States than any other monetary reform
proposal. Those who presume to govern us by having us obey them had
best consider what would happen if they were no longer able to get
their hands on whatever money they wanted and have the taxpayers
cough it up later as has always been the result of the present
arrangement of things.
[b] The
borrowing of money from the Federal Reserve system of banks or from
other institutions or individuals to pay for federal government
expenditures is prohibited.
Of course. You would
abolish it. But money certainly would need to be borrowed from
someone. We don't mind the bond issues which must be paid back over
time, but we would mind a ruinous tax regime as a result. Remember,
taxes are the first expense of every successful business. The higher
the taxes, the higher the prices must go no matter what the supply
happens to be. The squeeze comes when a business recognizes that
certain things have made it too expensive to continue in business,
like taxes. Certain laws are deliberately passed to encourage or
dissuade various kinds of business. All such laws are essentially
unconstitutional at least at the Federal level. Each state can and
will determine for itself among its own state legislatures what to
encourage and what to discourage based on the views and sentiments of
voters and taxpayers in each state.
[c]
All outstanding Treasury Securities are henceforward redeemed on
demand via payment with U.S. Treasury Dollars.
I
suppose that private banks would handle this business as they did
before the Federal Reserve was enacted. Without the central bank, we
might see a return to the National Bank system where each bank at
this first rung level would transact business directly with the US
Treasury and all the rest of the banks would see a trickle down
economics as a result. Economies would begin to look the way they
did under the robber barons of the late 19th century.
What would be under all of that? The precious metals markets of
course. What of cryptocurrencies? They are uniformly ex nihilo buy
and hold limited commodities. Did you or I issue any of them? No.
So are they intrinsically ours? No.
(6)
[a] Abolish the Federal Income Tax on individuals, corporations, and
business enterprises while maintaining a social security tax on
individual incomes.
All right, so we have two ideas
here. First the taxing of labor. I don't care how much anyone
thinks that any income taxes are moral, because they aren't. Taxing
the incentive to work is among the lowest, most stupid ideas invented
by governments and the bankers who lend them their money.
Second
we have something that is expected to substitute for something
everyone needs to do for themselves. What did people do before
Social Security?
So first a little background. In ancient
times, yes going back about 4,000 years by our reckoning, families
used to have cashes of money in the form of precious metals and
especially of items made of precious metals and they would appoint
stewards to look after these cashes. The cashes were increased by
what they called tithes, which were not paid out of the usual income
streams from the family business, but only from any excess windfalls
that would from time to time accrue. Legal terms developed to
describe these cashes as trusts. Hence family trusts. If
some member of the family had some serious needs, they could be paid
out of the family cashes. The stewards would be notified and act
accordingly. These days we would say that every natural person
involved with any money deserves to consider the importance of a
trust, whether shared with others or not.
So secondly Dennis
identifies the idea of a public trust for each taxpayer. This blog's
proposal certainly takes Social Security and all other pensions
seriously and offers members the right and privilege of issuing
Valuns up to the same value awarded by Social Security or other
pensions combined and referred to as a member's WILL [fiat]. If a
member has become able to receive payments in their money in Social
Security or some other union or private pension, they are able to
issue the same value in Valuns and they may accumulate Valuns to
issue over time and the proposal allows past pension payments to
determine how many Valuns a member may have to issue as a direct
extension of the member's WILL [fiat]. This privilege extends back
to the inception of the Valun in November of 2011.
For to us,
the issuance of money by fiat was never an issue, because we weren't
having to uphold the phony scarcity ideas that help make the present
system grind along, on fear and greed, because the scarcity of
resources, time, effort, everything is what drives it all. To us,
all their money was illegitimate to begin with and STOLEN FIAT FROM
US upon issue. To us, the contention wasn't ever about fiat issue vs
some STUPID idea about “sound money” which is some monopoly
controlled scare commodity masquerading as something more valuable
than paper to represent a barter transaction.
Again:
Where does money reside? On accounts. What did Gresham's law
prove? That money tokens representing the same value on paper would
drive out of circulation all tokens made of metal. So we don't give
a tinker's damn about the money tokens having any intrinsic value.
That's just another of our enemies' peculiar superstitions to try and
convince us that the tokens are all that matters and we can forget
about the accounting.
Fine then, trade with precious metals is
determined by people you and I don't know, who trade the stuff –
real or imagined – and each day determine what an ounce of it will
purchase in the other brands of their money. In 2020 gold made a
climb to a new high in Federal Reserve dollars and this blog captured
its significance for enlarging the purchasing power of the proposed
international standard value unit or Valun. It's new low is $2.59.
Lately the proposed Valun has been around $3.00. Since last August,
an ounce of gold has lost around $200 in purchasing power for no good
reason except that the people who own the mines, mints and markets
for it say so. It's NOT your money!
[b]
Social security retirement revenues are strictly sequestered in
Federal Government Retirement Accounts held by the U.S. Treasury and
managed by the Social Security Administration. The Sixteenth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is hereby rescinded and the
Internal Revenue Service disbanded.
All right, but
since we are guaranteed inflation because the basis of the issuance
of the money is all wrong, placing whatever sums with the US Treasury
for any safe keeping is also a preposterous and ludicrous idea. If I
were interested in increasing my trust's value, I'd want to be
able to have someone take prudent risks to reinvest the trust's funds
to achieve as much from the normal rent of money; capitalism. Who
would rent trust fund money? Businesses and governments would. But
there's no private enterprise organization behind getting any of this
off the ground and so far nothing proposed is anything better than
shining up what amounts to a pile of turds. Here's some more.
(7)
[a] Institute a federal sales tax with a varying yearly tax rate
adjusted by the U.S. Congress in session, the sole aim of such
adjustments being to maintain a stable or decreasing Consumer Price
Index based on data collected by the Federal Government.
OK,
so we are supposed to grant to the government the further right to
tinker with the economy, to attempt to guarantee the impossible, and
to do it without the requirements of special knowledge of particular
fields and industries, etc which are usually beyond the knowledge,
scope or ability to care of even the most moral public bureaucrat.
Ah, no I don't think so. This is why we have futures markets which
really do accomplish the same thing. Could we dispense with these
too? If you don't solve the illegitimacy of the money issuance, you
certainly wouldn't be able to devise anything better and certainl
not leaving it for more bureaucrats.
[b]
Any such federal sales taxes taken in by the Federal Government are
extinguished from the currency supply to keep the Consumer Price
Index stable or decreasing and are not utilized for further funding.
Believe
it or not, the one class of economics jerks who would approve of
these ideas are the Keynesians. They always imagine that it is one
of government's unique economic functions to adjust averages, prices,
supply and demand and they have even advocated government
extinguishing of money to do it. Government policies and spending
are always or usually involved with such schemes to make certain
expenditures seem more attractive and others less so. One reason NOT
do allow any governments to do this is that obviously this opens up
the corridors of government to fill up with grifters and grafters.
Consider all the various kinds of nonsense governments have been
faced with to come up with more astoundingly expensive schemes which
are supposed to guarantee things which are as Riegel said, as though
they thought they could determine the orbits of the planets. So,
no.
(8) Clause 1: Article 1, Section 8
of the U.S. Constitution is amended to read as follows: The Congress
shall have Power to collect customs duties on imports and exports,
uniformly applied throughout the United States.
Dennis is apparently referring to the clauses within this vast section. Since this is important, we consider it necessary to post here what this passage in the US Constitution curretly says (Article 1 Section 8 divided by clauses):
[1] The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
[2] To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
[3] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
[4] To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
[5] To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
[6] To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
[7] To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
[8] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
[9] To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
[10] To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
[11] To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
[12] To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
[13] To provide and maintain a Navy;
[14] To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
[15] To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
[16] To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
[17] To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;-And
[18] To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
We think it a good idea from time to time to reflect on the actual powers currently granted to the American Federal legislature. Refer to these as the discussion concludes.
(9) Clause 2, Article 1, Section 8 of the U. S. Constitution is rescinded.
Borrowing
money on the credit of the United States would be prohibited. This
would probably crash the foreign markets in all US securities
beginning with US treasuries.
(10) The
adoption of this amendment does not prohibit the use by the citizens
of the United States of any alternative currencies they should choose
to use in their private or commercial transactions, provided both
parties to the transaction agree to the medium of exchange.
There's
actually little prohibiting it at the Federal level at the moment.
It's all with each state and their banking and finance departments,
whatever bonds are floated for this or that venture, public works or
improvements.
So to wrap this one up, none of the issues having to do with monetary reform have anything to do with any attempts to reform what is essentially a living nightmare that will certainly pass away sooner or later, though we caution anyone to assume that any of the current town criers has any crystal ball adequate to foretell the exact moment of the present order going to pieces. This proposal requires interest and organization from many groups of people especially as we have said, beginning with military veterans, law enforcement and their respective mothers and grandmothers. We have decided not to go video on any of this because ultimately we will require people to read, write and count and passively reclining while this is being read to you doesn't really cut it. What did we say money was for? To substitute for your barter. So to begin with, that means the time you spend away from doing anything else in order to earn barter. Getting it yet? Read more of this blog and please copy and spread any and all of it far and wide to as many people as you can. Until next time.
David Burton
dpbmss@mail.comPS: Students. While we're here do any of you remember which clause in this part of the American Constitution that E. C. Riegel found unfortunate? It was clause 5, not the whole thing, just one particular. It was to regulate the value of said minted coins. We know how it is done now. People who control the ownership of the mines and a few private mints operate based on values set up by private trading organizations operating in foreign countries, chiefly in London but elsewhere too. The relationships among these commodities; precious metals and stolen fiat currencies as well as cryptocurrencies all rely on these markets. What this proposal advocates is to allow them to go ahead and run their own system. We will determine based on our own rules how to determine the relative value of our money compared to theirs and the rules are in accordance with Riegel's main observations and further contributions to the observation of money, what it is, what it does and how it accomplishes these things. So far so good. Over the lifespan of the proposed Valun, since 2011, it has increased in average purchasing power from a low of $2.16 to nearly $3.00 today and according to the rules, a Valun once it reaches a new inception point, never goes back to an earlier one. So, since we are thinking in terms of contracts, and some of these are to be retroactive all the way back to the first Valun inception, the Valun gets heavier and heavier over time. Best
