Legal Reality

Bigger text (+) | Smaller text (-)

"They have a monopoly on a type of money
that isn´t even constitutional,"

5 April A.D. 2011

The sentence used in the subject line is highlightedbelow.

Of course, "federal" means "federal." So, why does the concept of "constitutional" still keep coming up over and over and over, especially by people who should know better?

What this author has come to realize is that the general awareness of various problems with government has progressed to a substantial level of understanding of details in various areas of the law. For example, it's very encouraging to find how many people are aware of at least part of the basis of what we call today "The Federal Reserve System" and that "funny money" is borrowed into existence. One continuing "barrier" to grasping today's reality, however, is the persistent notion we've all been raised to accept as true and reliable about "constitutions," namely that "government" was/is created by documents called "constitutions."

Therefore, one of the "themes" that the readers of notes from Legal Reality may start to see, to accompany "federal" means "federal," is this: No "constitution" is severable.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/severable

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/severable+contract

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/severable

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/severable.html

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/severable-contract.html

http://research.lawyers.com/glossary/severable.html

etc.

If there's a "constitution" that is severable, it'll be for one and only one reason: it self-proclaims its severability. But, in our present reality, that's a moot question, anyway.

In an effort to make all the more plain that our present reality has "nothing," whatsoever, to do with any "constitution," thus, to make all the more plain that no "constitution" provides "any" meaningful enforceable limits on what passes today as "government," the concept this author will refer to is the concept of severability.

In short, no "constitution" is severable. It's a package deal, as in "all or nothing." Thus, where we see even one part missing, then we also "see" that the whole is missing.

In the context of the note below, the part that is so plainly missing is the general circulation of gold and silver Coin. Therefore, given that one part is missing, the whole is missing.

Where the whole is missing, it's non-sense to characterize "anything" as "constitutional" or as "unconstitutional." "Everything" is non-constitutional.

Key with these matters of Money v. "funny money," where all that circulates is "funny money," we're most assuredly NOT dealing with "unconstitutional" "money." If it were "unconstitutional" to circulate "funny money," then there'd BE a "constitution" in place providing the standard for what constitutes lawful Currency. In other words, the mere existence of "funny money" in general circulation self-proves the non-existenceof any (national) "constitution."

The application of that reality found in this paragraph may be perceived as very detailed, and it is, but it's still the case that it's an oxymoron to call "funny money" "un-constitutional." If there wereany such "constitution," then there'd be no "funny money." If there were any such "constitution," and if there wereany such States, then all that would circulate as Currency would be Money (i.e., gold and silver Coin). Thus, the mere existence of "funny money," that says right on it that it constitutes "legal tender," self-proves, facially, the inapplicability of the concepts of both "constitutional" and "unconstitutional." Both terms have no real place in our present reality for any purpose other than a political purpose of keeping the lid from flying off.

No "constitution" is severable. It's a package deal -- "all or nothing." Therefore, where we see that a part is missing, then we also "see," in that same instant, that the whole is missing.

Where the whole is missing, nothing is either "constitutional" or "unconstitutional." Everything is non-constitutional.

This is one more reason why it matters that we understand that "federal" means "federal." It's not that there's no government, at all. It's that what passes as "government" operates on a very different set of principles than would a "constitutional Government." For a "federal government," nothing is "constitutional" or "unconstitutional." "Everything" is non-constitutional. A "federal government" operates not "by law" but rather "by agreement."

Thus, the existence/circulation/use of "funny money" isn't "unconstitutional." It's "agreed to." Thus, the Fed has a monopoly on a type of money that is "agreed to."

Going the next step, if the Fed were "trust busted" as impliedly suggested needs to happen (see the highlighted part below), then the "funny money" won't go out of existence. If the Fed is "trust busted," nothing about the existence of "funny money" will be changed. It'll simply be supplied by spin-off entities from the Fed, in the exact same way that multiple Bell companies now supply phone services after Ma Bell was "trust busted" and compelled to split up.

"Trust busting" the Fed will change nothing. Still to be researched is the limit, if any, on how many suppliers of "funny money" the "federal government" may contract with. The greater the number of such contracts, the greater the security risk for counterfeiting.

In short, the word choice demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of our present reality, and the concept of "illegal" monopoly regarding the contracted supplier of "funny money" tends to demonstrate desperation in coming up with a solution for putting the Fed out of business.

To put the Fed out of business, We, The Posterity, simply have to stop using the "funny money." In yet one more way, we see that there is no political solution for this commercial problem.

Harmon L. Taylor
Legal Reality
Dallas, Texas

Subscribe / unsubscribe : legal_reality@earthlink.net


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: "They have a monopoly on a type of money that isn´t even constitutional,"
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 14:50:18 +0000 (UTC) (not the same as GMT)


Ron Paul to Probe U.S. Mint Coin Shortage

Texas (Kitco News) -- Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, has one question for the U.S. Mint: why is there a coin shortage?

He is aiming to get to the bottom of this during a scheduled April 7 hearing of his U.S. House Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy to examine the bullion programs at the U.S. Mint.

"We are going to try and find out what the Mint has done so they can give us a better answer as to why there is a shortage. Why can´t they keep the supply of coins up?" said the congressman in an exclusive interview with Kitco News.

Demand for precious metals in the futures markets and in physical gold bullion coins increases as the dollar weakens, which often leads to coin shortages.

Part of the problem lies in manufacturing the blanks, said Paul. The blank planchets are not made at the Mint, which hasn't had the production capacity for this stage of the minting process since the budget cuts of 1981.

"Looks like we don´t even get (all) blank coins made in the U.S. - there is a contract with a foreign company, which makes no sense at all," said the congressman.

Today there are three refineries that supply planchets to the Mint: VennerBeck Stern Leach in Rhode Island, Sunshine Minting in Idaho and Goldmark in Perth, Australia.

Paul said that a U.S. company may appear at the scheduled hearing with a solution.

"They can help relieve the shortage by providing these blank planchets for the Mint," he said, not revealing the company.

"I think there is a huge demand and it is being provided by a bureaucracy, and the bureaucracy isn´t responding very well -- but I can´t believe there is any excuse for this," he said.

The Mint is planning a major overhaul of the metals composition of coins and how they manufacture them. The Coin Modernization, Oversight and Continuity Act of 2010 gives the Mint greater flexibility in meeting the demand for bullion coins as well as meeting the demand for gold and silver numismatic items.

Give Them a Choice: Paul

Paul is a strong advocate of currency backed by precious metals

Paul wants competition in currencies, and to do so, he said the tax on coins needs to be done away with. "Money shouldn´t be taxed with sales taxes or capital gains taxes, that would be my goal," he said.

In March, Paul introduced H.R. 1098, the Free Competition in Currency Act of 2011, which would repeal legal tender laws in order to prohibit taxation on gold, silver, platinum, palladium and rhodium bullion. The bill has been referred to the House Committees on Financial Services, Ways and Means, and Judiciary.

A staunch critic of the Federal Reserve, Paul said that instead of arguing his case for the Fed to close down tomorrow, he´s arguing the fact it should not hold a monopoly. "They have a monopoly on a type of money that isn´t even constitutional," he said.

"We would use no force, nobody has to use gold and silver coins," said Paul. Rather, he said the Fed does use force. "They are a cartel and they make us use Federal Reserve notes," he said.

The market provides a competition; however, he said there is always the threat of being taxed or the gold and silver being taken away as in the 1930s.

Paul explained that ideally, we should allow the market to pick the currency. "If you deal with international finance, people can use different currencies. Within the U.S., I believe you literally could, especially in this age of computers, that you could calculate two different currencies without difficulty."

Return to Gold Standard

A common assumption is that Paul is calling for a return to a gold standard. He clarified, saying he is not so inflexible.

"I wouldn´t be overly rigid and say, 'you must have a gold standard, you must go back to what we had.´ Our gold standard was imperfect, even though it worked better than the paper standard," he said.

Lawmakers in several states, including Tennessee, Virginia, New Hampshire and South Carolina, have introduced bills to look into minting their own currencies in the event of a complete breakdown of the U.S. Federal Reserve. In Georgia, a bill to make the state only use gold and silver is in committee.

Utah has received the most media attention on this subject as the House and Senate have passed HB317, which would recognize gold and silver coins as legal tender and exempt them from certain state tax liability.

"Governments over the many, many centuries have always demanded monopoly control over money. Even when gold and silver were principally used in the economies, they still wanted monopolies," Paul said.

Hence, he is not confident that any Utah law would be allowed to stand. "Well, they are going to fight it tooth and nail. They are not going to go along with this even though we have the law and Constitution on our side and it should appeal to all Americans to have competition."

Interest Rates

Regarding U.S. interest rate hikes, Paul said they are going to be gradual and steady but they are indeed coming. "The next big shoe to fall will be interest rates going up on municipal bonds -- that means a lot of these bonds will start defaulting," he said.

Presidential Run

Paul has not ruled out a run at the presidency but has not confirmed it either. When asked what would stop him from running, he said: "minimal support."

"So if there is a receptive audience out there, that is going to influence my decision," he said. "I have to have a good sense that the message I have will be received well. Last go-around I kept talking about the dangers of the financial and housing bubble. This go-around, I´ve been concentrating on the dangers ahead for the dollar."

Watch the Exclusive Ron Paul Interview with Kitco News



NOTICE: Harmon L. Taylor and other presented entities are not affiliated with Freedom School.
NOTICE: If anything in this presentation is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification.
Specialty Areas

All the powers in the universe seem to favor the person who has confidence.
Share

More & Other Information - Resource Pages
AntiShyster Magazine Attention Signing the Constitution Away
Aware Belligerent Claimant
Bonds Citizenship / nationality related items
Education Graphics
Health related  
Howard Griswold History
Jerry Kirk Jurisdiction
Law related items Lee Brobst
Lewis Mohr Luis Ewing
Money Reading Material
Reading Room Stuff
Tax matters Travel related
Truth Video
NOTICE: The information on this page was brought to you by people who paid this website forward so that someone such as you might also profit by having access to it. If you care to do so also please feel encouraged to KEEP THIS SITE GOING by making a donation today. Thank you. Make donation with PayPal - it is fast, free and secure!

Freedom-School is not affiliated with the links on this page - unless otherwise stated.
This enterprise collectively is known and generally presented as "Freedom-School.com" - "we," "us" or "our" are other expressions of Freedom-School.com used throughout. "You" is in reference to the user / visitor.

This is the fine print that so important. Freedom School and other information served is so for educational purposes only, no liability expressed or assumed for use.
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Freedom School does not consent to or condone unlawful action.
Freedom School advocates and encourages one and all to adhere to, support and
defend all Law which is particularly applicable.
Information is intended for [those] men and women who are not "US CITIZENS" or "TAXPAYERS" - continued use, reference or citing indicates voluntary and informed compliance. Support is not offered.

Freedom School is a free speech site, non-commercial enterprise and operation as
there is no charge for things presented.
Freedom-School.com site relies on this memorandum and others in support of this philosophy and operation.

The noteworthy failure of [the] government or any alleged agency thereof to at any time rebut anything appearing on this website constitutes a legal admission of the fidelity and accuracy of the materials presented, which are offered in good faith and prepared as such by Freedom School and any and all [third] parties affiliated or otherwise. THIS IS AN ELECTRONIC AGREEMENT AND IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT, EQUIVALENT TO A SIGNED, WRITTEN CONTRACT BETWEEN PARTIES - If the government, or anyone else, wants to assert that any of the religious and/or political statements appearing on this website are not factual or otherwise in error, then they as the moving party have the burden of proof, and they must responsively meet that burden of proof under the Administrative Procedures Act 5 U.S.C. § 556(d) and under the due process clauses found in the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments to the national Constitution BEFORE there will be response to any summons, questions, or unsubstantiated and slanderous accusations. Attempts at calling presented claims "frivolous" without specifically rebutting the particular claim, or claims, deemed "frivolous" will be in deed be "frivolous" and prima facie evidence that shall be used accordingly. Hey guys, if anything on this site is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification.

Freedom-School.com is not responsible for content of any linked website or material.
In addition, users may not use Freedom-School.com to engage in, facilitate or further unlawful conduct;
use the service in any way, or manner, that harms us or anyone connected with us or whose work is presented;
damage, disable, overburden, or impair the service (or the network(s) connected to the site)
or interfere with anyone´s use and enjoyment of the website.

All claims to be settled on the land - Austin, Travis county Texas, united States of America, using Texas Common Law.
All parts of this contract apply to the maximum extent permitted by law. A court may hold that we cannot enforce a part of this contract as written. If this happens, then you and we will replace that part with terms that most closely match the intent of the part that we cannot enforce. The rest of this contract will not change. This is the entire contract between you and us regarding your use of the service. It supersedes any prior contract or statements regarding your use of the Freedom-School.com site. If there exists some manner of thing missing we do not forfeit our right to that thing as
we reserve all rights.
We may assign, or modify, alter, change this contract, in whole or in part, at any time with or without notice to you. You may not assign this contract, or any part of it, to any other person. Any attempt by you to do so is void. You may not transfer to anyone else, either temporarily or permanently, any rights to use the Freedom-School.com site or material contained within.

GOOGLE ANALYTICS: While we do not automatically collect personally identifiable information about you when you visit the Freedom-School.com site, we do collect non-identifying and aggregate information that we use to improve our Web site design and our online presence.
Visitors to this site who have Javascript enabled are tracked using Google Analytics. The type of information that Google Analytics collects about you includes data like: the type of Web browser you are using; the type of operating system you are using; your screen resolution; the version of Flash you may be using; your network location and IP address (this can include geographic data like the country, city and state you are in); your Internet connection speed; the time of your visit to the Freedom-School.com site; the pages you visit on the Freedom-School.com site; the amount of time you spend on each page of the Freedom-School.com site and referring site information. In addition to the reports we receive using Google Analytics data, the data is shared with Google. For more information on Google´s privacy policies, visit: www.google.com/privacy_ads.html
Here is Google´s description of how Google Analytics works and how you can disable it: "Google Analytics collects information anonymously, and much like examining footprints in sand, it reports website trends without identifying individual visitors. Analytics uses its own cookie to track visitor interactions. The cookie is used to store information, such as what time the current visit occurred, whether the visitor has been to the site before, and what site referred the visitor to the web page. Google Analytics customers can view a variety of reports about how visitors interact with their website so they can improve their website and how people find it. A different cookie is used for each website, and visitors are not tracked across multiple sites. Analytics requires that all websites that use it must update their privacy policy to include a notice that fully discloses the use of Analytics. To disable this type of cookie, some browsers will indicate when a cookie is being sent and allow you to decline cookies on a case-by-case basis."


Presentation Copyright© 2007, 2016
All Rights Reserved

H O M E

Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional