Debt-Free US Notes Were Once Issued Under JFK And The U.S. Government Still Has The Power To Issue Debt-Free Money (economy, national debt)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Simply saying "United States note" doesnt mean it came debt free..
The only 'kooks' we have to fear are the ones like yourself who refuse to acknowledge the truth and who still cling to false ideas simply because they are comforted by them.
I think we have reached the point of no return and that JFK attempt to issue debt free money will be the last. I took note of your list and the points all depend on congress. Does anyone think that congress would take the power away from the FR and the banksters? They know who their daddy is.
I watched a interview with G. Edward Griffin and he said that if people think that one man can change the monetary and banking system singlehandedly they are delusional. Even though he acknowledges Ron Paul and thinks he is doing a great service by bringing the issue to the forefront it is going to take congress.
He went on to say that is the battle to get more people elected that understand monetary issues. This is going to take hard work and in my opinion will never happened. Look at our electorate, look at this forum, how many people care about monetary policy? We have people that look at foreign policy, taxes, social programs, and social issues and prob ally do not spend one second thinking about monetary policy.
We have watched and read about all the {R} debates how many questions was asked by MSM moderators about the FR or monetary policy? I have talked to people about our monetary system and they either back it or they do not understand a word I am saying. Some have made the claim that USD is backed by gold that is at Ft Knox.
Putting faith in voters and the imbeciles that they elect will be a losing battle. That is why I moved to the boonies and I am learning sustainable living skills. I am not going to let democracy and Barnanke starve me to death.
Much of what Ron Paul wants to do will not be accomplished in his first term. His desire to radically reform monetary policy as well as the IRS and other governmental agencies would not make it thru the Congress on the first try.
However, the debate on the issues he puts forth would educate the American public to the truths about the economic system that enslaves them.
Paul has the most direct control over the US military, and as commander-in-chief can immediately put an end to all of the stupid wars that have helped bankrupt America since Bush started them.
Hey, maybe they can run a foreclosure auction for the tax-payer funded billion dollar embassy in Iraq - maybe the Shiite fundamentalst government that we spend a trillion to install will pay us a million for it and convert it to a Shiite mosque.
Those are interest free notes not debt free notes. Coins are also interest free, the reason being they had intrinsic value in the past with no need to be backed by a promise like a note. Anyone who has a treasury note still means government owes them a debt.
The Fed returns its profit to the treasury. When da guberment runs a deficit while the Fed purchases the amount of the deficit, its effectively printing money. The reason why bonds are auctioned is to prevent inflation when we actually have inflation.
The real problem is the secret operations of the FED and fractional reserve banking as applied to fixed assets with real estate in particular. The money supply expands, but what it buys doesn't. There is a real scam in the banking system, and that is it.
But wouldn't that make all US paper currency currently in circulation worthless?
Gold can be made worthless with taxing power so no. I don't know why people think nothing backs the US currency. Its steel, titanium, lead and depleted uranium backed currency. Lead has always been worth more than gold.
Those are interest free notes not debt free notes. Coins are also interest free, the reason being they had intrinsic value in the past with no need to be backed by a promise like a note. Anyone who has a treasury note still means government owes them a debt.
The Fed returns its profit to the treasury. When da guberment runs a deficit while the Fed purchases the amount of the deficit, its effectively printing money. The reason why bonds are auctioned is to prevent inflation when we actually have inflation.
The real problem is the secret operations of the FED and fractional reserve banking as applied to fixed assets with real estate in particular. The money supply expands, but what it buys doesn't. There is a real scam in the banking system, and that is it.
It is 'debt-free' if the US government issues the money and it is used within the US as a means of trade of services and products, backed by the full faith in the US government. It becomes 'debt' when it is bought by another country, and it would make sense to have it based on a universal standard, such as gold.
Currently our 'money' is created by the Fed, and 'owed' to the Fed by the US taxpayer. If we were to convert all 'Federal Reserve' currency to 'United States' currency, then we would be indebted only to countries that hold US treasuries, not to the Fed private bankers.
1. Congress has power to "coin money" (stamp bullion) and "borrow money". It has no power to create money. If it did, why would it need to borrow it?
2. Notes are not money, by law. Notes are debt.
3. Federal Reserve notes, since 1933, have no par value (worthless), due to Congress repudiating their promise to redeem them with "lawful money" (gold coin).
4. Via FICA, 313 million Americans are "human resources" pledged as collateral (i.e. "contributors") on the public debt, thus making FRNs into "legal tender".
5. The public debt, in excess of 15 trillion dollars, cannot be repaid with "dollar bills" (IOUs). Debt cannot pay debt. Minus plus a minus is more minus. In terms of gold, the public debt is over 750 billion ounces of gold stamped into coin. World wide supply (2007 est) is 5.3 billion ounces. Fort Knox depository allegedly holds 147.4 million ounces.
6. It is obvious that Congress never borrowed 750 billion ounces of gold to substantiate the public debt. But the validity of this debt cannot be questioned pursuant to clause 4, Amendment 14, USCON.
Suggest reading Coinage Act of 1792, et seq., and Title 12 USC Sec. 411.
It is 'debt-free' if the US government issues the money and it is used within the US as a means of trade of services and products, backed by the full faith in the US government. It becomes 'debt' when it is bought by another country, and it would make sense to have it based on a universal standard, such as gold.
Currently our 'money' is created by the Fed, and 'owed' to the Fed by the US taxpayer. If we were to convert all 'Federal Reserve' currency to 'United States' currency, then we would be indebted only to countries that hold US treasuries, not to the Fed private bankers.
Again this would be true if the profits of the FED were not rebated to the treasury. They are so any debt held by the FED is basically fictitious. Its also why the national debt nominal amount is meaningless. New money to increase the national debt is interest free money. That is why the banks want everyone looking at the national debt because it dilutes their positions when it expands. The national debt spent into the hands of foreign interests is the debt that matters and then not nearly as much as people think because its in US denominations. When the national debt increases domestically it also dilutes foreign debt.
The scam is with fractional reserve lending, especially against fixed assets not produced by human labor.
We have 57 trillion owed to banks at roughly 6% = nearly 3 trillion. What if the 5 trillion in foreign debt debt rolls onto 2% 10 year bonds? 100 billion? So all this fuss is about 100 billion a year and not the nearly 3 trillion a year the FIRE sector is consuming?
1. Congress has power to "coin money" (stamp bullion) and "borrow money". It has no power to create money. If it did, why would it need to borrow it?
Foreign debt, thats why. Not everyone will necessarily accept local script. The US used Continental script which the British sabotaged with counterfeit.
Quote:
2. Notes are not money, by law. Notes are debt.
yep.
Quote:
3. Federal Reserve notes, since 1933, have no par value (worthless), due to Congress repudiating their promise to redeem them with "lawful money" (gold coin).
In other words the debt became the money supply. The national debt is now the money supply and nothing else. If we are not using gold, paying off the debt( which was once gold) will destroy the entire money supply. It used to be gold and Treasuries, which were as good as gold. Now its just Treasuries. So people are basically clamoring to extinguish the debt and the money supply.
Quote:
4. Via FICA, 313 million Americans are "human resources" pledged as collateral (i.e. "contributors") on the public debt, thus making FRNs into "legal tender".
5. The public debt, in excess of 15 trillion dollars, cannot be repaid with "dollar bills" (IOUs). Debt cannot pay debt. Minus plus a minus is more minus. In terms of gold, the public debt is over 750 billion ounces of gold stamped into coin. World wide supply (2007 est) is 5.3 billion ounces. Fort Knox depository allegedly holds 147.4 million ounces.
6. It is obvious that Congress never borrowed 750 billion ounces of gold to substantiate the public debt. But the validity of this debt cannot be questioned pursuant to clause 4, Amendment 14, USCON.
Suggest reading Coinage Act of 1792, et seq., and Title 12 USC Sec. 411.
Laws can be repealed. Gold is a lousy standard anyway. Its a myth that any large scale of it was used. Europe's post Roman world was silver based. Rome's was copper.
That is not true when Lincoln issued the greenback there was no bonds involved it was a fiat currency just like USD is today. It was backed by the 1st legal tender laws you know "this note is for all debts public and private" etc, etc.
Another question : if JFK was not attempting to issue debt free money why did he put into circulation a bill different then the FR?
Why did JFK by EO order silver cerificates to be issued into circulation?
You are wrong Lincoln, Money, Greenback, JFK, Kennedy, Edmund D. Taylor and C In reality, bonds were created to "back" the various greenbacks issues. And these bonds became a source of bank credit. They were sold to bankers at discount and at 6% interest in gold! In the end, this had the effect of making the issues of greenbacks a forced loan from the people to the government, saddling them with costs that should have been totally bypassed by the issue of greenbacks. The bond purchasers not only insisted on deep discounts to purchase the bonds, but gold interest to boot – and before the maturity of the bonds approached, and the Resumption Act was passed (1873, and effective in 1879), they finally received gold, in payment of the principle!
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT
The only 'kooks' we have to fear are the ones like yourself who refuse to acknowledge the truth and who still cling to false ideas simply because they are comforted by them.
Yeah, why be accurate when lying about things is so much easier, right? You can just sit here and babble on and on with your left wing nonsense, and expect people to not point out that you are WRONG..
http://www.xat.org/xat/usury.html
Hazard Circular - London Times 1865 From this extract its plan to see that it is the advantage provided by the adopting of this policy which poses a threat to those not using it. 1863, nearly there, Lincoln needed just a bit more money to win the war, and seeing him in this vulnerable state, and knowing that the president could not get the congressional authority to issue more greenbacks, the money changers proposed the passing of the National Bank Act. The act went through. From this point on the entire US money supply would be created out of debt by bankers buying US government bonds and issuing them from reserves for bank notes.
The issuing of money was NOT debt free, even if you lie and claim it was.
You are wrong Lincoln, Money, Greenback, JFK, Kennedy, Edmund D. Taylor and C In reality, bonds were created to "back" the various greenbacks issues. And these bonds became a source of bank credit. They were sold to bankers at discount and at 6% interest in gold! In the end, this had the effect of making the issues of greenbacks a forced loan from the people to the government, saddling them with costs that should have been totally bypassed by the issue of greenbacks. The bond purchasers not only insisted on deep discounts to purchase the bonds, but gold interest to boot – and before the maturity of the bonds approached, and the Resumption Act was passed (1873, and effective in 1879), they finally received gold, in payment of the principle!
Yeah, why be accurate when lying about things is so much easier, right? You can just sit here and babble on and on with your left wing nonsense, and expect people to not point out that you are WRONG..
THE HISTORY OF MONEY Abraham Lincoln's Greenback Dollar
Hazard Circular - London Times 1865 From this extract its plan to see that it is the advantage provided by the adopting of this policy which poses a threat to those not using it. 1863, nearly there, Lincoln needed just a bit more money to win the war, and seeing him in this vulnerable state, and knowing that the president could not get the congressional authority to issue more greenbacks, the money changers proposed the passing of the National Bank Act. The act went through. From this point on the entire US money supply would be created out of debt by bankers buying US government bonds and issuing them from reserves for bank notes.
The issuing of money was NOT debt free, even if you lie and claim it was.
You call my comments 'left-wing babbling'? I guess that makes you by default 'right-wing' babbling'. The issue of the Fed private banking control of the conomy is being pushed by one and only one candidate, Ron Paul. Sp do you consider him to be a 'left-wing babbler'?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
