| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 1,830 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
597 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
244 Posts |
Fascinating. I don't see any businesses actually taking precious metals at intrinsic value, but it is interesting that at least one state is willing to make a statement against fiscal insanity.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2424 Posts |
so what is stopping me from driving to Utah and getting some of their silver coins and bringing them back to CA to sell em?>
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3692 Posts |
Wasn't that the problem faced with South Carolina's crops being worth 5-6 times in New Hampshire? Naturally, you're going to have traders coming in from all places ready to take advantage of a plot of land. Reminds me of that American silver dealer who bought all those $5 Olympic coins at under $5 spot and then tried to sell them back to the mint.
Edited by Libertad
05/30/2011 6:35 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3345 Posts |
I would do that, if I was there. I would like to see a roll of these!
(A WHOLE roll of pure silver)
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
this was discussed a month or so ago, it would make it almost impossible for a merchant to keep up with the spot price of precious metals the way they change all the time. Heck you may have 2 ASE's in your pocket and right before you leave for the store you check the spot price and know you can afford 80.00 in groceries (just a number I pulled out of the hat, not actual spot price right now) and by the time you drive to the store and do your shopping and add it all up and figure you have exactly 80.00 worth of groceries in your card (including tax) only to find out by the time you get to the counter the price has falling and you have to put something back. Just seems rather naive to think any merchant would want to put themselves in this position where they would have to check spot price each time someone wanted to pay with precious metals. Also what about the people with pre 1964 quarters and stuff, they would have to determine how much they were actually worth also because they would be worth more than a quarter. On a plus, that would put all the coin searching tellers everywhere but still do not think it will ever happen |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1204 Posts |
Some people from around the world who have giant hoard of precious metal ll come here and buy the whole state I mean buy even the system there and own the state , from the land and banks also the politics and pay with gold and silver !(i dont know if they ll accept only the gov issued coinage or the precious metal in self ) but sounds just unreasonable , I think is just a politic move to make sure the americans who are unhappy with this crises in usa and turning against the obama administration this tea party want those votes to winn the election ! May not be never to happen they just want make some noise and show to the obama haters that they are against the gov , just politics . This crise is not the atual administration's fault , it Is concequences of many differents factor in a long run but you all know alway is gonna have a opposition dont matter who is in the power ; its called politic games !
|
|
Moderator
 Australia
16810 Posts |
The whole point of money is that it's convenient. People are, fundamentally, lazy - it's been proved time and time again that, if given a choice, people will choose a convenient form of money rather than one that is "safer" or "more sensible". Why do dollar notes circulate and not dollar coins? Because dollar coins are less convenient. The reason that coinage proved so popular back when it was invented 2,600 years ago was that you didn't have to go around haggling over every nuance of each transaction - a coin had a specific government-sanctioned face value which both sides of a transaction could accept. Using bullion as money means that both parties have to come to some sort of agreement as to what the bullion price actually is at that time, then work out the weight and fineness of the bullion, then work out equivalent amount of goods to exchange for that bullion, then figure out some way of "making change" that's also acceptable to both parties. It's not impossible, but it is inconvenient. There's no way merchants are going to willingly embrace such a system until and unless the more convenient forms of money collapse completely. Quote:
From the article:
...supporters say it is more than political pocket change. They say that it is just a beginning, that one day soon Utah might mint its own coins... I've said it before in the other threads about these laws, and I'll say it again: the US Constitution very specifically forbids states from issuing their own coins ( Art.1 Sect.10). To make it's own coins, Utah will either have to (a) secede, or (b) get the Constitution changed. Both of these options have proved to be very difficult things for states to do in the past. Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Valued Member
United States
136 Posts |
Its actually Article 1, Section 8 that forbids states from issuing their own money as that authority was withdrawn from the states and given to congress at the adoption of the constitution. Federalist paper #44 I believe it is goes into details on this. Section 10 gives the states the authority to make ONLY gold and silver a 'tender in payment of debts'.
The only form of money we have today that is actually made under constitutional authority are coins. All paper money is not, it is issued outside the authority of the constitution. If we simply got back to constitutionally issued paper money we could alleviate a great number of the economic situations we have today. But I will stop there lest I get on my soap box.
I do agree though that money is convenient. Money, whether it be coin or currency, is nothing but a medium of exchange. Its rate of exchange established by the government and what that rate of exchange purchases is determined more or less by free markets. It is unfortunate, however, as Sap pointed out people generally choose a more convenient form of money over one that is safer.
If I got to wait while a merchant has to figure up how much silver there is in a coin and then check spot rates I'm probably not going to go that route.
I have some concerns though, what would happen is these small shop operations would pop up and be something like the quick check cashing places except exchange your silver for dollars and it would be some twisted perversion of the spot rate to where I get very little of the actual value in silver in return.
South Carolina attempted to do something along the lines of Utah earlier this year. They actually had a bill (whether it passed or not I'm not sure) that would give the state of South Carolina the authority to create its own currency of gold and silver in the event of a Federal Reserve failure. There are a few other states that were looking into similar measures.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3692 Posts |
Haven't you guys heard of the London Fix? I know that most places today go by the minute (what an age) but back in the day did they not use a set price for the entire trading day? I even mentioned London Fix to a banker - they had no idea what that meant.
It's true that money is for lazy people but it works. The thing that makes it work is don't take more than you need to get things rolling and don't hoard (leads to more printing). Instead of trading actual goods and services, we look to a middle man to tell us what our services are worth. But imagine a shoe shiner who had to try and polish everyone's shoes just to eat some bread or ride the bus.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10034 Posts |
Actually this kind of a system can work rather well. On the old NORFED website, it had a picture of an actual vending machine (!) for 1 oz. silver rounds Chambersburg, Pennsylvania. The people and businesses there did use the rounds as regular currency (before the big rush on silver). In fact I saw signs in store windows saying they accepted these rounds. Some of the locals I talked with said they used them just like normal money. I was surprised to find out that some had used them in the Chambersburg Wal-mart! When I first heard of NORFED in 1998, I thought the guy behind it had the right idea of backing currency with silver (and auditing the - private owned - federal reserve bank), but it seemed he was engaging in some price gouging since the value he stamped on the coins was (at least I thought) quite a bit more than silver was worth. Hindsight is always best and now I wish I had bought some anyway in 1998 as these became a political issue and now have a collectible value on them. The 1998's sell for multi hundreds, and the more recent ones sell higher that ASEs on ebay. I was personally drawn to the design of them when I saw in an ebay auction that Chambersburg had their own round made with the PA state seal on the back. I just liked the look of the coin. When I obtained one of these, I was surprised at how professional these pieces were made. So I got a few more of them. They are beautiful in design - this is why I have a picture of one as my avatar. To me they, along with the ASEs, are some of the prettiest silver rounds. How much squash could a Sasquatch squash if a Sasquatch would squash squash? Download and read: Grading the graders Costly TPG ineptitude and No FG Kennedy halveshttps://ln5.sync.com/dl/7ca91bdd0/w...i3b-rbj9fir2 |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Quote:
so what is stopping me from driving to Utah and getting some of their silver coins and bringing them back to CA to sell em?> Your kidding of course. With the price of gas for your car, it would cost you a fortune to go there. I spend as much to go to a nearby store in my car for gas as if it were Gold. Quote:
To make it's own coins, Utah will either have to (a) secede, Now that could start one of those again. I can see it now. 38 states secede to make their own coins.  The worst part of that would be an entire new pile of different Quarters. |
|
Valued Member
United States
262 Posts |
Not sure who subscribes to CoinWorld but they had an very interesting on this....I believe they also stated that North Carolina was planning on doing the same thing. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
This is old news they passed that law over a month ago. One thing that makes it difficult to disscuss this topic is that I have never actually seen the text of the law so I can't really say what it does. It has been reported that it makes gold and silver coins legal tender. Whose coins? Anyones? And legal tender at what rate? Face value or bullion value? If it doesn't make it at bullin value then it is meaningless nonsense because it would mean that they have declared legal tender US coins legal tender. A non-issue. This is why you have to see what the law actually says. Unfortunately the link to the legislation in the article is broken. This also does not mean that Utah will start striking their own coins. That would be unconstitutional and the Federal government would be within their rights to step in and put a stop to it. |
|
Valued Member
United States
136 Posts |
Ive seen the South Carolina text and I do not recall whether or not it made the coins legal tender. I want to say it did, but please dont quote me on that until I've had a chance to look at the bill again, but even if it did, as long as its not a coin and they do it with gold or silver, it is constitutional. If you interpret 'striking coins' as I believe you are, as in striking coins as they are made and circulated then you would be correct that it is unconstitutional as it explicitly forbids the coining of money. However, according to the constitution the states can make gold and silver tender for the payment of debts. So, it would seem, as I read it that as long as it doesn't look like a 'coin' they can do pretty much what they want as long as it was with gold or silver. The constitution does also state that any rights not spelled out in the constitution are reserved to the states and people. So while coining money is spelled out as a federal function, it leaves the door open that something else could be done with gold and silver. What that 'something' would be and how it would be implemented is beyond me. It would seem, however, that some of the states are trying to figure out what that 'something' would be or even form it as a just in case plan. From Article 1, Section 10 Quote:
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. Edit to correct formating of constitutional text. Edited by StormStrikes
06/01/2011 7:41 pm
|
|
Moderator
Australia
16810 Posts |
Quote:
However, according to the constitution the states can make gold and silver tender for the payment of debts. So, it would seem, as I read it that as long as it doesn't look like a 'coin' they can do pretty much what they want as long as it was with gold or silver. No, it's quite specific - only "Coin" can be made a "Tender". I don't know if there's ever been a constitutional ruling on the definition of "coin", but the commonsense understainging is a piece of metal produced for use as money, with a value assigned to it by a government authorised to do so. US courts have ruled in the past, via the "mail fraud" route, that "coins" issued by unrecognized countries such as Hutt River Province cannot legally be marketed as "coins". "Make" in this clause does not mean "manufacture", it means "declare". The scenario the founding fathers imagined was that the young United States might not be able to always make enough coinage to go around - a scenario which did in fact eventuate for the first few decades after the Constitution was signed. In such a scenario, the states would be free to declare whatever coinage they had to hand as legal tender in that state - and most such coinage would have been foreign coinage. This power was left in state hands because different foreign coins would likely be available in different parts of the country: British/Canadian coins in the north, Mexican coins in the south, European and African coins in the east, Asian coins in the west, etc. As far as I can tell, the "gold and silver coin" this clause talks about can only belong to any of the following categories: - foreign coins - coins issued by or on behalf of the state before the state joined the US. Apart from several East Coast states and Hawaii, no such coins exist, and all such coins are worth much more in collector value than face value - though the state would have the right to declare whatever face value on them it pleased. Quantities of these old coins available for commerce would be limited indeed, and would quickly be souvenired out of circulation. - US coins that the US government has demonetized. Since the US government has not demonetized any of its coins, this category is empty. "Coins" which a state produces for itself now,while it is still a member of the US, can not be included. Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 1,830 |
|
Posted 05/30/2011 6:21 pm
