The American Ruling Class

[rickoff]

Sorry, are you saying these 'Greenbacks' would be 'backed' by Gold reserves?

Firstly, my understanding is the U.S. Government has no Gold reserves, so again your suggesting we go back to a situation which no longer exists.

No, Jim. I said that greenbacks are just like FRN's in that they are both valueless fiat currencies worth only the paper and ink they are printed with. Neither is backed by gold or silver, and I did not suggest going back to that. My point was that it is crazy for our "government" to borrow FRN's at interest when they could simply be printing greenbacks debt and interest free. And since there would be no debt or interest to pay, there would be no need for any tax revenues.

[aljhoa]

Thomas Jefferson
First Inaugural Address
In the Washington, D.C.
Wednesday, March 4, 1801
During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore; that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others, and should divide opinions as to measures of safety. But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this Government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary, the strongest Government on earth. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the law, would fly to the standard of the law, and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern. Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.
Thomas Jefferson: First Inaugural Address. U.S. Inaugural Addresses. 1989

Pardon Edward Snowden
Edward Snowden is a national hero and should be immediately issued a a full, free, and absolute pardon for any crimes he has committed or may have committed related to blowing the whistle on secret NSA surveillance programs.

Created: Jun 09, 2013

Signatures needed by July 09, 2013 to reach goal of 100,000; 0
Total signatures on this petition; 107,440
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...owden/Dp03vGYD

Al

[jdodson]

Sorry, but that argument makes no sense.

What do you think happened when a trillion dollars of stimulus was pumped into the economy? None of us here recieved a penny, yet the dollar was devalued.

you would be one of those 5 and you would have received the same that they did - a million dollars. Therefore, everything stays relative.

Your actually right, I guess that was bad example, If everything stays relative...then so would debt, would it not?

Imagine if a canyon full of gold was discovered...An ounce of gold would no longer buy a mens fine suit...maybe that price would be 10 ounces.

The rarity of an item is what gives it value. Weather its gold, paper, or even dirt.
Dirt is worthless because its everywhere.

Secondly, printed fiat currency is not money, so the idea that "much more money is now in supply" is incorrect.

Money | Define Money at Dictionary.com
Mon.ey - any circulating medium of exchange, including coins, paper money, and demand deposits.

FRN's are in fact "money". The value they hold is relative to the supply.
The more we print them, the less rare they become, and the less value they hold. So the more it should cost to pay off debt.

If we printed 16 trillion dollars it would no longer be worth 16 trillion dollars.

[aljhoa]

The rarity of an item is what gives it value. Weather its gold, paper, or even dirt.
Dirt is worthless because its everywhere.

Margrit Kennedy: Interest and Inflation Free Money

The combination of an exchange ring, like the LET System or WIR
exchange ring - with a savings and loans association, like the JAK
System - but based on a parking fee or circulation incentive to help
all necessary transactions does not exist today, although it would be
quite easy to bring into existence by linking together the
longstanding practical experience with these two systems. Thus an
interest-free money system would be created which would provide
all the possibilities covered by the normal money system:
1) Exchange
2) Lending
3) Saving
Different attempts with alternative money systems are politically
meaningful, because they help us to understand how money works and
the purpose money serves in our life. Practical experiences are
important, because they encourage people to make changes on a wider
basis. However, so far none of these attempts have changed the major
problems caused by today's money system in the world economy.
Therefore, the aim to introduce fundamental monetary change at a
national and international level should be among our highest political
priorities for a just world.
http://library.uniteddiversity.coop/...free_money.pdf

WHY AND HOW USURY HAS BEEN IMPOSED ACROSS THE WORLD

Al

[Shamus]

Anyone with an interest in money should really look into Bitcoin. It is, as far as I can tell, the very first currency that deals with the "trusted third party" system by doing away with it entirely. It's a completely decentralized, peer-to-peer system using public key cryptography to verify transactions.

"So what?" I can hear you say. Well, there are two very compelling reasons to like this new currency:

• It does away with centralized banks
• Its value can't be inflated, as only a fixed number of Bitcoins will ever be made

For the first time ever, it is possible to trade goods and services using a medium of exchange without a bank being involved in the transaction. That alone is enormous, and worthy of serious consideration. "But I've been doing that with cash* for years before Bitcoin came ever came along!" I can hear you say. True, but that cash had to be issued by a central bank, which controls the value of it by all kinds of machinations, not the least of which is printing more and more thus diluting its value. No third party means that you don't have to give your power away for the privilege of doing business with your fellow man.

Currently, the Corporate USA does not like Bitcoin at all, and is doing everything it can to prevent its adoption. However, due to its decentralized nature, it can't be shut down the way that eGold and Liberty Reserve were. Right now, it's vulnerable in the conversion from USD to BTC, and this is where the Corp. US is focusing its attention. However, that problem will go away once more and more businesses start accepting BTC.


* I recognize that Federal Reserve Notes are not money in the legal sense, but for the sake of argument, most people treat it that way.

[aljhoa]

Currently, the Corporate USA does not like Bitcoin at all, and is doing everything it can to prevent its adoption. However, due to its decentralized nature, it can't be shut down the way that eGold and Liberty Reserve were. Right now, it's vulnerable in the conversion from USD to BTC, and this is where the Corp. US is focusing its attention. However, that problem will go away once more and more businesses start accepting BTC.

Vircurex,
the exchange platform for buying, selling and trading
your Bitcoins and its various alt-chains.
We currently support
Bitcoin,
Namecoin,
Devcoin,
Litecoin,
Ixcoin,
PPCoin,
Terracoin,
Feathercoin
https://vircurex.com

Al

[rickoff]

What do you think happened when a trillion dollars of stimulus was pumped into the economy? None of us here recieved a penny, yet the dollar was devalued.

Where do you think that trillion dollars came from? Did it come from anything of actual value? No, it was just a ledger entry stating that the "government" had borrowed a trillion from the Federal Reserve. Nothing of any value was given to the "government." When something has zero value to begin with then it can not be devalued.

FRN's are in fact "money". The value they hold is relative to the supply. The more we print them, the less rare they become, and the less value they hold. So the more it should cost to pay off debt. If we printed 16 trillion dollars it would no longer be worth 16 trillion dollars.

FRN's are not money. They are debt instruments. Take a 1 dollar FRN out of your billfold and look at it. Printed at the top is "FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE," right? A "NOTE" is a debt instrument and simply acknowledges a debt is owed. In this case the debt is owed by the Federal Government and is payable to the Federal Reserve. You hold in your hand a 1 dollar debt note. Think about it - it is essentially the same thing as an IOU. Is an IOU money? No, it is not. It is not a payment - it is simply a promise to pay a stated amount of something at some future time. The problem with IOU's is that they are only as good as the promise that was made to pay. If you advertised your car for sale and a fellow came by and offered to buy it in exchange for a handwritten IOU, would you accept that IOU and let him drive away with your car? Probably not. What reason would you have to believe he would ever pay you? Likewise, what reason would you have to believe the "Government" will ever pay the debt it owes? The debt constantly rises because none of it is ever paid. Only the interest on that debt is paid. So you see, that IOU (FRN) is worthless. It has no value, and therefore cannot be devalued no matter how many FRN's are said to exist.

Actually, the Federal Reserve would like to do away with FRN's altogether, and do everything by electronic transactions. The vast majority of transactions are now done using credit or debit cards, so there isn't a need for printing up a lot of FRN's. When the "government" borrows a trillion, the FED does not print a trillion FRN's, they simply make a ledger entry and a government bond is created, which then must be "sold." It's quite the sham.

[dutchdivco]

Semantics

Seems to me. And your right, Rick, it IS quite a scam. A scam that started when our country was founded, and was used BY our 'founding fathers' to fund the revolutionary war! Spain gave the Colonies 7 million gold 'dollers' (yes, noe the spelling difference). Then, the Colonies printed up notes that were SAID to be 'backed' by this gold.
Patriots wanted to support the revolution, so they used these revolutionary notes as currency. As the Colonies needed more $ to finance the revolution, they just kept printing more currency, with the result that the value of each note went down.
Anyway, IF I wan to sell my car, for say,....$2,000. I get a buyer, and he says "I don't have $2,000, but I have this IOU from Fred, for,...$2,500. Freds 'good' for it, you know him. (And because I DO know him, I'm able to verify that he is 'good' for it), and so I take the IOU from Fred, in exchange for the car. Thats basically what your talking about. So yes, and IOU CAN be used as 'currency'; ANYTHING, shells, beads, paper or coin, CAN be used as 'currency', including an IOU; so long as everyone agrees it is a symbol, to represent some given amount of value.
And again, this all really 'caught on' when Man decided to start living in one place, instead of hunter/gathering. Then people wanted to live near other people, which lead to towns and then cities.This led inevitably to 'specialisation'; it no longer was practical for each person to supply their own necesities, and made more 'sense' for this person to make shoes, and this one to make wagons, etc. At some point, bartering became unworkable, and similar 'forces' had caused Governments to develop. And so the government stepped in, to produce coins which could be used, to 'facilitate' commerce. And, also made it possible for government to collect TAXES. Which gets us back where we started.
Saying the Government can simply print more greenbacks, when it needs $, and so there is no need for taxes, seems rather naive; its like "What doyou MEAN, I can't pay off my Visa card with my mastercard, or What do you MEAN, I'm 'overdrawn'; I STILL have checks left!
In order for a currency to have value, it has to be percieved as having value; thats its 'key'; if the government can just print more as it needs, at some point the percieved value is going to disappear.
And I THINK thats bound to happen, at some point, with these FRN's. No one in the History of Man, has ever done what the Fed has been doing, artificially suppressing the interest rate to near -0-. Going to be interesting to see what happens when it stops. Can you say 'run-away inflation'? Maybe THIS will bring about the collapse we're all expecting? Jim

[jdodson]

rickoff, I understand alot of what your saying but I think we are just arguing semantics when it comes to calling FRN's "money".
Regardless of its origin or reason for existence any circulating item that is commonly traded for other items such as a cheeseburger should be considered money. Weather the value is real or perceived shouldn't change that definition in my opinion. At the end of the day, the real value of any object is what we perceive it to be, regardless of weather it holds any real value or not.

Think about it - it is essentially the same thing as an IOU. Is an IOU money?

If its circulated and commonly accepted, yes I personally would consider it "money".

When the "government" borrows a trillion, the FED does not print a trillion FRN's, they simply make a ledger entry and a government bond is created, which then must be "sold." It's quite the sham.

You obviously know much more about this topic than I do. If nothing is actually printed, how did FRN notes ever get into circulation? I assumed when Obama borrowed a trillion for the stimulus bill, a trillion was printed and distributed which is what was used to actually pay the workers from those "shovel ready jobs". If not, where did the actual paper bills come from that paid those workers?

[rickoff]

rickoff, I understand a lot of what your saying but I think we are just arguing semantics when it comes to calling FRN's "money". Regardless of its origin or reason for existence any circulating item that is commonly traded for other items such as a cheeseburger should be considered money. Weather the value is real or perceived shouldn't change that definition in my opinion. At the end of the day, the real value of any object is what we perceive it to be, regardless of weather it holds any real value or not. If its circulated and commonly accepted, yes I personally would consider it "money".

I agree that the value assigned to anything is largely the value perceived by the person who is receiving that item. Probably 98% or more of the public believes, like you, that FRN's are "money," and this perception is the only reason why people continue to accept and use these worthless debt instruments. I'm sure you would readily agree that an IOU, which is a promise to pay a debt at some unknown future time, is not money, and there is no reason to believe that debt will ever be paid. When the public finally understands this, no one will continue accepting FRN's.

Believing that FRN's are money is understandable, because it is due to years of false indoctrination. You may continue to refer to FRN's as "money" if you wish, but any attempt to convince me that they are "money" will definitely fail. There's no need for us to argue, and we probably both agree that the current Federal Reserve system should be abolished quickly.

You obviously know much more about this topic than I do. If nothing is actually printed, how did FRN notes ever get into circulation? I assumed when Obama borrowed a trillion for the stimulus bill, a trillion was printed and distributed which is what was used to actually pay the workers from those "shovel ready jobs". If not, where did the actual paper bills come from that paid those workers?

FRN's were printed and used in the past in large numbers, but with electronic fund transfers accounting for nearly all credits and debits, there is actually little need for FRN's any more. Consequently, there are less and less FRN's in circulation each year. Banks turn in worn out FRN's to the FED, and the FED used to replace these with crisp new FRN's, but now they mostly just issue an imaginary electronic "credit" to the bank, and destroy those worn FRN's.

It may surprise you to learn that the Federal Reserve itself says that there are only $1.5 trillion in FRN's currently in circulation worldwide, and of course that only accounts for less than half the annual budget of the US. Since the US borrows from the FED in order to meet the annual budget, you can see that there simply aren't enough FRN's to "borrow." But no problem! The FED simply makes an electronic ledger entry stating that they have lent whatever trillion amount to the Corporation U.S. "government." Nothing is actually given to the "government other than an imaginary electronically transferred "credit" line of the amount "borrowed." In exchange, the "government" issues a bond to the FED, promising to repay that amount plus interest at some unstated point in the future. Crazy, huh? And what's even crazier is that it would be impossible for the "government to ever repay the amount plus interest, because the interest FRN's were never printed or electronically created. Anyways, the FED places the government bond in their vault and then sells smaller bonds to investors.

Currently the FED retains about 70% of the original bond amount, and sells the rest, and that's because private investors and foreign country investors are wising up to the fact that this system is unsustainable. With the imaginary "funds" having been credited to the Corporation U.S. Treasury account, the "government" then issues Treasury checks to "pay" for all things such as Federal employee paychecks, military, Welfare payments, Social Security checks, Bank and Wall Street bailouts, General Motors bailouts, crony inspired investments in "Green Energy" companies that never produce a product before going bankrupt, Stimulus projects that never seem to produce the "shovel ready jobs" that were touted, and so on. The Corporations and other entities receiving these imaginary electronic credits use them to pay their executives, general employees, and sub-contractors by writing worthless checks. Those checks are deposited in bank accounts where further imaginary "credits" are created.

To this point, as you can see, there is no need to print up or transfer any FRN's whatsoever, and in fact there is little need to do so beyond this point. That's because the vast majority of transfers into and out of bank accounts is accomplished by further electronic 'direct deposits" and transfers using debit cards and credit cards. I myself make frequent use of my debit card to purchase nearly anything with a "cost" of more than $10, and therefore seldom need any FRN's. When I start to get down low on FRN's, I utilize the option of withdrawing $20 in FRN's at the time I am making a store purchase. The FED would like to eliminate FRN's altogether, and that does seem to be the direction we are headed in. I'm all for eliminating them and using greenbacks instead, but not to continue allowing the FED to maintain their imaginary fund transfers and interest charges.

You may also be interested to know that, according to the Corporation US Treasury, the federal "government" paid about $360 billion in interest on the National Debt in 2012. The fiscal year for Treasury accounting runs from October through September, and for the 8 months of 2013 which account for October through May, the interest has already come to over $252 billion. Of course the methods by which the Treasury calculates interest payments is rather questionable, and the actual cost can be way more. For example, by their own admission, the amount of interest paid in July on Department of Defense expenditures was "reduced $75 billion" simply by implementing "a change in the accounting method!" So in other words, the Treasury sugar coats the figures to make them look like things aren't so bad when in fact the reality of the situation is anything but good. With that $75 Billion added back in where it should be, that brings us to interest expense of $327 billion already for 8 months of 2013, with another 4 months to go. Simply insane, don't you think?

[dutchdivco]

Rick

This IS largely semantics, but words ARE important, as you discussion demonstrates; If the majority of people think of FRN's as 'money' (sematics) they ARE money.
And yes, I think we all agree these shenanigans are absolutely absurd.
If you and I and some other members started a 'Corporation', and did what the gov't is doing, we'd be prosecuted for fraud, money laundering,, lets see now, RICO violations, currency manipulation, insider trading, counterfieting,
misappropriation, and I'm sure there are more charges, as well.

But because the Gov't is doing it, there is no prosecution. And, of coarse, BIG entities, Corporations, etc. are 'in on it', as well, its a mess!

Flush twice, its a Loooong way to D.C.! The whole thing you describe is like a 'ponzi-scheme', just like Social Security. And, like any Ponzi-scheme, the people running it always make the same mistake; there is no 'exit strategy'; they always get 'caught' and come up short, in the end.

I just don't see that there is or can be any 'easy' way to fix the situation, that will be implenented; you can propose all sorts of things that would 'solve' the problem, but if the solution is one that won't be implemented, its just whistling past the graveyard. Not going to happen.

And too many people 9including sheeple) believe they have a 'vested' interest in the status quo, and are scared of any radical change. Only when the system collapses, or when the current situation becomes too undesirable will people seriously consider any alternative which includes major change.

And of coarse, you know the one about how to cook a frog; if you dump him in boiling water he'll hop right out; so, you put him in a pan of cold water, and gradually add heat; the increase in heat is gradual, and so he doesn't notice, and stays in till he's cooked!

And currently, thats what the sheeple are doing. Question is when will the sheep look up? What will be the catalyst? I'm thinking inflation is just about got to result from the FED eliminating quantitative easing, and inflation is something that WILL p*ss people off. But, we'll see!

Hey, did you see that the IRS recently 'discovered' that there were additional groups being 'targeted? Groups with 'occupy' were apperently being treated the same as 'tea party' groups. So, apperently the IRS 'sees' the same thing I do; the 'Tea Party' groups, and the 'occupy' people actually have many of the same gripes! LOL Jim

[Mad Scientist]

This IS largely semantics, but words ARE important, as you discussion demonstrates; If the majority of people think of FRN's as 'money' (sematics) they ARE money.
And yes, I think we all agree these shenanigans are absolutely absurd.

But how many sheeple actually stop and think about what is going on? They go work for someone for one hour and get paid $10. They can then take their $10 FRN and give it to someone else in exchange for that person’s $10 worth of work. As far as they see it the system is working just fine.
The fact that 50 years ago that same one hour of work would have only paid them $2 is ancient history and totally irrelevant.

[rickoff]

If the majority of people think of FRN's as 'money' (sematics) they ARE money.

No, it only goes to show the majority are incorrect and have no idea as to what they are talking about. If the majority of people who were shown an artificial apple believed it to be a real apple, would that make it an apple?

IF I want to sell my car, for say,....$2,000. I get a buyer, and he says "I don't have $2,000, but I have this IOU from Fred, for,...$2,500. Fred's 'good' for it, you know him. (And because I DO know him, I'm able to verify that he is 'good' for it), and so I take the IOU from Fred, in exchange for the car. That's basically what your talking about.

No, I'm talking about FRN's, which are IOU's that are worthless. You may be able to verify that "Fred's" word is as good as gold, and that there is an almost certain probability that Fred will come good on his promise, but you cannot verify that a FRN IOU has any value whatsoever. It doesn't have any value because the "government" does not have the capability to make good on their IOU, and you know that.

Saying the Government can simply print more greenbacks, when it needs $, and so there is no need for taxes, seems rather naive; its like "What do you MEAN, I can't pay off my Visa card with my mastercard, or What do you MEAN, I'm 'overdrawn'; I STILL have checks left!

You're missing the point, Jim. First of all, when greenbacks are printed, there is no need to "pay off" anything because nothing has been borrowed, and there are no interest charges either. The VISA card/MasterCard example is therefore meaningless, since the "government" would not have borrowed anything which needed to be repaid. Similarly, the "government's use of greenbacks can not be likened to writing checks on an overdrawn account. Whatever you had in your checking account was tied to a limited number of FRN's, but the greenbacks are tied to nothing, and are therefore limitless.

You probably aren't familiar with the way the greenbacks worked, so I'll include a bit of history on them which I wrote in post #182 back in 2009:

During the Civil War (from 1861-1865), President Lincoln needed money to finance the War from the North. The Bankers were going to charge him 24% to 36% interest. Lincoln was horrified and went away greatly distressed, for he was a man of principle and would not think of plunging his beloved country into a debt that the country would find impossible to pay back. Eventually President Lincoln was advised [by Edmund Dick Taylor] to get Congress to pass a law authorizing the printing of full legal tender Treasury notes to pay for the War effort. Lincoln recognized the great benefits of this issue. At one point he wrote:
"... (we) gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they have ever had - their own paper money to pay their own debts..."

The Treasury notes were printed with green ink on the back, so the people called them "Greenbacks". Lincoln printed 400 million dollars worth of Greenbacks (the exact amount being $449,338,902), money that he delegated to be created as debt-free and interest-free money to finance the War. It served as legal tender for all debts, public and private. He printed it, paid it to the soldiers, to the U.S. Civil Service employees, and bought supplies for war with them.

Shortly after that happened, The London Times printed the following:

"if that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the North American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed, or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

The Bankers obviously understood. The only thing that is a threat to their power is sovereign governments printing interest-free and debt-free paper money. They knew it would break the power of the international Bankers.

Ellen Brown, president of the Public Banking Institute, explains how greenbacks not only were instrumental in winning the Civil War, but also funded a period of unprecedented expansion and economic soundness:

Lincoln’s government created the greatest industrial giant the world had yet seen. The steel industry was launched, a continental railroad system was created, a new era of farm machinery and cheap tools was promoted, free higher education was established, government support was provided to all branches of science, the Bureau of Mines was organized, and labor productivity was increased by 50 to 75 percent. The Greenback was not the only currency used to fund these achievements, but they could not have been accomplished without it, and they could not have been accomplished on money borrowed at the usurious rates the bankers were attempting to extort from the North.

Ellen advocates a return to a system based on greenbacks, and publicly owned state and county banks, as the solution to America's economic woes. She notes that, "Here in the United States, the state of North Dakota has a wholly state-owned bank that creates credit on its books just as private banks do. This credit is used to serve the needs of the community, and the interest on loans is returned to the government. Not coincidentally, NorthDakota has a $1.2 billion budget surplus at a time when 46 of 50 states are insolvent, an impressive achievement for a state of isolated farmers battling challenging weather. The North Dakota prototype could be copied not only in every U.S. state, but also at the federal level."

Ellen wrote that in 2009, and now in 2013 North Dakota is the only state which has managed to avoid a credit crisis.

I leave you with a keen observation noted by Thomas Edison:

“If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good, makes the bill good, also. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets money brokers collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20%, whereas the currency pays nobody but those who contribute directly in some useful way. It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30 million in bonds and not $30 million in currency. Both are promises to pay, but one promise fattens the usurers and the other helps the people.”

[dutchdivco]

Mad Scientist

Remember the old public service anti-drug commercial "Why do you think they call it DOPE, kid?"
Well, WHY do you you think they are called Sheeple, Mad Scientist?!!!

In making society 'more efficient', individuals in that society have relinquished responsibility, and at the same time made our lives more complicated, and stressful.

And we, (collectively) have gone from being wolves; as they really are, not as they are often portrayed, to being sheeple. We surrendered the freedom for security, and its been going on since we abandoned the hunter/gatherer lifestyle, for the staying in one place lifestyle, which archeologists call civilisation. Bad decision, bad 'choice' as far as i'm concerned. But we are here, and this is now. And we made a decision 10,000 years ago, to take the left turn in the road, rather than continueing on the road we had been on for millions of years. And this road we're on now leads to a cliff, and we're going to go OFF that cliff. Just a question of when, and the 'details'. Jim

[dutchdivco]

Rick

I think you don't really understand the concept of 'semantics', just as I, (probably as a result of that greenback funded (initially, at least) public education system, don't really understand finance.

"No, it only goes to show the majority are incorrect and have no idea as to what they are talking about. If the majority of people who were shown an artificial apple believed it to be a real apple, would that make it an apple?"

Well, yes, it would. Thats what sematics is about. Give you an example; when you and I were kids, 'swipe' meant to steal something, as in "Where'd you get that skateboard; did you SWIPE it? And 'everybody' accepted thats what 'swipe' meant. I was a little confused, the first time a cashier told me to 'swipe' my debit card. "I didn't SWIPE it, its MY card!!" The ganerally accepted meaning of 'swipe' changed. And so yes, if everyone came to see an artificial apple as an 'apple', THATS what an apple would be!

Anyway, on the one hand I want to say that if these 'greenbacks' are printed up by the government, they are intrinisically worthless, unless you need some toilet paper. That is, they are just a piece of paper. I accept the quote, that if a Government can issue bonds, they can issue currency; both are 'worthless'; in that they have NO 'intrinsic' value, (again, unless you need toilet paper). Their only 'value' is that the majority of people agree to asign a certain value to them. The Government SAYING they will be used for all 'debts, public or private' means nothing, unless and only as much as you trust the government. I DO 'get' what you are saying, about the moneylenders, and usury. Just don't see that $ directly printed and issued by the government is without inherent problems; the problem I think we would agree with is that the government tends to spend too much $; there are all sorts of factors which contribute to the increase in the size of Governement.

Whether the financing of the government is done thru FRN's, or greenbacks, the problem is how to restrain the growth of governement. The government being able to directly print more $ whenever it wants means MORE government, which means less liberty. NOT in favor of that.Jim