Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

[Roln99]

Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

I stumbled across this ad while conducting online research and I thought it worth mentioning!!!

GOLD. . . . AND THE PATRIOT ACT
REGULATIONS EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2006


CLEARLY SHOW . . . .
THE INTENT - TO (ONCE AGAIN) - PROHIBIT
THE OWNERSHIP OF GOLD IN ANY FORM
OTHER THAN -- JEWELRY & ANTIQUE COINS
. . . . These new rules can be found on the internet at the Federal Register website. However, the specific definitions are buried at the very end of the third column on page 33716. They specifically define, under federal law, what IS and what IS NOT "bullion.". . . . Also, they define, under the Patriot Act - what IS and IS NOT "antique numismatic gold."

. . . . What's more, the trade associations of the jewelry industry involving 30,000 retail jewelry stores . . . . and about 1,000 bullion and numismatic coin dealers were notified, in 2005, of the requirement to attend costly seminars - led by the Treasury Department - on the new rules and regulations concerning the sale of gold in either bullion - or - antique form. It gets much worse. . . .

TREASURY DEPARTMENT
REGISTRATION -- AND LICENSING
BY THE GOVERNMENT
. . . . It should be impressed upon our readers' minds, that retail jewelry stores and gold dealers are now effectively - "LICENSED & REGULATED" - by the Treasury Department. Forms must be filed according to regulations on certain transactions, depending upon whether they are one type or the other . . . . cash or paid by check. KEY QUESTION: - - What might the purpose be for all this??

To receive an annotated copy of the Federal Register,
plus related 1933 documents.
Contact us at 1-800-543-0486, no charge.
My staff will be glad to discuss this clearly threatening document and its wording.
. . . . All of this is not an accident - but it is indicative of plans to reorganize the U.S. monetary system based upon a continuously weakening currency - - due to our phenomenally growing trade debts with our trading partners, in particular, Red China.

. . . . Our trade debts with China - alone - are running at the rate of a quarter trillion dollars per year at the present time, increasing our China debts - by a trillion dollars every four years. Other countries are LENDING US the money . . . . to purchase goods by accepting U.S. Treasury Bonds to invest the accumulated dollar cash taken in payment. However, China has already rejected any further Treasury Bonds to invest their dollars in, as of the fall of 2007.

. . . . China is now pressing hard on the Treasury Department to come up with options for it to purchase other American assets such as real estate . . . . home mortgage bonds . . . . AND GOLD. We are faced with a monetary crisis of monumental proportions with China leading the way to collect unpaid debts for merchandise we no longer provide ourselves.

. . . . The U.S. press does NOT cover the monetary threat . . . . However, the London Financial Times does, occasionally, provide - an article with a clear indication of the possible collapse of the dollar -- IF our trade practices continue much longer, which lead to higher and higher debts.

THE SETTLEMENT OF DEBTS --
WITH GOLD -
The basis of all Central Bank wealth and the primary monetary asset used to settle debts between nations.
. . . . The settlement of U.S. debts must be - AT LEAST - partially paid with American gold bullion plus: . . . . real estate and other assets. To accomplish this, the rules of the Patriot Act clearly indicate the confiscation of privately owned bullion -- with exceptions for antique numismatic coins with a rarity value specified AT LEAST EQUAL to the bullion content. This key formula will be the single defining fact - as to whether or not you will be able to continue to own gold coins after the confiscation is announced.

NOTE THIS: - -
Failure to turn in your gold will reap no benefit - - AS YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO FIND A BUYER - DUE TO CRIMINAL PENALTIES.

. . . . If you would like a copy of these regulations with an explanatory bulletin, you should contact our office at 1-800-543-0486 requesting a copy. Once you see the regulations in print - pursuant to the Patriot Act from the federal website, you will realize that the freedom to own gold, achieved only in 1975 - is going to COME TO AN END ONCE AGAIN.

HOW TO PREPARE NOW FOR CONFISCATION --

. . . . To protect our subscribers and clients, we have long since chosen a reliable numismatic expert to offer services which we stand behind and guarantee satisfaction. Since there are a number of questionable or dishonest dealers in the numismatic and coin trade, it is especially important that you ONLY deal with a numismatic dealer backed by a publisher. . . . When you call for a copy of the regulations, we can provide you with the name and phone number of our recommended dealer.

. . . . To receive our backing, it is a requirement that we receive a faxed or mailed copy of your invoice directly from OUR RECOMMENDED DEALER.

WHEN WILL CONFISCATION COME ??

. . . . There is no way to know the day of the confiscation decision pursuant to the regulations of the Patriot Act . . . . However, in our publisher, Lawrence Patterson's view - having been involved in gold since 1966. . . . and having studied the monetary system of the U.S. and its accumulated debts . . . . current events indicate that time is clearly running out for negotiations with China (and other countries) - for a stable universally accepted currency . . . . The dollar has routinely slipped and slipped month after month and year after year to lower and lower levels against foreign currencies, especially against the Euro and the Yen.

. . . . This makes many countries unwilling to continue to accept the monetary unit of the United States . Thus, a conflagration is about to unfold. . . . We suggest you talk to one of our consultants. . . . then order the copy of the regulations mentioned above. We will mail them to you at no charge, if you provide us with your full name, address and phone number when you call.

. . . . Also, after reviewing the rest of the website, if you would like to obtain a past issue of Criminal Politics Magazine, we would be glad to provide you with a sample copy as well, along with your request for the federal regulations on the ownership of bullion vs. antique gold.

. . . . Criminal Politics Magazine is now in its 35th year of publication, and grows on a regular basis, due to a very high renewal rate, approaching 100% once the decedents and infirm are counted out. We hope to hear from you soon. Why not dial right now? If we are closed - just leave a time to call and your number - 1-800-543-0486. Office hours are M-F 10:00 am - 6:00 pm EST.

GET READY FOR $5000 GOLD!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[BIG61AL]

Re: Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

What is the big deal about not being to own gold besides coins and jewelry? Why does the government care who own what?

 

[Roln99]

Re: Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

Rising Gold Prices will help the Economy
Jason Hommel

It is a common myth that says a rising gold price would be followed by economic doom, misery, hard times, and perhaps a dreaded depression.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Rising gold and silver prices helps the economy, as I will prove.

The reason this myth is created in the media is to scare people away from investing in gold and silver. The myth creates a sense of guilt among those who own gold, and among those who are thinking about buying gold. It wrongly claims, "You will be to blame for harming the economy, if you buy gold and the gold price goes up." It whispers the socialist lie, "If we all remain in the dollar, everything will be OK."

The amazing thing about this media-myth is how many gold investors are scared out of their minds of the thought of gold rising past $3000/oz. as they fear it will bring on the prophesied economic doom, with riots, joblessness, homelessness, and widespread poverty.

Here is the reality from history. In 1933 U.S. farmers were dumping milk and destroying their crops because prices were artificially kept so low that they were losing money. Why were prices too low? Because gold was fixed at $20/oz.! And thus, other commodities were also priced too low! It would cost farmers money to bring their produce to market; therefore, they stopped doing so. The farmers were smart enough to realize and act on the axiom, "Do not engage in uneconomical activity."

I wish the silver miners today would be so smart. In other words, if you are not making a profit by mining and selling silver, stop bringing silver to market!

In my opinion Franklin D. Roosevelt was one of the worst presidents in our nation's history. He did more to befriend the big banks, and hurt the interests of the common man, and destroy economic freedom than perhaps any other president. Under FDR we got the dreaded Ponzi-scheme called Social Security. He created bigger government, social handouts, price controls, pulled the nation into World War II, and did everything needed to lead to the totalitarian government we have today.

But there was one thing he did that I think that had positive benefits. He revalued the gold price upwards from $20/oz. to $35/oz. Most gold commentators will say this was theft, a default, and the worst thing he did. But FDR did not create the theft that was originally created when excess paper money was created in the first place. The money-creation was the theft. FDR issued the decree that said that this excessively created paper money should not be valued as highly as it claimed it should be. That was the good thing FDR did, since he helped to reveal the fraud inherent in the dollar. Unfortunately, this re-valuation in the price was accompanied by the proclamation that made it illegal to own gold domestically. Yet, it still helped things for FDR to reveal the fraud of the dollar.

This created a boom in all commodity prices, and helped the farmers out tremendously, and helped the economy. Finally, it would be economic to produce food again. The rising gold price helped the economy.

If anything, the gold price did not rise high enough.

Move forward to the 1970's and 1980's. The years of Ronald Reagan, 1980 to 1988 were prosperous years. Society embraced morality more strongly than in the swinging 70's. Disco was out, and polo shirts were in. Reagan got re-elected in 1984 by asking the simple question, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" Prosperity followed after the gold price rose to $850 in 1980. It was not chaos, not doom, not poverty everywhere you looked. It was a boom time. The after effect of the rise in the gold price was prosperity.

So, as if the facts from history are not enough, let's look at the logical, rational reasons why higher precious metal prices will help the economy. It's very simple.

Barter is inefficient. You cannot efficiently trade cookies for a TV set, and you cannot efficiently trade a car for crayons, you cannot efficiently trade chickens for clothes. I hope I'm not boring you to tears, but do you get the concept? You cannot have an efficient economy without real money. You need a medium of exchange that is easily divisible, portable, valuable, and does not spoil or go out of style.

Gold and silver are what you need, for the reason that they make trade easier and more efficient, or economical. Gold and silver thus save time and energy, and are extremely useful.

Furthermore, a gold or silver coin cannot be tracked, does not need to be kept in a bank, does not need to pay interest, and therefore, cannot be taxed on every transaction. Therefore, gold and silver are very efficient for trading, far more efficient and useful than paper money.

(The reason that gold and silver do not need to pay interest is that there is a constant deflation when gold and silver are used as money. They grow ever more valuable over time as production grows more efficient and prosperity increase when gold and silver are used as money. This fact utterly refutes the "time value" of money that states that money today is more useful than money tomorrow, which is a lie used to justify charging interest on a loan. A no-interest gold loan, when gold is used as money, is generally repaid with gold and silver that is more valuable than before!)

In contrast to the usefulness of gold and silver as money: If I'm paid in paper money, drawn from a bank, the other party feels a compulsive need to report to the government how much he paid me, in order to keep his paper trail of transactions open for the government to follow. Thus, each transaction is looked at by the government, and is taxed at every step. This taxation harms and discourages economic activity from taking place, and thus is not an efficient process at all, and reduces trade and the exchange of dollars, and hurts the economy.

Furthermore, as paper money always suffers from inflation or hyperinflation, there is a lack of incentive to save and invest, which also hurts future production, and hurts the economy.

Next, the excessive creation of paper money and overvaluation of that paper money creates economic mis-allocations of capital, and dislocations of economic activity. Jobs are lost as workers overseas produce more for less. People over-invest in housing due to the easy money available for home loans.

Price fixing, (especially in the form of a low gold price, or a manipulated low gold price), in all its forms, hurts the economy. Price fixing is a disruption of free market capitalism. Free market capitalism, and free market prices, create the most prosperity for the most participants far more than any other economic system yet invented by man.

When the price of gold is allowed to seek its natural free market level, and when the fraud of paper money is destroyed (and paper debts wiped out), then economic freedom and prosperity will follow. It will be too expensive to wage needless wars, too expensive for a massive totalitarian government, too expensive for social programs that destroy a person's incentive to work.

When gold and silver are used as money, there will be plenty of people available to work, needing to work, and willing to work. There will be plenty of money (since the gold and silver would then be valuable enough to do the work of money). There will be plenty produced, since the economy will be free from debt, free from over-burdensome government regulations, free from excessive taxation. There will be plenty produced and prosperity will follow because gold and silver are more efficient at promoting trade than the fraud of the dollar that is over-valued and excessively-taxed.

Some people will counter with the lie that certainly paper money is lighter, and thus more efficient. Again, not true. I have a 1/10 oz. gold coin that is very light and small, lighter than a stack of $1 bills. I have a 1 oz. gold coin that is lighter and more compact than four stacks of a 100 count, $1 bills. Besides, our coins have become dross, worthless heavy slugs.

I'd rather have a tenth oz. gold coin in my wallet than two twenty-dollar bills. And I'd rather have an oz. of gold than four hundreds. Who really needs to carry around more than an ounce of gold, anyway? (Only for the large and more rare transactions.) Too heavy? Hogwash! Society can pay for the cost to transport bottled water, but transporting gold costs too much? Ridiculous!

Gold and silver are not too heavy to transport. Silver alone may be relatively heavy today, given that it is so undervalued, but when the metal is fairly valued, transportation is not a problem. When an ounce of gold or silver is $100,000/oz., then an oz. of gold or silver will not be "too heavy" to transport. Transportation costs are miniscule to the extreme, and are no justification for the fraud of paper money.

If gold and silver are good for an economy, the parallel point is that fraud is bad for an economy. And since the dollar is fraud, then the dollar is bad for the economy. Yes, it's that simple.

A rising gold price means economic misery for the Federal Reserve, for politicians, for the banks, and for the socialists, and all whom they sponsor, such as the Universities and mass media. A rising gold price means economic freedom and prosperity to everyone else!

Buying gold and silver will bring prosperity not only to you, but also to everyone else! Buying gold and silver is the most useful and economic thing you can do to help bring a positive change to the corruption of society that exists at all levels.

 

[Minstrel]

Re: Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

BINGO !!!--GREAT ARTICLE--You hit the nail on the head with one swipe of the hammer. Finally nice to see someone else with the same perspective.
Minstrel

 

[Roln99]

Re: Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

Thanks Minstrel

My main goal for this particular topic is to acquire a collection of interesting and relevent articles on this subject! Its time that all treasure hunters become aware of the pending hidden agenda of the greedy to take away our hobbies and privileges as citizens to hunt for gold, silver, precious stones, and anything else of value! They've already made their fortune, so why should they be allowed to hinder us from finding treasure?!!! The more we educate ourselves against this treachery the better a chance we stand against them!

 

[Lowbatts]

Re: Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

Great read! Keep on educating!

 

[Roln99]

Re: Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

Protecting the Currency: Outlawing Gold

This same mistrust of money at any price also whacked the US Dollar in the early 1930s...even as deflation hit and the value of money seemed to be rising.

The Great Depression led American citizens to hoard gold before cash. 'During 1932 the US Federal Reserve raised its discount rate to defend the Dollar,' as Sam Hewitt noted for Sun Valley Gold in a paper 10 years ago. But fearing an imminent devaluation of the Dollar, 'the American public continued to hoard non-interest bearing gold.'

The American public was right to fear devaluation – just as the Sterling raiders and foreign investors fleeing the Peso were right to mistrust rising interest rates, too.

In the end, it took the Presidential executive order of 5th April 1933 to force US citizens back into the Dollar. President Roosevelt made gold ownership illegal, punishable by $10,000 fines and/or imprisonment.

He also devalued the Dollar by 40% at a stroke.

Economic Liberty and the Constitution, Part 10
by Jacob G. Hornberger, March 2003


An analysis of the Gold Clause Cases, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1934, necessitates a brief discussion of the Legal Tender Cases, which decided the constitutionality of the legal-tender laws enacted by the Lincoln administration during the Civil War.

To finance the war against the Confederacy, Lincoln resorted to the standard method used by rulers throughout history when faced with tax revolts from the citizenry: he began inflating the currency. That meant simply cranking up the printing presses and printing up enormous quantities of paper money and using it to purchase the goods and services needed for the war effort.

At that time, Americans were accustomed to carrying gold and silver coins in their pockets because that was the medium of exchange that our ancestors had established for the American people. Everyone at that time understood that the government’s bills and notes were simply evidence of indebtedness — that is, they were promises to pay gold and silver coin. Thus, whenever someone wanted to redeem the note for the coin, the government would honor it.

Once Lincoln resorted to the printing presses to finance the war effort, however, the bills and notes began trading at a discount. For example, let’s assume that something is priced at $100 (in gold coin), and the government has been inflating its notes. When someone attempts to purchase the item, the merchant might require payment of a $100 note plus a bit more, to take into consideration the possibility that the government could default.

Lincoln’s and Congress’s response was a legal-tender law, which required people to accept the government’s bills and notes at face value, regardless of how many were being depreciated.

In Hepburn v. Griswold, the Supreme Court held the legal-tender law to be unconstitutional. The Court pointed out that under the Constitution, while the federal government had the power to borrow money through the issuance of bills and notes, it had not been given the power to issue paper money or to make its bills and notes legal tender.

Within less than a year, however, two new justices were appointed to the Court. In one of the most shameful acts in the Supreme Court history, the new majority voted to overrule Hepburn v. Griswold. In Knox v. Lee and subsequent decisions, it became the settled law of the land that the U.S. government had the power to issue paper money and enact legal-tender laws.

Justice Stephen J. Field, who had been a fountainhead for constitutional principles dealing with economic liberty (see “Economic Liberty and the Constitution, Part 5,” Freedom Daily, October 2002), stated the following in voting against the constitutionality of the legal-tender laws:

The power to commit violence, perpetrate injustice, take private property by force without compensation to the owner, and compel the receipt of promises to pay in place of money, may be exercised, as it often has been, by irresponsible authority, but it cannot be considered as belonging to a government founded upon law . . ..

From the decision of the Court I see only evil likely to follow.

Gold owners as criminals

The evil which Field predicted came into full force during the Franklin Roosevelt administration. In the midst of his New Deal, the federal government committed one of the most heinous acts in history when it nationalized gold in the United States and declared it a felony for any American to own gold in the future. Americans were required to turn their gold in to the federal government and receive in return the federal government’s paper money, which the government had recently devalued.

Today, given that many people believe that the federal government should have the omnipotent power to control and regulate people’s economic activities and their possessions, that might not come as such a surprise.

In the early 1930s, however, that the federal government could do what socialist and communist governments were doing in Germany, Italy, and the Soviet Union came as a mighty shock to many people’s understanding of America’s heritage of private property and economic liberty. At that time, many Americans still believed in Americanism — in the principle that a person’s possessions were his and that the government could not arbitrarily take them away, as governments were doing in Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, and the communist Soviet Union.

Moreover, not only was gold ownership declared illegal, the government went one step further: it nullified all “gold clauses,” both in private and government contracts.


The gold clauses

What were the gold clauses? Their purpose was to protect the parties to a contract from government depreciation of the currency, as Lincoln had done during the Civil War and, for that matter, as governments throughout history had done when given power to control their nation’s economic system.

Keep in mind that there was one big reason that our Founders and ancestors had made gold and silver coin their official medium of exchange — to protect themselves and their successors from government’s plundering and looting them through inflation. And make no mistake about it: unlike many Americans today who honestly believe that inflation is some mysterious disease that afflicts nations from time to time, or that it is caused by greedy businessmen, early Americans had a very clear understanding of the problem; they knew that inflation had one and only one root — government — and specifically the propensity of public officials to secretly and surreptitiously tax the citizenry through the issuance of depreciated currency.

That’s the reason that the Constitution did not give the federal government the power to make paper money legal tender. It’s also the reason that the Constitution expressly prohibited the state governments from making anything but gold and silver coin legal tender.

Thus, creditors, especially the owners of long-term bonds (e.g., 100-year railroad bonds ), needed a way to protect themselves from the possibility of inflation, especially after the Supreme Court had upheld what Lincoln had done with his legal-tender laws. For example, suppose someone lends a railroad $100,000, with interest payable annually and principal payable in 100 years. How does the lender ensure that he (or his heirs) is not paid back in depreciated currency?

The answer: a gold clause in the contract. Gold clauses would provide that since the lender was delivering $100,000, the borrower would have to repay the loan using the same measure of “dollar” in effect when the loan was entered into. For example, let’s say that when the loan was entered into, a U.S. “dollar” was defined as a gold coin containing two grams of gold. Later, let’s say that the government depreciated the currency by declaring that a U.S. “dollar” now contained only 1.5 grams of gold. The debtor would have to use the earlier measure when he repaid the loan, rather than the depreciated measure.

FDR and his statist and socialist cronies went much further than that, however. Rather than simply reducing the gold content in the U.S. dollar (as kings had done throughout history) and rather than simply making the federal government’s bills and notes legal tender, the federal government went much further down the road that Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, and the communist Soviet Union were traveling.

By confiscating gold, making gold ownership illegal, and making its bills and notes irredeemable (in terms of what they had promised to pay), the federal government was doing its best to ensure that the American people could never protect themselves from the government’s ability to plunder and loot them through the Federal Reserve System’s inflationary policies.

Thus the federal government would be unshackled in its quest to go on a perpetual spending spree, promising the people unlimited welfare benefits, and all for “free,” because as government continually used depreciated currency to pay for all the goodies, the American people would continue to believe that inflation was some mysterious disease whose cause was unknown or one caused by the greed and rapaciousness of private businessmen.

There was only one obstacle standing in their way: the gold clauses that had been inserted into both private and federal loan agreements … and the U.S. Constitution, which did not give the federal government the power to destroy contracts, either private or public.


The Court’s decision

The Gold Clause Cases actually involved three separate cases, all of which were decided at the same time: Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., Nortz v. United States, and Perry v. United States.

In a 5-4 decision, the Court upheld the nullification of the gold clauses in all private contracts. What was the Court’s reasoning? Essentially, it said that since the Constitution gives the federal government the power to establish a monetary system, the exercise of that power in the interests of society trumps the interests of private individuals to protect themselves from depreciated currency.

Where did the majority find such a power in the Constitution? The Court held that by giving the federal government the power to borrow money, along with the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof, it was obvious that the Framers were actually giving the government the power to establish a monetary system, even one entailing the issuance of irredeemable notes, legal-tender laws, gold confiscation, criminalization of gold ownership, and nullification of gold clauses in private contracts.

The majority had somewhat of a more difficult problem justifying the nullification of the gold clauses in instruments of indebtednesses. After all, it would be an odd Constitution that would give the government the power to borrow money and then allow it to default on the contract through repayment in depreciated currency. The majority agreed that the federal government’s gold clauses had to be honored but then held that since gold was now illegal to own in the United States, the bondholder hadn’t really suffered any damages.

In the dissent were the Four Horsemen — George Sutherland, Willis Van Devanter, Pierce Butler, and James McReynolds — who were clear and direct with respect to what Roosevelt and the Congress were doing:

Just men regard repudiation and spoliation of citizens by their sovereign with abhorrence; but we are asked to affirm that the Constitution has granted power to accomplish both. No definite delegation of such a power exists; and we cannot believe the farseeing framers, who labored with hope of establishing justice and securing the blessings of liberty, intended that the expected government should have authority to annihilate its own obligations and destroy the very rights which they were endeavoring to protect. Not only is there no permission for such actions; they are inhibited. And no plenitude of words can conform them to our charter.
The dissent then proceeded to explain the purpose of gold clauses, a purpose that the majority conceded:

By the so-called gold clause — promise to pay in “United States gold coin of the present standard of value,” or “of or equal to the present standard of weight and fineness” — found in very many private and public obligations, the creditor agrees to accept and the debtor undertakes to return the thing loaned or its equivalent. Thereby each secures protection, one against decrease in value of the currency, the other against an increase.

The clause is not new or obscure or discolored by any sinister purpose. For more than 100 years our citizens have employed a like agreement….

The gold clauses in no substantial way interfered with the power of coining money or regulating its value or providing an uniform currency. Their existence, as with many other circumstances, might have circumscribed the effect of its intended depreciation and disclosed the unwisdom of it. But they did not prevent the exercise of any granted power. They were not inconsistent with any policy theretofore declared. To assert the contrary is not enough. The Court must be able to see the appropriateness of the thing done before it can be permitted to destroy lawful agreements. The purpose of a statute is not determined by mere recitals — certainly they are not conclusive evidence of the facts stated.

... This statute does not “work harm and loss to individuals indirectly,” it destroys directly. Such interference violates the Fifth Amendment; there is no provision for compensation. If the destruction is said to be for the public benefit proper compensation is essential; if for private benefit the due process clause bars the way.
Thus the dissenters pointed out the obvious: not only did FDR and the Congress not have the constitutional power to nullify the gold clauses, the gold clauses themselves did not interfere with any monetary power that the Constitution gave the federal government.

The dissenters also addressed the federal government’s repudiation of its own bonds and gold certificates:

Congress may coin money; also it may borrow money. Neither power may be exercised so as to destroy the other; the two clauses must be so construed as to give effect to each. Valid contracts to repay money borrowed cannot be destroyed by exercising power under the coinage provision.
The dissent also addressed the majority’s point that damages could not be assessed because of the prohibition on owning gold:

Congress brought about the conditions in respect of gold which existed when the obligation matured. Having made payment in this metal impossible the government cannot defend by saying that if the obligation had been met the creditor could not have retained the gold; consequently he suffered no damage because of the nondelivery. Obligations cannot be legally avoided by prohibiting the creditor from receiving the thing promised. The promise was to pay in gold, standard of 1900, otherwise to discharge the debt by paying the value of the thing promised in currency. One of these things was not prohibited. The government may not escape the obligation of making good the loss incident to the repudiation by prohibiting the holding of gold. Payment by fiat of any kind is beyond its recognized power. There would be no serious difficulty in estimating the value of 25.8 grains of gold in the currency now in circulation. These [U.S. government] bonds are held by men and women in many parts of the world; they have relied upon our honor. Thousands of our own citizens of every degree not doubting the good faith of their sovereign have purchased them….

These words of Alexander Hamilton ought not to be forgotten: “When a government enters into a contract with an individual, it deposes, as to the matter of the contract, its constitutional authority, and exchanges the character of legislator for that of a moral agent, with the same rights and obligations as an individual.”
Finally, the dissent pointed out how the federal government had used its powers to enrich itself:

Under the challenged statutes it is said the United States have realized profits amounting to $2,800,000,000. But this assumes that gain may be generated by legislative fiat. To such counterfeit profits there would be no limit; with each new debasement of the dollar they would expand. Two billions might be ballooned indefinitely — to twenty, thirty, or what you will.

Loss of reputation for honorable dealing will bring us unending humiliation; the impending legal and moral chaos is appalling.
With the ruling in the Gold Clause Cases, the final obstacle in the path of the power of the federal government to plunder and loot the people through debasement of their currency by the central monetary authority known as the Federal Reserve System had been overcome. FDR and his collectivist associates, both in the executive and legislative branches, had won another big one in transforming American society in a revolutionary way.

Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

 

[deepskyal]

Re: Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

What a bunch of ultra-rightwing hogwash.

Rising Gold Prices will help the Economy
Jason Hommel

It is a common myth that says a rising gold price would be followed by economic doom, misery, hard times, and perhaps a dreaded depression.

(This is a common myth? Can't be all that common. I read news from several sources and this is the first time I've heard it. This is an excellent propaganda tool used to convince people something is a reality when in fact, it is not. Open an article with a lie that sounds believable.)

Nothing could be further from the truth. Rising gold and silver prices helps the economy, as I will prove.

The reason this myth is created in the media is to scare people away from investing in gold and silver. The myth creates a sense of guilt among those who own gold, and among those who are thinking about buying gold. It wrongly claims, "You will be to blame for harming the economy, if you buy gold and the gold price goes up." It whispers the socialist lie, "If we all remain in the dollar, everything will be OK."

The amazing thing about this media-myth is how many gold investors are scared out of their minds of the thought of gold rising past $3000/oz. as they fear it will bring on the prophesied economic doom, with riots, joblessness, homelessness, and widespread poverty.

(Then why are investors putting thier money into gold as a haven?)

Here is the reality from history. In 1933 U.S. farmers were dumping milk and destroying their crops because prices were artificially kept so low that they were losing money. Why were prices too low? Because gold was fixed at $20/oz.! And thus, other commodities were also priced too low! It would cost farmers money to bring their produce to market; therefore, they stopped doing so. The farmers were smart enough to realize and act on the axiom, "Do not engage in uneconomical activity."

(The government pays millions to farmers not to plant these days and we still have price fixing...aka: the Milk Marketing Board. This has nothing to do with gold and it didn't back then either. Someone made up this theory to support thier flawed idea. Farms were much smaller back in those days, not the huge conglomerates they are today. It was easy for companies and banks to take advantage of the lowly farmer and squeeze every drop of blood from them that they could.)

I wish the silver miners today would be so smart. In other words, if you are not making a profit by mining and selling silver, stop bringing silver to market!

(Don't you believe it. There isn't a company in this world that does something on a regular basis at a loss...including silver miners.)

In my opinion Franklin D. Roosevelt was one of the worst presidents in our nation's history. He did more to befriend the big banks, and hurt the interests of the common man, and destroy economic freedom than perhaps any other president. Under FDR we got the dreaded Ponzi-scheme called Social Security. He created bigger government, social handouts, price controls, pulled the nation into World War II, and did everything needed to lead to the totalitarian government we have today.

(Worst president in history? So what you propose to do without social security...let people starve? Work til the day they collapse and die on the job? Go without health care? As technology advances, less jobs are available. Robots do what people did, and more efficiently. Less jobs mean higher unemployment. What do you propose to do with them? Forced planned parenthood like China? Can't have excess people under this plan.)

But there was one thing he did that I think that had positive benefits. He revalued the gold price upwards from $20/oz. to $35/oz. Most gold commentators will say this was theft, a default, and the worst thing he did. But FDR did not create the theft that was originally created when excess paper money was created in the first place. The money-creation was the theft. FDR issued the decree that said that this excessively created paper money should not be valued as highly as it claimed it should be. That was the good thing FDR did, since he helped to reveal the fraud inherent in the dollar. Unfortunately, this re-valuation in the price was accompanied by the proclamation that made it illegal to own gold domestically. Yet, it still helped things for FDR to reveal the fraud of the dollar.

(Drastic times calls for drastic measures...I think the depression was pretty devastating to those who lived through it.)

This created a boom in all commodity prices, and helped the farmers out tremendously, and helped the economy. Finally, it would be economic to produce food again. The rising gold price helped the economy.

( Yea, we all know that none of the public works projects that put people back to work had nothing to do with the economy recovering back then. Nor did social security by giving people money to spend and eat have anything to do with it. Come on!!! Gold had nothing to do with this either. But heck...if someone said it did...then it must be true.)

If anything, the gold price did not rise high enough.

Move forward to the 1970's and 1980's. The years of Ronald Reagan, 1980 to 1988 were prosperous years. Society embraced morality more strongly than in the swinging 70's. Disco was out, and polo shirts were in. Reagan got re-elected in 1984 by asking the simple question, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" Prosperity followed after the gold price rose to $850 in 1980. It was not chaos, not doom, not poverty everywhere you looked. It was a boom time. The after effect of the rise in the gold price was prosperity.

(Now I know this is pure BS. Where were you during one of the worst recessions in US history and Reagan was at the helm? Economic boom? Unemployment skyrocketed...I was one of them. I watched the steel mills crumble, businesses fold, stood in the unemployment line that went out the door and up the street, there were so many.
Gold prices rose as investors tried to protect their money by investing in it...pretty simple. Somewhere they forgot to mention that unemployment went from 18% to 6% overnight. No miracle...just playing with numbers, which the government is so good at, a little recalculating and defining, and now we have a goodlooking figure. I do remember that quite clearly. 1980 was a benchmark for a bad recession, one of the worst in US history. I was there.)

So, as if the facts from history are not enough, let's look at the logical, rational reasons why higher precious metal prices will help the economy. It's very simple.

Barter is inefficient. You cannot efficiently trade cookies for a TV set, and you cannot efficiently trade a car for crayons, you cannot efficiently trade chickens for clothes. I hope I'm not boring you to tears, but do you get the concept? You cannot have an efficient economy without real money. You need a medium of exchange that is easily divisible, portable, valuable, and does not spoil or go out of style.

Gold and silver are what you need, for the reason that they make trade easier and more efficient, or economical. Gold and silver thus save time and energy, and are extremely useful.

Furthermore, a gold or silver coin cannot be tracked, does not need to be kept in a bank, does not need to pay interest, and therefore, cannot be taxed on every transaction. Therefore, gold and silver are very efficient for trading, far more efficient and useful than paper money.

(Okay, now this really boarders on the absurd. You honestly think gold transfer wouldn't be regulated, taxed, stuffed and hoarded in banks? Do you think they track money now? This is paranoia being spread by someone that has a private agenda to get people to believe them and their theories, no matter how rediculous. Stuff in enough untruths into a long, boring read and people may just believe you because they aren't seeing any facts written. Maybe those that haven't lived an honest life may believe this hogwash.)

(The reason that gold and silver do not need to pay interest is that there is a constant deflation when gold and silver are used as money. They grow ever more valuable over time as production grows more efficient and prosperity increase when gold and silver are used as money. This fact utterly refutes the "time value" of money that states that money today is more useful than money tomorrow, which is a lie used to justify charging interest on a loan. A no-interest gold loan, when gold is used as money, is generally repaid with gold and silver that is more valuable than before!)

(So, let me get this straight. A dollar today has the same value as the dollar I spent 20 years ago? And my dollar today will be worth the exact same 20 years from now? If this is true, why isn't my bread still .10 cents a loaf? Would bread still be .10 cents a loaf if we used gold instead of the current printed money we have? And if I gain no interest from gold, where does my retirement come from? Interest is charged on a loan as a fee. I lend you this amount but I want X amount back. What does this have to do with the price of chicken lips? I guess gold magically increases in value, simply because it can. And prices will never rise so gold will be even more valuable, right?)


In contrast to the usefulness of gold and silver as money: If I'm paid in paper money, drawn from a bank, the other party feels a compulsive need to report to the governmenthow much he paid me, in order to keep his paper trail of transactions open for the government to follow. Thus, each transaction is looked at by the government, and is taxed at every step. This taxation harms and discourages economic activity from taking place, and thus is not an efficient process at all, and reduces trade and the exchange of dollars, and hurts the economy.

(So again...you don't think they'll track gold movement? And where does the government get their money to operate without taxes?)

Furthermore, as paper money always suffers from inflation or hyperinflation, there is a lack of incentive to save and invest, which also hurts future production, and hurts the economy.

(So in this fairytail world, we won't have to save gold for retirement, save up to buy a car, and you are saying you won't have interest paid on gold so what purpose is there to invest it in anything? Someone is saying it works both ways...which is it?)

Next, the excessive creation of paper money and overvaluation of that paper money creates economic mis-allocations of capital, and dislocations of economic activity. Jobs are lost as workers overseas produce more for less. People over-invest in housing due to the easy money available for home loans.

(People create overvaluation, money doesn't. This is why wallstreet is in so much trouble. Greed on behalf of employers seeking a greater return on their investment shipped those jobs overseas to poverty stricken countries to line their own pockets with more wealth. Toss those poor, starving people a bone and they'll sell you their kidneys. Walmart demands more for less, blame them.)

Price fixing, (especially in the form of a low gold price, or a manipulated low gold price), in all its forms, hurts the economy. Price fixing is a disruption of free market capitalism. Free market capitalism, and free market prices, create the most prosperity for the most participants far more than any other economic system yet invented by man.

When the price of gold is allowed to seek its natural free market level, and when the fraud of paper money is destroyed (and paper debts wiped out), then economic freedom and prosperity will follow. It will be too expensive to wage needless wars, too expensive for a massive totalitarian government, too expensive for social programs that destroy a person's incentive to work.

(Gold DOES fluctuate...wars are too expensive NOW and without social programs, people will die. And exactly how does one propose to wipe out all the debt that's been incurred, by paper currency or otherwise?)

When gold and silver are used as money, there will be plenty of people available to work, needing to work, and willing to work. There will be plenty of money (since the gold and silver would then be valuable enough to do the work of money). There will be plenty produced, since the economy will be free from debt, free from over-burdensome government regulations, free from excessive taxation. There will be plenty produced and prosperity will follow because gold and silver are more efficient at promoting trade than the fraud of the dollar that is over-valued and excessively-taxed.

(There is excess labor now...that drives wages down because of competition for what few jobs there are. There's plenty of money too...it's just not distrubited enough. Technology is producing things faster, more efficiently and with less people than ever before......how is gold going to magically create jobs that technology has permanately erased? There will never, ever be enough jobs in this world to employ everyone. Never in world history was every single person on this earth employed at one time. What about them, huh?)

Some people will counter with the lie that certainly paper money is lighter, and thus more efficient. Again, not true. I have a 1/10 oz. gold coin that is very light and small, lighter than a stack of $1 bills. I have a 1 oz. gold coin that is lighter and more compact than four stacks of a 100 count, $1 bills. Besides, our coins have become dross, worthless heavy slugs.

I'd rather have a tenth oz. gold coin in my wallet than two twenty-dollar bills. And I'd rather have an oz. of gold than four hundreds. Who really needs to carry around more than an ounce of gold, anyway? (Only for the large and more rare transactions.) Too heavy? Hogwash! Society can pay for the cost to transport bottled water, but transporting gold costs too much? Ridiculous!

Gold and silver are not too heavy to transport. Silver alone may be relatively heavy today, given that it is so undervalued, but when the metal is fairly valued, transportation is not a problem. When an ounce of gold or silver is $100,000/oz., then an oz. of gold or silver will not be "too heavy" to transport. Transportation costs are miniscule to the extreme, and are no justification for the fraud of paper money.

(How do I pay my bills? Transfer gold electronically? And you do pay for the transport of bottled water. 65,000 pound cakes of copper are shipped worldwide everyday...at a cost that consumers ultimately pay in some form.
Why would you carry four hundreds when you can carry a piece of plastic, write a check, or god forbid...barter for?
People are more than willing to pay for those conveniances...good luck convincing them carrying around gold would be better.)

If gold and silver are good for an economy, the parallel point is that fraud is bad for an economy. And since the dollar is fraud, then the dollar is bad for the economy. Yes, it's that simple.

(Fraud is the result of greed for want of money, nothing that has to do with money being fraudulant. It is the schemes of the rich and powerful that created the fraud that causes collapse of economies. Tell me an apple is worth five dollars when I know its only fifty cents. But...tell enough people, someone will believe it and pay five for it. But no matter how you look at it, it's still a fifty cent item and when they try to sell it for the same amount they paid for it, then they discover it's only worth fifty cents. That is fraud. You know as well as I do, they would do the same, scheme the same, reguardless of the form of currency. Someone will figure out how to manipulate it to maximize their gold holdings.)

A rising gold price means economic misery for the Federal Reserve, for politicians, for the banks, and for the socialists, and all whom they sponsor, such as the Universities and mass media. A rising gold price means economic freedom and prosperity to everyone else!

(Does this fairytail have a title?)

Buying gold and silver will bring prosperity not only to you, but also to everyone else! Buying gold and silver is the most useful and economic thing you can do to help bring a positive change to the corruption of society that exists at all levels.

This whole notion is absurd. They are trying to sell you the garden of Eden, Utopia. The only idealistic theory that even comes close to this is what the Bible says. Every man, woman and child would be equal, have plenty, never be sick, never die.

I want to know what kind of government this would be called that can wave a magic wand and make the world a perfect place, simply by making a golden calf.

Al

 

[coin_diver]

Re: Gold Confiscation Possible "Again"

What many of you need to understand is that Gold and silver are tangible wealth items, exchanging them for printed money is a fiat exchange, only worth what ever the fed and treasury tell you the are.

More importantly, the "Patriot Act" cannot be considered legitimate law. This was written by a Vietnamese national, working in the state department and started as a simple outline. The Constitution declares only Congress shall pen new law.

Read and read some more, then be heard!