Quote:
|
Originally Posted by indio007
The fact is that he can't follow the logic that there is an intrinsic difference between a case decided on the basis of legal tender vs lawful money.
|
It's obvious you haven't read the O'Malley decision. There's absolutely nothing in it about legal tender or lawful money; even the dissenting Justice didn't raise such an absurd theory. That's just your bizarre rationale. Here, read it:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...=307&invol=277
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by indio007
Altering or changing what someone paid in exchange for labor vs changing their "gross income" , "income" or "wages" based on employment are two vastly different actions at law.
|
You don't seem to understand that it doesn't matter what one receives in exchange for labor, as long as it has value. You can get paid in beaver pelts, gold, Andy Warhol prints, groceries, or federal reserve notes. Whatever you receive, its fair market value is gross income. And to use a tired example to which the anti-FRN crowd never has a response, if you think your FRN's are worthless, send them to me.