Greenspan: money=thing

In 2/17/2000 Congressional Exchanges: http://www.usagold.com/gildedopinion...span-gold.html

Dr. PAUL. So it is hard to manage something you can't define.

Mr. GREENSPAN. it is not possible to manage someTHING YOU CANNOT DEFINE.

Modern money is not a thing. It is nothing--no thing. It does not have length or breadth or width or substance. Therefore, it cannot be measured; and the term used to measure money when it was silver and gold, namely, "dollar," is meaningless today. A concerned citizen wrote to the Internal Revenue Service, a branch of the United States Treasury, to request the definition of the word "dollar." His thought was that since citizens are required to provide sworn statements (1040 form) to the government setting forth the "true, complete, and correct" amount of their income in dollars, and that such statements are to be according to the citizen's best "knowledge and belief," the definition of the word "dollar" should not be a matter of conjecture or guesswork, but rather of clearly stated law. He was rather surprised to learn from the IRS that there is no definition of the word "dollar" in the Internal Revenue Code.

Another request, again asking the definition, from any source, in U.S. law, was ignored. Government agents, testifying under oath in court, have admitted that there is no definition of "dollar." Treasury Department executives have acknowledged in writing that Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars. The term is meaningless. In St. Louis a few years ago, a young man, fearing possible prosecution by the IRS, went into federal court with the request that the court order the IRS to provide a definition of such terms as "dollar" and "money." His motion was vigorously opposed by the IRS with pages and pages of rather remarkably far-fetched and illogical arguments.

Isn't it incredible that a branch of the United States Treasury should so strenuously object to telling a citizen of the country just what a "dollar" is? The judge agreed with the IRS. (Judges are audited, too!)

1976, February 11, of that year, forty-four federal judges--who were eventually joined by ninety-six more--went into the United States Court of Claims seeking a raise in pay. The one hundred and forty federal judges (and that's a fair percentage of all federal judges) based their arguments on Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution, which states that the compensation of federal judges should not be diminished during their continuance in office. Well, it was a matter of record that the pay of a federal circuit judge was $40,000 annually, and had been such for a number of years.

How could the judges claim, therefore, that their salary had been diminished? This is what they told the court of claims: "As a result of inflation, the compensation of federal judges has been substantially diminished each year since 1969, causing direct and continuing monetary harm to plaintiffs---. Thus, as measured by the consumer price index, the real value of the compensation for each United States district judge was diminished from $40,000 to approximately $26,000 between March 15, 1969, and October 1, 1975." What a remarkable admission!

If an income of $40,000 in 1975 was less income than $40,000 in 1969, then surely the "dollar" must be a fiction! For if the judges knew what a dollar was--whatever it might be--then they would also know that 40,000 of them were 40,000 of them whether in 1975, 1969, or whenever.

http://www.usagold.com/AllWorkandNoPay.html

[masterduke]

Great Post and insightful as well

It stands to reason that if a workman is worthy of his hire, it also stands to reason that a workman is a worthy of being paid. There are reams written against involuntary servitude but when people have never been paid for their work in just weights and balances, eg gold, silver, how is that not involuntary servitude?

The Act of Maryland of 1723, which made tobacco legal currency but converted its value into English gold money, by declaring a pound of tobacco equal to a penny, recalls the leges barbarorum, which on the contrary equated definite sums of money with oxen, cows, etc. In this case the real material of the [exchange] money of account was neither gold nor silver, but the ox and the cow.

1 quarter of wheat=1 ounce of gold
1 hundredweight of coffee=1/4 ounce of gold
4 toilet seats = 1/4 ounce of gold
Y commodities=X ounces of gold

Gold up $10, gains 1% for week … If and when the AMERICAN PUBLIC WAKES UP TO THE REALITY THAT THEIR DOLLARS ARE NOT MONEY, but a currency, the panic and stampede will begin. My concern is that very soon, citizens of the world will tire of America's gross fiscal mismanagement and hesitate to take U.S. dollars. The secret to surviving the next few years is keeping your wealth in real money, not in the U.S. dollar. Buy things that hold their value and are exchangeable all over the world. Commodities such as gold and silver have a world market that transcends national borders, politics, religions, and race. http://www.usagold.com/DailyQuotes.html

The Greenspan-Paul Congressional Exchanges?1997-2005
http://www.usagold.com/gildedopinion...span-gold.html

2/27/02………..referring to a speech you [Greenspan] gave in January at the American Numismatic Society where you spoke profoundly about monetary policy …. And then you followed it up by saying, in case it didn't work, and I don't know whether you had tongue-in-cheek or not about this, but you said that WE MIGHT AHVE TO GO BACK TO SEA SHELLS AND OXEN AS OUR MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE

7/17/2002 Alan Greenspan …. ''in the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value without gold. This is the shabby secret of the welfare state that tirades against gold. DEFICIT SPENDING IS SIMPLY A SCHEME FOR THE HIDDEN CONFISCATION OF WEALTH. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights.'' ??BUT GOLD ALWAYS HAS ALWAYS HAD TO BE UNDERMINED IF FIAT MONEY IS TO WORK, AND THERE HAS TO BE AN ILLUSION OF TRUST FOR PAPER MONEY TO WORK.

2/12/2003 GREENSPAN. ?I had always thought that the fiat money system was chronically and inevitably an inflation vehicle, and indeed, said so repeatedly.

So the only glue holding the fiat " no-THING-dollar together is ‘substance’ of some kind – the signatures of the people? Which is why it is become by wayof law of necessity/public policy to enforce it?

IF there were full disclosure, good faith and clean hands regarding a fiat "no-THING-dollar", then the disclosure statement on each ‘"no-THING-dollar" should state:·

Dollars are tokens, i.e., a paper tickets/coupons
Dollars are not redeemable into anything
Dollar is defined ….
The true value-substance defined
Who, what, where, how, why, when are dollars created
Only value dollars have is people accept them for their goods, services and labor
People are forced by public policy to accept “dollars” for all debts public and private
Depreciation of dollar [depreciated purchasing power by more than 90% since 1950]
Dollars are in no way obligations of the government; the signatures are gratuitous

http://www.the-privateer.com/paper.html

There is nothing behind today's money except a promise to pay. Accepting a promise to pay is the acceptance of a debt - and a debt is an unfinished transaction.

Who has made the promise? We have - by consenting to or ignoring the actions of our government. Who will fulfil the promise? No one, according to modern "economics".

There is no place for Gold in the modern financial system. The most frightening thing about this argument is that it is true! There really is no place for Gold - in the modern financial system. That leads us, however, to a further question: What does that say about the modern financial system?

1913: $50 Gold Certificate?The last of the true Gold Certificates - the Federal Reserve was instituted in December 1913. This is a completely honest and upright money. It says so right on the certificate: What you are looking at here is a money substitute. Any holder of this certificate held title to 2.41896 troy oz of Gold (at $US20.67 per troy oz.) which could be redeemed at any bank or from the U.S. Treasury itself at any time.

Enter The Federal Reserve

1914: $1 Federal Reserve Bank Note
?At the time this was issued, a "note" was well understood to be a promise of payment. Accordingly, this is prominently labeled as a "Federal Reserve Bank Note".And what is this Note redeemable in? Here's what it says: "Secured By United States Certificates Of Indebtedness Or One-Year Gold Notes, Deposited With The Treasurer Of The United States Of America". The Note was directly redeemable in Treasury debt, but it was not directly redeemable in Gold.

It's Money Because We Say It Is

1928: $100 Gold Certificate?The last of the U.S. Gold Certificates. This certificate was discontinued in 1934 - the same year as the U.S. ceased to issue Gold coinage and made it illegal for Americans to own Gold. While the statement that the certificate is redeemable in Gold coin still appears, there is this ominous addition imprinted on the "Gold Certificate" stamp. "This Certificate Is A Legal Tender In The Amount Thereof In Payment Of All Debts And Owen Public And Private". "Owen" is an archaic form of the verb "owe", meaning "to be in debt".

Redeemable In What?

1934: $1000 Federal Reserve Note?As it says right on the note, "The United States Of America Will Pay To The Bearer On Demand One Thousand Dollars". But what is it redeemable in? "Lawful Money". It says so right on the note: "This Note Is Legal Tender For All Debts Public And Private And Is Redeemable In Lawful Money At The United States Treasury Or At Any Federal Reserve Bank".
In 1934, Gold was no longer "lawful money". In fact, this note was "redeemable" in another note just like it, or 10 "$100s", or 50 "$20s", or 1000 "$1s" - you get the picture.

1963: $1 Federal Reserve Note?The U.S. probably printed more of these than any other note in its history. When they first came out, you could buy quite a lot with one. Now, the U.S. $1 Dollar bill is being phased out. The recognition of what a "note" is is no more. There is no statement about what this note can be redeemed in anywhere on it. Nor does the Fed bother to point out that the note is "lawful money" - just try and spend anything else! The Note simply states: "This Note Is Legal Tender For All Debts Public And Private". That's it.

The New U.S. Paper Money

1997: $50 Federal Reserve Note?Here is a specimen of the new "counterfeit proof" U.S. paper currency (the "$100s" came out in 1996). As far as what is written on the note, there is not much to distinguish it from the $1 note above. The only discernible difference is the markedly inferior engraving.But look at the portrait of Ulysses S. Grant, and then scroll up to the first example on this page. Same man, radically different "money". This is counterfeiting of a much more blatant kind than the mere copying of what is already just a piece of paper.

[idknow]

thank you Martha.

[charlesa6]

Right on the money, Martha.

You are welcome.

No pun intended, charlesa6 ... right on the MONEY!?!

Had a good chuckle over that one.