WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Moderator: Burnaby49
-
- Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
- Posts: 8228
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:45 am
- Location: The Evergreen Playground
WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
I'm sure it's a relief to readers to find that redeeming lawful money is still going strong;
http://worldfreemansociety.ca/forum/49- ... ong#144670
http://worldfreemansociety.ca/forum/49- ... ong#144670
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs
-
- Illuminatian Revenue Supremo Emeritus
- Posts: 1591
- Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:13 pm
- Location: Maryland
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
It's nice to see that the word salad generator is still running at 100% efficiency.
Taxes are the price we pay for a free society and to cover the responsibilities of the evaders
-
- Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
- Posts: 6125
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
- Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
He's as boring as ever. I've even stopped visiting Planet Merrill, except on rare occasions, because he and his acolytes are still pushing the same mix of legal misinformation and turgid religious expositions.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
-
- Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
- Posts: 1678
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 9:35 am
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Dot C-A? As in Canada? Why would David Merrill think that American banking law would... never mind, I answered my own question.
-
- Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
- Posts: 6125
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
- Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Remember, this is a guy who thinks that, just because someone named Van Pelt was a "Patroon" in the days of New Netherlands, he now has some exalted status under US law.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
-
- A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
- Posts: 13806
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Actually, come to it, I think WFS deserves Merrill, with parsley on top, it is about time they paid the price, and he will certainly be it. Maybe he'll attempt another coup and try and turn them in to a religious order or something, that would be fun to watch.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
-
- Princeps Wooloosia
- Posts: 3144
- Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 4:50 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
David Merrill - real name: David Merrill van Pelt - knows what it's like to be locked down - both in jail and in a psych ward.
He has several very strange notions, including one that could put him in deep deep trouble - he thinks that Federal Reserve Notes are not "lawful money", and therefore not taxable. The last form of currency explicitly identified as "lawful money" was United States Notes - which were first issued in 1862 and last issued nearly a century later, around 1958. United States Notes generally resembled FRNs and had the remarkable distinction for paper currency issued in 1862 - unlike Silver Certificates and other paper currency of that time, United States Notes represented no collateral, no precious metal, no govt assets - only the good faith of the US govt; making them fiat currency - the bane of Rightwingers, which is why Congress went to the trouble of declaring United States Notes to be lawful money. As I said, United States Notes have not been issued since van Pelt (or as I refer to him "DiM") was in diapers, and now are prized collectors' items so they're not at all in circulation. But when van Pelt wants to pretend that he is getting "lawful money", he puts a rubber stamp on checks he cashes at the bank, "pay in lawful money" -- or when presenting FRNs for exchange at a bank he will murmur "lawful money please" -- and imagine that the FRNs he gets in return are somehow United States Notes, although to everyone else they're ordinary FRNs.
I might add that a very few court cases called upon in the last half century to decide what "lawful money" can be gotten in exchange for FRNs decided that Federal Reserve Notes are, themselves, lawful money (as are coins minted by the govt). Several sections in the federal transportation laws provide that lost cargo or luggage will be compensated in "lawful money" - sections enacted or amended since United States Notes ceased to be issued. No litigation was ever commenced challenging the adequacy of FRNs to satisfy these terms (but it was evidently intended that a shipper would pay for lost luggage with spendable money and not with discounted tickets). Generally, "lawful money" is a broader term than "legal tender"; "legal tender" is the official currency issued by the govt itself, "lawful money" is whatever the marketplace accepts as media of exchange, including traveler's checks, business/personal checks, credit cards, and, yes, legal tender.
He has several very strange notions, including one that could put him in deep deep trouble - he thinks that Federal Reserve Notes are not "lawful money", and therefore not taxable. The last form of currency explicitly identified as "lawful money" was United States Notes - which were first issued in 1862 and last issued nearly a century later, around 1958. United States Notes generally resembled FRNs and had the remarkable distinction for paper currency issued in 1862 - unlike Silver Certificates and other paper currency of that time, United States Notes represented no collateral, no precious metal, no govt assets - only the good faith of the US govt; making them fiat currency - the bane of Rightwingers, which is why Congress went to the trouble of declaring United States Notes to be lawful money. As I said, United States Notes have not been issued since van Pelt (or as I refer to him "DiM") was in diapers, and now are prized collectors' items so they're not at all in circulation. But when van Pelt wants to pretend that he is getting "lawful money", he puts a rubber stamp on checks he cashes at the bank, "pay in lawful money" -- or when presenting FRNs for exchange at a bank he will murmur "lawful money please" -- and imagine that the FRNs he gets in return are somehow United States Notes, although to everyone else they're ordinary FRNs.
I might add that a very few court cases called upon in the last half century to decide what "lawful money" can be gotten in exchange for FRNs decided that Federal Reserve Notes are, themselves, lawful money (as are coins minted by the govt). Several sections in the federal transportation laws provide that lost cargo or luggage will be compensated in "lawful money" - sections enacted or amended since United States Notes ceased to be issued. No litigation was ever commenced challenging the adequacy of FRNs to satisfy these terms (but it was evidently intended that a shipper would pay for lost luggage with spendable money and not with discounted tickets). Generally, "lawful money" is a broader term than "legal tender"; "legal tender" is the official currency issued by the govt itself, "lawful money" is whatever the marketplace accepts as media of exchange, including traveler's checks, business/personal checks, credit cards, and, yes, legal tender.
-
- Gunners Mate
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 9:22 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/lawfulmoney.asp
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/legal-tender.asp
well define "lawful money" and "legal tender".
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/legal-tender.asp
well define "lawful money" and "legal tender".
-
- A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
- Posts: 13806
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Poorly worded definitions and the one on "lawful money" is just flat out wrong, and there are sufficient court cases to that effect. There is NO difference in the meaning, and the Treasury does not, and has not, issued currency for decades.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
-
- Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
- Posts: 6125
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
- Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Courts have consistently held that US Notes are no longer necessary since they performed no function which Federal Reserve Notes do not perform just as well. The requirement that a certain amount of US Notes be "kept in circulation" was "observed", since the early 70s, by "circulating" pallets of USNs around a secure warehouse, until the circulation requirement was repealed, at which point the remaining USNs were destroyed.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
-
- Quatloosian Federal Witness
- Posts: 7584
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Not even close.norrha wrote:http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/lawfulmoney.asp
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
- David Hume
-
- A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
- Posts: 13806
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
I'm thinking I would not be interested in taking investment advice from a company that can't even get something that simple right.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
-
- Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
- Posts: 1678
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 9:35 am
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
For anyone interested in the details of "redeeming lawful money", there was a fantastic thread on it awhile back:
viewtopic.php?t=8415
viewtopic.php?t=8415
-
- Princeps Wooloosia
- Posts: 3144
- Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 4:50 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
I spent quite a bit of time ferreting out the legal significance of "lawful money" and the definition offered by Investopedia is simply wrong. While the precise definition seems to vary from economist to economist, from lawyer to lawyer, it is not something that excludes FRNs or legal tender. Back in 1913 the US Treasury offered the (debatable) legal opinion that lawful money was absolutely synonymous with legal tender.
The problem goes back to the 1862 issue of United States Notes. As they were fiat currency it was felt necessary to declare them, by law, usable currency; one Congressional bill called them legal tender and another Congressional bill called them lawful money. In Conference, both terms were used in tandem; United States Notes were declared to be both lawful money and legal tender, as if the two terms suggested something very distinct from each other. Then in 1913, the Federal Reserve Act said that the new Federal Reserve Notes were redeemable in lawful money -- for some people this meant that FRNs were interchangeable with the currency already in circulation, for people like DiM it seemed to mean that FRNs were somehow different. Without changing that section of the law, in 1933, another law was enacted, when gold and gold certificates were taken out of circulation, that all govt-issued currency, specificially mentioning FRNs, were all now legal tender.
The problem goes back to the 1862 issue of United States Notes. As they were fiat currency it was felt necessary to declare them, by law, usable currency; one Congressional bill called them legal tender and another Congressional bill called them lawful money. In Conference, both terms were used in tandem; United States Notes were declared to be both lawful money and legal tender, as if the two terms suggested something very distinct from each other. Then in 1913, the Federal Reserve Act said that the new Federal Reserve Notes were redeemable in lawful money -- for some people this meant that FRNs were interchangeable with the currency already in circulation, for people like DiM it seemed to mean that FRNs were somehow different. Without changing that section of the law, in 1933, another law was enacted, when gold and gold certificates were taken out of circulation, that all govt-issued currency, specificially mentioning FRNs, were all now legal tender.
-
- Gunners Mate
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 9:22 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
So how about using the definition in Merriam-Webster (MW) instead: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona ... ul%20money
"lawful money" could mean "money issued in accordance with (positive) law" whereas "legal tender" simply means that which is recognized by law for the payment of debts. The fact that FRNs are now considered legal tender and lawful money [1], does not negate that the terms are fundamentally different.
[1] http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_15197.htm
"lawful money" could mean "money issued in accordance with (positive) law" whereas "legal tender" simply means that which is recognized by law for the payment of debts. The fact that FRNs are now considered legal tender and lawful money [1], does not negate that the terms are fundamentally different.
[1] http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_15197.htm
-
- Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
- Posts: 6125
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
- Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Why bother? This is a distinction which has long since ceased to have any real meaning in our lives. I have long since realized that trying to make Van Pelt understand that his fantasies hold no legal weight whatsoever is futile, and I decline to give his ideas any respect by making further attempts to refute them.norrha wrote:So how about using the definition in Merriam-Webster (MW) instead: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona ... ul%20money
"lawful money" could mean "money issued in accordance with (positive) law" whereas "legal tender" simply means that which is recognized by law for the payment of debts. The fact that FRNs are now considered legal tender and lawful money [1], does not negate that the terms are fundamentally different.
[1] http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_15197.htm
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
-
- Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
- Posts: 2272
- Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:01 pm
- Location: New York, NY
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Dictionary definitions are not binding law. This topic, and Lawful Money has already been fully defined in teh other thread. If you are interested in a definition, start there.norrha wrote:So how about using the definition in Merriam-Webster (MW) instead: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona ... ul%20money
"lawful money" could mean "money issued in accordance with (positive) law" whereas "legal tender" simply means that which is recognized by law for the payment of debts. The fact that FRNs are now considered legal tender and lawful money [1], does not negate that the terms are fundamentally different.
[1] http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_15197.htm
The Hardest Thing in the World to Understand is Income Taxes -Albert Einstein
Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose - As sung by Janis Joplin (and others) Written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster.
Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose - As sung by Janis Joplin (and others) Written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster.
-
- Quatloosian Federal Witness
- Posts: 7584
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 6:39 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
norrha wrote:So how about using the definition in Merriam-Webster (MW) instead: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona ... ul%20money
No thanks.M-W wrote:You've found a word that is only available in the Merriam-Webster Unabridged Dictionary. To view the full definition of lawful money, activate your free trial today.
I agree that the terms are different in theory. I suppose that, in theory, something could be lawful money without being legal tender (although the inverse is pretty hard to picture). In 2017 U.S., however, they are identical in practice. FRNs, plus any left-over US Notes, or Silver or Gold Certificates, are both lawful money and legal tender."lawful money" could mean "money issued in accordance with (positive) law" whereas "legal tender" simply means that which is recognized by law for the payment of debts. The fact that FRNs are now considered legal tender and lawful money [1], does not negate that the terms are fundamentally different.
Yes, that's accurate. As Gman says, it's all been discussed in considerable detail in the other thread. So what's the problem?
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume
- David Hume
-
- Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
- Posts: 730
- Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 8:20 pm
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
Isn't "positive law" a nonsensical term made up by FMOTL and Tax Deniers? Does it have any real legal significance. I have heard Tax Deniers argue that Title 26 is not "positive law" because Congress never voted on the title as a whole. In their fantasies, they believe that this makes the tax laws invalid.norrha wrote:So how about using the definition in Merriam-Webster (MW) instead: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona ... ul%20money
"lawful money" could mean "money issued in accordance with (positive) law" whereas "legal tender" simply means that which is recognized by law for the payment of debts. The fact that FRNs are now considered legal tender and lawful money [1], does not negate that the terms are fundamentally different.
[1] http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_15197.htm
-
- Further Moderator
- Posts: 7524
- Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 11:48 pm
- Location: Virgin Islands Gunsmith
Re: WFS has a new star - David Merrill!
That he is still getting taxed despite stamping "lawful money" on his currency?wserra wrote:Yes, that's accurate. As Gman says, it's all been discussed in considerable detail in the other thread. So what's the problem?
"I could be dead wrong on this" - Irwin Schiff
"Do you realize I may even be delusional with respect to my income tax beliefs? " - Irwin Schiff
"Do you realize I may even be delusional with respect to my income tax beliefs? " - Irwin Schiff