Non filing attorney

A collection of old posts from all forums. No new threads or new posts in old threads allowed. For archive use only.
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

Post by webhick »

Prof wrote:Because I don't count the non-person, count Van Pelt, you are obviously not the dumbest person here. That has to be the Captain -- what else can you say about someone who is a SECOND GENERATION MARINE. (It's an Army thing.)
My self-appointed title of "Dumbest Person Here" is something to be proud of and isn't meant as a way to garner sympathy or pep-talks. If I really thought I was dumb, I wouldn't even torture you fine Quatloosians with my presence.

Second generation marine...you know, I bring up again: "There's a reason they always send the marines in first".
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
Demosthenes
Grand Exalted Keeper of Esoterica
Posts: 5773
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:11 pm

Post by Demosthenes »

LPC wrote:But have you ever tried to have a conversation with the FedEx guy?
My FedEx guy is a moron. He usually rings the doorbell and runs as fast as he can down the hill back to his truck, which is irritating when he takes the package back with him because he couldn't get a signature...

My UPS guy is a really cool guy in comparison. He comes to my office door, always says a few words, and when he delivered my table saw a couple of years ago was very helpful with setup tips since he uses the same model in his home workshop.
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

Post by webhick »

David, I want to go back to what you were saying about US Notes.

I was reading up on the US Treasury site...if US Notes were taken out of circulation, they are now collector's items. That would explain why they cannot easily be purchased at face value, but are redeemable for goods at face value.

Let's say I have a very rare and nearly priceless quarter from the 1870s. Provided it's the right size, I can shove it in the vending machine with a bunch of other coins and get a soda. I could also accidentally include it in some change when I pay for my next meal. Or, I can take it to a coin collector and sell it for thousands. It is both worth $0.25 and thousands at the same time. In the first two scenarios, I'd be a moron, of course.

US Treasury FAQ
I would recommend reading that, since it states that they were indeed taken out of circulation.

Seems to me that dealing in US Notes instead of FRNs is a bit pain in the patookie. Especially since private businesses are not required to accept all forms of legal tender (see the 1st FAQ question on the page linked above). Your banker may be required to take it on face value, but they're special in the eyes of the Gov't.
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
David Merrill

webhick distortion

Post by David Merrill »

That didn't work Webhick;


But it was slick; coming on all stupid like that. Then blurting...

US Treasury FAQ
I would recommend reading that, since it states that they were indeed taken out of circulation.
http://www.treas.gov/education/faq/curr ... nder.shtml

What it says is:
United States notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve notes. As a result, the Treasury Department stopped issuing United States notes, and none have been placed into circulation since January 21, 1971.
You blurt. Yes, blurt, blurt, blurt.

Because you even wait a few posts or pages to try making your point, your misdirection credible. But you have it right there in your post - you dishonest genius you; if quarters were taken out of circulation then they would have only a collector value if anything.

http://www.friesian.com/notes.htm

Thank you. And of course special thanks to LDE:
LDE wrote:David, that link is to a letter in which you advocate "devaluing" the renminbi. I think you meant to advocate for an upward revaluation, not a devaluation. A cheaper renminbi would increase Chinese exports to the U.S.

Revaluing the renminbi is a red herring, IMO. The trade balance could be resolved by devaluing the dollar against all foreign currencies. This would hike the price of cheap consumer goods at Wal-Mart and inflame the lower classes, which is why the U.S. won't really do it.

Since the U.S. economy is so much bigger than the Chinese, if we really wanted to revalue the renminbi upward, it would be easy enough for the U.S. to announce it would buy renminbi for dollars at a rate higher than the official one. But it's in some people's interest to keep the country in debt, so you're not going to see anything of the kind.

David, you were asked point blank what you consider "lawful money." Can you please explain? FRNs say right on their face that they are legal tender. Isn't that lawful money? Could you post a picture of some "lawful money"? You've referred to it a number of times but I don't know what you mean by the phrase.
You Quatlosers never cease to amaze me. (Quick, Joey!)


David Merrill.
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

Post by webhick »

David, there was nothing sinister intended nor was I trying to trick you into anything. I took "taken out of circulation" and "none have been placed into circulation" to mean pretty much the same thing. Also, it is not a misdirection or being dishonest if it's my understanding of the situation. I can just be wrong without malicious intent, you know. If you're going to continue to humor yourself with my stupidity, then you should get used to me being wrong or misreading something.

In order for me to trick you, I would have to know something about FRNs, lawful money and what-not. I walked into this conversation knowing nothing about either one. Heck, I didn't even notice that the currency in my pocket said "Federal Reserve Note" until I modified that $1 with my love note. I would also have had to have the foresight to plan it out to an extent. That's, like, chess-master skills for me. Did I ever tell you that I suck at chess. Yeah, I suck at chess. I could lose to a dog with one eye and no paws.

I also did not intentionally wait a few pages or posts to respond to try to detract from what I was saying. I told you in an earlier post that I would get to researching it when I could, since it looked like it was going to take longer than the lawful money definition. The one-off posts I put up between declaring that I would research it later and when I actually responded with what I found were quick little ditties that took no time at all. I posted the information shortly after finding it.
David wrote:if quarters were taken out of circulation then they would have only a collector value if anything.
I was talking about a very rare quarter, not quarters in general. If the rare quarter was taken out of circulation, it can easily pass for one still in (unless someone is actually looking). It is how I came in possession of a beat-up indian head penny from 1908. I got it for $0.01.

Since the FRN and the USN serve the same purpose, taking it out of circulation (or simply not entering any more into circulation) places it in the same ballpark as the indian head penny. A $1 FRN = $1 USN when one is not paying attention. Just as a 2007 Penny = an Indian Head Penny when one is not paying attention.

I went back and re-read your post a couple of times. I'm sorry, I did not initially see the parts where you mentioned that there is a difference between taking something out of circulation and not entering anymore in.

I'm misreading and misunderstanding you and you're throwing accusations. Since I'm not sure if you would be throwing accusations, had my reading comprehension been better, I feel it is best to let this deteriorated mess of a conversation we were having just die.
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
David Merrill

Post by David Merrill »

I took "taken out of circulation" and "none have been placed into circulation" to mean pretty much the same thing.

As with the quarter scenario you gave to exemplify the distortion, they do not mean the same thing.



Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S.
I went back and re-read your post a couple of times. I'm sorry, I did not initially see the parts where you mentioned that there is a difference between taking something out of circulation and not entering anymore in.

I'm misreading and misunderstanding you and you're throwing accusations.
The accusation is basically that you are part of the Quatloos Insultinator dogpiling on David Merrill for the sake of fun. Specifically though, the accusation that you are distorting taking something out of circulation for the decision to not continue putting something, in its particular form into circulation. As compared to:
Dr. Caligari wrote:On Sui, David has posted -- if I understand him correctly, and that's a big "if"-- that he has some magic means of turning FRNs into "lawful money"; that the "lawful money" looks exactly like FRNs; but that, because it's now "lawful money," it's non-taxable.
that is a wonderful confirmation that when people compliment me about my video, saying that they understand me, they are telling the truth. And that the genre of posters like Dr. Caligari read and understand what I am saying too.
aksis

Post by aksis »

David, I was also looking at the Treasury site FAQ, specifically these 2 questions and answers:
Question: What are Federal Reserve notes and how are they different from United States notes?

Answer: Federal Reserve notes are legal tender currency notes. The twelve Federal Reserve Banks issue them into circulation pursuant to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. A commercial bank belonging to the Federal Reserve System can obtain Federal Reserve notes from the Federal Reserve Bank in its district whenever it wishes. It must pay for them in full, dollar for dollar, by drawing down its account with its district Federal Reserve Bank.

Federal Reserve Banks obtain the notes from our Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP). It pays the BEP for the cost of producing the notes, which then become liabilities of the Federal Reserve Banks, and obligations of the United States Government.

Congress has specified that a Federal Reserve Bank must hold collateral equal in value to the Federal Reserve notes that the Bank receives. This collateral is chiefly gold certificates and United States securities. This provides backing for the note issue. The idea was that if the Congress dissolved the Federal Reserve System, the United States would take over the notes (liabilities). This would meet the requirements of Section 411, but the government would also take over the assets, which would be of equal value. Federal Reserve notes represent a first lien on all the assets of the Federal Reserve Banks, and on the collateral specifically held against them.

Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity, and receive no backing by anything. This has been the case since 1933. The notes have no value for themselves, but for what they will buy. In another sense, because they are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are "backed" by all the goods and services in the economy.
Question:What are United States Notes and how are they different from Federal Reserve notes?

Answer: United States Notes (characterized by a red seal and serial number) were the first national currency, authorized by the Legal Tender Act of 1862 and began circulating during the Civil War. The Treasury Department issued these notes directly into circulation, and they are obligations of the United States Government. The issuance of United States Notes is subject to limitations established by Congress. It established a statutory limitation of $300 million on the amount of United States Notes authorized to be outstanding and in circulation. While this was a significant figure in Civil War days, it is now a very small fraction of the total currency in circulation in the United States.

Both United States Notes and Federal Reserve Notes are parts of our national currency and both are legal tender. They circulate as money in the same way. However, the issuing authority for them comes from different statutes. United States Notes were redeemable in gold until 1933, when the United States abandoned the gold standard. Since then, both currencies have served essentially the same purpose, and have had the same value. Because United States Notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve Notes, their issuance was discontinued, and none have been placed in to circulation since January 21, 1971.

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 authorized the production and circulation of Federal Reserve notes. Although the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) prints these notes, they move into circulation through the Federal Reserve System. They are obligations of both the Federal Reserve System and the United States Government. On Federal Reserve notes, the seals and serial numbers appear in green.

United States notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve notes. As a result, the Treasury Department stopped issuing United States notes, and none have been placed into circulation since January 21, 1971.

United States notes are obligations of the United States issued directly into circulation by Treasury Department.


Federal Reserve notes are, 1) obligations of the Federal Reserve Bank; 2) obligations of the United States; 3) liabilities of the Federal Reserve Bank; 4) represent a first lien on the assets of the Federal Reserve Bank, and on the collateral specifically held against them, and; 5) move into circulation through the private Federal Reserve System.


A United State note, 1) is not an obligations of the Federal Reserve Bank; 2) is not a liability of the Federal Reserve Bank; 3) does not represent a first lien on the assets of the Federal Reserve Bank, and on the collateral specifically held against them, and; 4) are not issued through the Federal Reserve System.



Are either of the notes "lawful money" as the words are used at 411?

Are "obligations" and "liabilities" of a person, "lawful money", or would they be more properly the subject matter of contracts?

What, if any, additional terms and conditions are imposed upon people choosing to make use of the private Federal Reserve System?

David, via the non-endorsement, are you bypassing the private Federal Reserve System and looking specifically to the public "obligations of the United States" - or in other words, using the 'public side' of the Federal Reserve note?

You say, you are "redeeming FRN's for lawful money", and that, "they (FRN's) are United States Notes in the form of FRN's." I see that both a FRN and a US note are "obligations of the United States".
David Merrill

off topic - like this entire thread...

Post by David Merrill »