Constitutional Law
-
It regulates the AMOUNT, not the value. One influences the other, but it's not the same thing. And like I said... What's a dollar worth? Give me a number... What is the value of $1?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
Sure, I'll give you a value. It costs you $1080 for one ounce of gold. You know how much it was back in 1971? $30. I'd say there's always inflation. The dollar loses value constantly. You just don't see it. It's a piece of paper. Paper has negligible value, compared to rare metal.
-
Just like they passed the Patriot Acts after deleting most of the amendments to the Bill of Rights right? They don't give a damn about the constitution, they do as they please.
Show me exactly which amendments were deleted. Far as I know, they're still there. And if you think the Patriot Act contradicts them, show me exactly where and how. Which clauses? What exact words? If you can prove that, then maybe you should be talking to your Senators... Personally, I would love to see the Patriot Act torn up, as I'm a bit sick of the government using the "terrorist threat" and "think of the children" to gain support for just about anything... But as far as I know, it was all done legally.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
-
It regulates the AMOUNT, not the value. One influences the other, but it's not the same thing. And like I said... What's a dollar worth? Give me a number... What is the value of $1?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
They can easily regulate its value. A dollar is worth over 95% less than what it was worth just before the federal reserve was established.
-
LunaticFringe wrote:
I believe the proper Brooklynese is 'youse'.
Damn, my English -> Drivel dictionary is out of date. :((
-
Sure, I'll give you a value. It costs you $1080 for one ounce of gold. You know how much it was back in 1971? $30. I'd say there's always inflation. The dollar loses value constantly. You just don't see it. It's a piece of paper. Paper has negligible value, compared to rare metal.
I'm not saying it isn't losing value. I'm saying it doesn't have a set value. Why exactly does it cost $1080 for an ounce of gold? Because that's what people are willing to pay. There's no government agency or private corporation saying "Ok, today the price of gold is going to be $1080!" It's worth $1080 because people think it's worth $1080.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
-
Show me exactly which amendments were deleted. Far as I know, they're still there. And if you think the Patriot Act contradicts them, show me exactly where and how. Which clauses? What exact words? If you can prove that, then maybe you should be talking to your Senators... Personally, I would love to see the Patriot Act torn up, as I'm a bit sick of the government using the "terrorist threat" and "think of the children" to gain support for just about anything... But as far as I know, it was all done legally.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
My point was that they do pass unconstitutional laws.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
nd if you think the Patriot Act contradicts them, show me exactly where and how.
Wiretapping, illegal search and seizures, putting American people on criminal watch lists without a trial , that prevent them from flying and so on. You can look it up.
-
As for the Federal Reserve question (Separate post, to keep things distinct)... Technically, the Federal Reserve does NOT regulate the value of the currency. The value of the currency really isn't regulated at all. It's as valuable as people THINK it is. The Federal Reserve indirectly influences its value by, as its name suggests, varying the amount of money it keeps in reserve. See, if we were still gold-backed, then currency would have a finite value... $1 is worth X ounces of gold (Ok, much less than an ounce, but 0.0001 is still a number). Since we're not gold-backed (Actually, I don't think any country still uses gold-backed currency), how do you define the value of a dollar? The Fed, by the way, was created via the Federal Reserve Act of... I think it was 1913, but don't quote me on that. So it's not in the Constitution itself, obviously.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
There's a slight problem with this to the extent of the reserve's interest rate on it's loans to banks effectively setting a minimum rate at which banks will loan money, and greatly influencing the rates of nearly every other financial activity. That seems to be a great deal of 'regulating the value' to me.
-
josda1000 wrote:
money is involved in everyone's life.
And what has this to do with your constitiution?
The Continental was a monetary unit that was used before the Constitution was put in place. It was made of paper; backed by nothing, just as we have it today. Now the Continental became absolutely worthless because the Continental was printed so quickly, and basically to pay off our Foreign Debt. The French helped us win the war against England; the American Revolution. We promised that we'd pay them back if they would help us win the war. So we basically paid them back. When we did so, we had to print a new currency, and unfortunately it was backed by nothing. So it lost credibility, and therefore it lost value. So the Founders were actually smart (not dumb, as many of you think) and wrote into the new Constitution the fact that Congress and the States may not make any Thing but gold and silver a legal Tender in Payments of Debt. (Article 1, Section 10). This is to force the government from printing their way out of debt. And guess what we see today... I hope this will suffice.
-
They can easily regulate its value. A dollar is worth over 95% less than what it was worth just before the federal reserve was established.
See above post: http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/3271557/Re-Constitutional-Law-Federal-Reserve.aspx[^] Yes, the value is decreasing, but the Fed isn't regulating it. They're influencing it, not regulating it. It's an exercise in semantics. If a large enough group of people came out and said "Hey, I think the dollar is worth twice what the market says", and enough people agreed with them, that would become the truth. Say I write a comic book and distribute it for a few years... It catches on, and people like it... Then after a while, copies get destroyed or lost in the normal course of things... I don't release any more, so the ones in good condition become a little more valuable. Then I sell the movie rights, and Hollywood makes a summer blockbuster based on it... Suddenly the value of those comic books SKYROCKETS, because people want it more. I didn't change the amount available... People just decided it was worth more. Perception is reality... Ever heard that phrase? Things are worth what people think they're worth. Value is a general consensus. So the Fed influences that consensus, but they aren't directly regulating it.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
-
They can easily regulate its value. A dollar is worth over 95% less than what it was worth just before the federal reserve was established.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
A dollar is worth over 95% less than what it was worth just before the federal reserve was established.
Let's see.... say modest inflation over that time. 3%. So over 95 years (reserve made in 1913 and I like rounding) it amounts to 97.85%. So yea, the dollar is worse about 95% less than it used to be. Welcome to basic math. Trying to maintain the exact same value in a monetary system is a pipe dream. Sooner or later someone figures they are worth more, get a way to get paid more and their extra money is injected into the system.
-
I'd like to mention, I'm being flippant in his direction not yours. It's just that the Fed is something I've argued out so many times I tend to get a tad terse on it. About the only thing I'm worse on is income taxes, back before I lost the forum it was on I'd just post a link to a post I made to educate the snot out of some business major who didn't understand the very basics of the system in place in the US.
-
My point was that they do pass unconstitutional laws.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
nd if you think the Patriot Act contradicts them, show me exactly where and how.
Wiretapping, illegal search and seizures, putting American people on criminal watch lists without a trial , that prevent them from flying and so on. You can look it up.
Not only is it unconstitutional, but is it morally right to wiretap? Whether foreign or domestic? Dude... when you argue with someone, argue with them with that backing. Always think of right/wrong. But keep it up. You got me to do this though... thanks for opening the door. Back room or not, people come. Awexomesauce
-
My point was that they do pass unconstitutional laws.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
nd if you think the Patriot Act contradicts them, show me exactly where and how.
Wiretapping, illegal search and seizures, putting American people on criminal watch lists without a trial , that prevent them from flying and so on. You can look it up.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Wiretapping
Where does the Constitution deny this power? I believe the amendment on the Bill of Rights was along the lines of "to be secure in their persons and possessions"... I don't remember there being a "Right to Privacy" in the Constitution.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
illegal search and seizures
You're partially right in this sense, as those types of incidents do take place, and are (Or should be) redressed. A lot of this, however, has to do with what it takes to get a court-issued warrant, which makes the search and seizure legal. As for things like airport searches... That's basically saying "If you want to get on this plane, you have to agree to be searched"... You always have the option to turn and leave.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
putting American people on criminal watch lists without a trial , that prevent them from flying and so on
There's no "Right to Fly" in the Constitution, and there's no law against putting people on a list. Again, I don't like the Patriot Act, and I actually agree with you that the items you listed are "bad," in some senses. But that doesn't make them unconstitutional.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
-
I'm not saying it isn't losing value. I'm saying it doesn't have a set value. Why exactly does it cost $1080 for an ounce of gold? Because that's what people are willing to pay. There's no government agency or private corporation saying "Ok, today the price of gold is going to be $1080!" It's worth $1080 because people think it's worth $1080.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
It's more than that. It's not just a mind game. Well, I guess it is a mind game, but think about it. If you're able to print money out of thin air, you have power. That's why counterfeiting is illegal. So where do "dollars" come from? They don't just exist. It comes from somewhere. And yes, it comes from a "Federal Reserve". Which is a bunch of malarkey but I won't go there. So if the bank prints dollar bills, it's adding dollars to the economy. Which means it loses value. Because it never had value to begin with; it's a damned piece of paper. Gold never loses value because nobody can screw with it. it's an element; it's not made of anything more than itself.
-
Not only is it unconstitutional, but is it morally right to wiretap? Whether foreign or domestic? Dude... when you argue with someone, argue with them with that backing. Always think of right/wrong. But keep it up. You got me to do this though... thanks for opening the door. Back room or not, people come. Awexomesauce
Hey, there are a lot of us that watch the Back Room, and are up for an intelligent discussion... Most of the heat CSS gets is from just repeating political rhetoric without actually understanding it, and then either cursing at us or ignoring us when he's proven wrong. A quote comes to mind: In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion. ~Carl Sagan, 1987
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
A dollar is worth over 95% less than what it was worth just before the federal reserve was established.
Let's see.... say modest inflation over that time. 3%. So over 95 years (reserve made in 1913 and I like rounding) it amounts to 97.85%. So yea, the dollar is worse about 95% less than it used to be. Welcome to basic math. Trying to maintain the exact same value in a monetary system is a pipe dream. Sooner or later someone figures they are worth more, get a way to get paid more and their extra money is injected into the system.
It would not lose its value if the Federal Reserve did not exist. In Rome, you could have bought a tunic, a belt and a nice pair of shoes for one ounce of gold. Today, you could buy a suit, a belt and a nice pair of shoes for one ounce of gold. Real hard money does not change, because everyone knows what gold is; it's money. It's worth something. BUT the more paper dollars you print, the more that the paper money will lose value. Basic math.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
A dollar is worth over 95% less than what it was worth just before the federal reserve was established.
Let's see.... say modest inflation over that time. 3%. So over 95 years (reserve made in 1913 and I like rounding) it amounts to 97.85%. So yea, the dollar is worse about 95% less than it used to be. Welcome to basic math. Trying to maintain the exact same value in a monetary system is a pipe dream. Sooner or later someone figures they are worth more, get a way to get paid more and their extra money is injected into the system.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
So yea, the dollar is worse about 95% less than it used to be.
That is almost the entire US economy and other countries economies that use the dollar, stolen over the period of 100 years. What could be done with many 20 trillion of dollars (in today's value) (World Bank states there over 40 trillion dollars in all the worlds currencies (but US dollar is dominate so I estimated half)) spent over the period of 100 years? That is about 500 million dollars spent EVERY DAY for 100 YEARS! Why would you think that stealing that much money from the people is okay? What was-andis that money being spent on? How is it being used to change society? What kind of damage has been inflicted upon the world with all of this misplaced monetary power.
-
It's more than that. It's not just a mind game. Well, I guess it is a mind game, but think about it. If you're able to print money out of thin air, you have power. That's why counterfeiting is illegal. So where do "dollars" come from? They don't just exist. It comes from somewhere. And yes, it comes from a "Federal Reserve". Which is a bunch of malarkey but I won't go there. So if the bank prints dollar bills, it's adding dollars to the economy. Which means it loses value. Because it never had value to begin with; it's a damned piece of paper. Gold never loses value because nobody can screw with it. it's an element; it's not made of anything more than itself.
Actually, that's a common misconception. Correct me if I'm wrong, because I haven't researched this in a while, so my memory might be fuzzy... The truth is, the US Dollar is basically a bond. The Treasury issues these bonds, and the Federal Reserve buys them, essentially loaning money to the government, the same way it would loan you a couple hundred thousand bucks for a mortgage. The difference between the Fed lending to the government and your bank lending to you, is that though the Treasury DOES pay interest to the Fed, something like 97% of that interest is remitted back to the Treasury (The rest is operating expenses). So the government is getting a nearly-interest-free loan. So when you really think about it, the Fed is just controlling how much money it keeps under its mattress instead of circulating. The Treasury is the one adding new currency to the system.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
-
The Continental was a monetary unit that was used before the Constitution was put in place. It was made of paper; backed by nothing, just as we have it today. Now the Continental became absolutely worthless because the Continental was printed so quickly, and basically to pay off our Foreign Debt. The French helped us win the war against England; the American Revolution. We promised that we'd pay them back if they would help us win the war. So we basically paid them back. When we did so, we had to print a new currency, and unfortunately it was backed by nothing. So it lost credibility, and therefore it lost value. So the Founders were actually smart (not dumb, as many of you think) and wrote into the new Constitution the fact that Congress and the States may not make any Thing but gold and silver a legal Tender in Payments of Debt. (Article 1, Section 10). This is to force the government from printing their way out of debt. And guess what we see today... I hope this will suffice.
nah, not really. See they gave the keys to enforcing this all to a branch of government that was more concerned with feeling important and the branch that is supposed to determine if the people writing how to do all this are wrong tend to be old, put in for politics that have everything to do with how they think women should reproduce and not how the Executive branch is stomping on the Constitution matters, and are sometimes completely inept. Meanwhile the people writing the laws occasionally get things right (like the fact that having a gold standard won't work when you don't have enough gold in the world to back all your currency) and mostly get things wrong (partiot acts 1 and 2.) You can't convince me that the Fed is a bad idea. It is okay and is not as bad as pretty much everything else I have had to deal with coming from our elected officials. The current situation globally for ecomomics was nto caused by the Fed. It was caused by a corrupt system with little to no regulation being allowed to get away with screwing a lot of people and with companies that made it worse with their own decisions. A company cancelled our credit card even though we had a modest balance, paid all our bills on time and were paying above the minimum. So instead of continuing to have good customers they decided to lose us and so lost a revenue stream. Makes perfect sense, right? And they did this to a lot of folks, made a big fuss out of all this lost revenue and got handed my tax money. When calling the representative to point out how stupid this was they asked me if I was a registered Rep. I got an answering machine when I said no. The system is crap. But it is what we have, and the people in charge won't let us fix it because it means they lose. So what do you do? Elect a guy that promises change and then changes his mind. Meh. Guess you do little to nothing.
-
I'd like to mention, I'm being flippant in his direction not yours. It's just that the Fed is something I've argued out so many times I tend to get a tad terse on it. About the only thing I'm worse on is income taxes, back before I lost the forum it was on I'd just post a link to a post I made to educate the snot out of some business major who didn't understand the very basics of the system in place in the US.