Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

homestead - Re: [Homestead] gold back currency anyone?

homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Homestead mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: bob ford <bobford79 AT yahoo.com>
  • To: Clansgian AT wmconnect.com, homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Homestead] gold back currency anyone?
  • Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 10:37:19 -0800 (PST)

James, another idea that goes along with this, is that becasue of gov't
controls you can not carry more than $10,000 US across borders. Howver there
are goldbugs who get around this becuase they use American Eagles or
buffalos, which are denominated into USD at a much lower rate than actual
gold value. It has been a topic of converstaion of goldbug boards for years.
It is surprising how many people on these type boards crisscross different
national borders on a regular basis................


----------------------------------------------------------------


--- On Sun, 12/7/08, Clansgian AT wmconnect.com <Clansgian AT wmconnect.com> wrote:

> From: Clansgian AT wmconnect.com <Clansgian AT wmconnect.com>
> Subject: Re: [Homestead] gold back currency anyone?
> To: bobford79 AT yahoo.com
> Date: Sunday, December 7, 2008, 10:51 AM
> > >That makes sense. Do you offhand know of the law
> that says a contract
> > based on gold is void? I am somewhat a fan of the
> cartoonist R. Crumb (Fritz
> > the Cat). A few years ago, he traded, using a legal
> contract, his 'notebook'
> > of drawings for an estate in France. No currebcy of
> any kind was used.
>
> "The limitation on gold ownership in the U.S. was
> repealed after President <A
> HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Ford";>
> Gerald Ford</A> signed a bill legalizing private
> ownership of gold coins, bars and
> certificates by an act of Congress codified in <A
> HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_law_%28United_States%29";>Pub.L.</A>
> 93-373 <A
> HREF="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d093:SN02665:@@@L&summ2=m&%7CTOM:/bss/d093query.html%7C";>[1]</A>
> <A
> HREF="http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/5000-200.html";>[2]</A>
> which went
> into effect <A
> HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_31";>December
> 31</A>, <A
> HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1974";>1974</A>.
> P.L. 93-373 does not repeal the <A
> HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gold_Clause_Resolution_of_1933&action=edit&redlink=1";>Gold
> Clause
> Resolution of 1933</A>, which makes unlawful any
> contracts which specify payment in
> a fixed amount of money or a fixed amount of gold. That is,
> contracts are
> unenforceable if they use gold monetarily rather than as a
> commodity of trade."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102
>
>
> --------------------
>
> You will find a lot of gold-o-philes who say that a supreme
> court case in
> 1977 established that 'gold clause' contracts were
> made legal again. Not true.
> This was only a case involving whether gold was being use
> in a monetarialy or
> not.
>
>
> James







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page