Douglas P.
Puritan Board Freshman
This seems to be a naked claim to unfettered ownership of virtually all wealth in a territory, if held in tradable dollars, which "private citizens" merely utilize as lessees, paying a neverending series of fees for the "service."
What happens when the government prohibits not just counterfeit dollars (private, unbacked "expansion" of that govt debt--why is it OK for one side in this social contract to manipulate this service for the benefit of its brokers?) but all other exchange media as well; or demands a "cut" (denominated in its own wealth counters) for those who would prefer to eliminate their reliance on commodity prey to the Issuer's coin-shaving habit?
Rev. Buchanan,
I should have been a little more clear in my response. My initial point was to try and dispel the myth that Gov't Debt is a bad thing, per se, and that it needs to be paid back.
I was using private savings in the national accounting sense. For every dollar in a savings account right now there is a corresponding dollar on the Treasury's balance sheet. We call this liability the federal debt. If we were to "balance the budget" and eliminate the federal debt, we would, by the rules of accounting, remove every dollar from circulation. And, as I pointed out earlier, we've ran a budget surplus for more than two quarters twice in US history, once from 1927-1929 and the other time being 1999-2000. You can pull up a chart of the DOW and see how well that worked out.
However, if someone wants to take their dollars and convert them into silver because they think that is a better investment, or a better way to save, than so be it. But the point still stands, they would have no dollars to buy gold if the gov't didn't create them in the first place.