Economics Questions

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Wilmot of Rochester — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 06:57:14 GMT

Wilmot of Rochester:

JonBostwick:

If anyone bothers to click the link, you'll notice the FAQ is talking about what "legal tender" means. What the answer, which Wilmot quoted mid-paragraph, is saying that a debtor is obligated to take dollars in payment of a debt, but a business is not obligated to engage in a transaction with a dollar holder.

That's actually not what it says,

This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor.

What the law really states is that for all contracts not otherwise stated the assumed form of payment is legal dollars. If you wanted to charge 800 gummy bears for a pair of jeans and refused federal reserve notes as the equivalent, you'd be able to do so. I'm not entirely certain about debts, I think if you stated in the contract specifically what you would take, there would be a case for it, but that may be a legal case matter that I'm not familiar with.

Here.

This is what I read.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Knight_of_BAAWA — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 02:06:34 GMT

Wilmot of Rochester:
Yeah, I get it because I read the law and understand what it means.

O RLY? You clearly don't grasp that the law talks about what the federal government says is legal tender. You'd rather create some diversion than have to deal with that.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

nirgrahamUK — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 01:20:27 GMT

there are lots of fun laws to read. america ensures freedom for its citizens.

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 25 > § 486

Prev | Next

§ 486. Uttering coins of gold, silver or other metal

How Current is This?

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title ^[1] or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

there are lots of lovelly laws. perhaps i can find a law for you ? place your requests and i'll see what the US government can cook up.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

nirgrahamUK — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 00:59:56 GMT

what did you read?

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Wilmot of Rochester — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 00:59:07 GMT

Yeah, I get it because I read the law and understand what it means. You apparently don't.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Knight_of_BAAWA — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 00:54:06 GMT

Except it doesn't make a difference. We're talking about what the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES AS LEGAL TENDER.

Get it now?

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Wilmot of Rochester — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 00:29:02 GMT

Knight_of_BAAWA:

Wilmot of Rochester:
Policies for cash would also include the policy of not accepting cash or of accepting foreign currencies.
And yet that makes no difference, given the legal tender laws of the US.

Except it does make a difference. Read the law you cited.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Knight_of_BAAWA — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:53:29 GMT

Wilmot of Rochester:
Policies for cash would also include the policy of not accepting cash or of accepting foreign currencies.

And yet that makes no difference, given the legal tender laws of the US.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Wilmot of Rochester — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:27:55 GMT

JonBostwick:

Wilmot of Rochester:
but this is coming from someone of the opinion that the Japanese are owd repayment for what was taken from them with significant interests.

What was taken from them? You mean the dozen cities burned to the ground?

I should have said Japanese-Americans.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

JonBostwick — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:49:58 GMT

Wilmot of Rochester:
but this is coming from someone of the opinion that the Japanese are owd repayment for what was taken from them with significant interests.

What was taken from them? You mean the dozen cities burned to the ground?

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Wilmot of Rochester — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:34:50 GMT

JonBostwick:

Wilmot of Rochester:
What the law really states is that for all contracts not otherwise stated the assumed form of payment is legal dollars.

I was about to tell you were wrong on that account, but it seems I'm behind the times.

Turns out that in 1977 congress repealed the 1933 clause that outlawed contracting for payment in gold.

http://www.safehaven.com/article-11114.htm

Of course, gold confiscation in 1933 is still relevent for the simple reason that its still in Fort Knox.

Of course gold confiscation isn't a good thing and should be given back, but this is coming from someone of the opinion that the Japanese are owd repayment for what was taken from them with significant interests.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Wilmot of Rochester — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:33:14 GMT

Knight_of_BAAWA:

Wilmot of Rochester:
It says that businesses are allowed to create their own policies on acceptance of cash.
Of what cash. But cash itself as FRNs are legal tender. You DO know what that means, RIGHT?

Policies for cash would also include the policy of not accepting cash or of accepting foreign currencies.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

JonBostwick — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:48:11 GMT

Wilmot of Rochester:
What the law really states is that for all contracts not otherwise stated the assumed form of payment is legal dollars.

I was about to tell you were wrong on that account, but it seems I'm behind the times.

Turns out that in 1977 congress repealed the 1933 clause that outlawed contracting for payment in gold.

http://www.safehaven.com/article-11114.htm

Of course, gold confiscation in 1933 is still relevent for the simple reason that its still in Fort Knox.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

scineram — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 03:14:44 GMT

You can demand bubble gums if you want.

Re: Safety deposit boxes

Knight_of_BAAWA — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 01:39:42 GMT

Wilmot of Rochester:
It says that businesses are allowed to create their own policies on acceptance of cash.

Of what cash. But cash itself as FRNs are legal tender. You DO know what that means, RIGHT?