What is a “dollar”?
One of the best-kept secrets of modern finance is the nature of money itself. I recall a televised dialogue between Ron Paul and Alan Greenspan, when the latter was the Chairman of the Federal Reserve bank. He was asked by Ron Paul what exactly a dollar is. Greenspan’s answer was: “I don’t know.”
Now I ask this audience: Is it credible that the chairman of the Federal Reserve bank didn’t know what a dollar is? Is it not infinitely more likely he knew exactly what a dollar is, but had a compelling reason for not wanting to say it on the public record?
The simple fact is that for hundreds of years, a dollar was a measurement of weight, a specific number of grams of silver. So “one dollar” referred to X grams of silver. In his marvelous essay on the subject, Pieces of Eight, Edwin Vieira Jr. demonstrates beyond any doubt that the constitutional dollar of the United States is a “historically determinate, fixed weight of fine silver.” The Coinage Act of 1792 is but one source among many that makes this plain. It reads:
“the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units … to contain three hundred and seventy-one grains and four sixteenth parts of a grain of pure … silver.”
That “a dollar” was a reference to a measured weight of silver (and indirectly of gold), was understood by every American man woman and child for hundreds of years. That understanding has been lost over time, since America’s gold was confiscated from the American people by FDR in 1933.
America’s wealth was confiscated in 1933
America’s gold was forcibly taken in 1933, under threat of huge fines and 10 years imprisonment. People were threatened with jail time and huge fines because otherwise few would have voluntarily given all their wealth to a government, they understood to be their servant. Americans did not give up their wealth voluntarily. They were coerced.
The questions of WHY it was taken, and WHERE IT WENT need to be understood. Most people not only don’t know, but they never even considered the questions. But rest assured that SOMEONE took ownership of America's gold. It wasn't 'the government' that took possession of the gold. 'The government' does not need gold, nor can it use it. It's always PEOPLE that want gold.
So, what did the American people get in exchange for the total accumulated wealth of some 250 years of American enterprise? In return for the wealth of a nation, the Federal Reserve gave the American people “green pieces of paper”, redeemable for silver (initially). The Indians who got trinkets for selling Manhattan got a better deal, actually. Those trinkets likely had some intrinsic value which paper does not have.
What was the result of the implementation of the Federal Reserve?
It is hard for the novice to grasp this concept - those green pieces of paper in your wallets are not actually yours. They are the legal property of the Federal Reserve.
Every dollar ever printed, or just 'created' on a bank's computer, were lent to the US government (which then distributed it to the population though various programs). When 'lending' something, ownership remains with the lender. If one lends a neighbor a tool, he generally expects it to be returned, right? Understanding this point is critical to grasping the 'Big Con'.
It is hard for the novice to grasp this concept - those green pieces of paper in your wallets or your bank account are not actually yours. They are the legal property of the Federal Reserve.
Every one of those green pieces of paper is 'owned by' the Federal Reserve, which lent it to the US government. (It is called a Federal Reserve “note”, because a note is 'evidence of a debt'.)
So, the American people are using the legal property of the Federal Reserve to transact all their business. We have no viable choice but to use these pieces of paper to transact business because genuine money has not been available since 1933. We are in exactly the same position as prisoners in a concentration camp using cigarettes as money, because real money is not available.
We are in exactly the same position as prisoners in a concentration camp, using cigarettes as money because real money is not available.
1913 was a fateful year
Beginning in 1913, America surrendered it's ability to issue it's currency to a private corporation called the Federal Reserve. This bank is privately owned by a small number of shareholders of the bank. They are running their business first and foremost to maximize long-term profits for the benefit of the shareholders.
What exactly is their business model? The owners of the Federal Reserve began lending to the US government an essentially worthless piece of green paper which nevertheless became extremely useful beginning in 1933, when people were basically forced to accept it in place of gold and silver coin.
Despite lending mere pieces of paper, the owners of the Federal Reserve demanded interest payments from the US government in gold. Within less than 20 years, after borrowing money to fight WW1 and even more during the roaring 20’s, the US Government was unable to make its interest payments – so the owners of the Federal Reserve foreclosed. They withdrew all credit to America, brought on the great depression, and essentially put a gun to America's head. "Pay us in full, or we will make this 'depression' even worse", they said.
Despite 'lending' mere pieces of paper, the owners of the Federal Reserve demanded interest payments from the US government be paid with gold.
FDR was only in office a couple of days when every bank in the country shut down. They did not open again until after FDR agreed to essentially confiscate the gold of every American, to be given to the owners of the Federal Reserve bank, in payment of the accumulated interest on the government’s debt. This happened in less than 20 years!
After that fateful day in 1933 there was no longer any gold in American circulation. You must understand that gold was the only REAL money the world knew. (Silver was still available, but the real store of wealth had always been gold). How then could anything be bought or sold? Up until that time paper "dollars" were called "US notes" and were redeemable in gold, so when paying with "dollars" one was really paying in gold. Now that there was no gold, there was no money. The government mandated that everyone accept paper instead.
But how could the nation ever accept pieces of paper as money? It was absurd. If you have ever held a gold coin in your hand you will understand that it is an entirely different experience than holding a piece of paper in your hand. The entire nation knew the difference intimately, because they had held gold coins their entire lives. The government had to force the use of paper, calling it 'legal tender' that everyone was REQUIRED to accept.
To the men and women of 1933, “Federal Reserve notes” were not different from “Chuck E. Cheese Money”, or “Disney Dollars”, with a picture of Chuck E Cheese or Mickey Mouse printed thereon. Monopoly money. Pictures of dead Presidents are put on Federal Reserve notes to give an illusion of legitimacy. It is not real. It is a façade – an illusion, a deception. The majority of the world today no longer realizes that it is disney dollars like one below which they are slaving for all day long.
It is important to reiterate that Federal Reserve notes remain the property of the Federal Reserve as they are lent to the American government at interest. As owners they are legally entitled to rental fees from those using their property, in the same manner that an apartment owner can justly demand rent from his tenants. These rental fees are called "interest". How did the Federal Reserve Bank and it's owners plan on ever getting paid the interest/rental fees they demanded?
How did the Federal Reserve Bank and it's owners plan on ever getting paid the interest/rental fees they demanded? Like the mafia, they needed "muscle".
Also in 1913, the IRS was born
All interest/rental fees are paid to the owners of the Federal Reserve Bank in the form of income taxes. Hence, the more of their notes one controls (i.e., the more money one makes), the higher the taxes. This is the key to understanding why it was only after the government began borrowing Federal Reserve notes in 1913 that the income tax was deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court.
These interest/rental fees are paid to the owners of the Federal Reserve Bank in the form of income taxes. Hence, the more of their notes one controls (i.e., the more money one has), the higher the taxes.
The wealth a very few men and their families have accumulated from this predatory arrangement in the past 110 years is staggering. It is said that less than 200 families own most of the world. Bill Gates is often hailed as being the richest man in the world, but he is far from it. The owners of the world are never in the newspaper, would not be recognized on the street. Most of them do not even live in America.
In addition to annual interest payments (income taxes), the true owner of the Federal Reserve notes you thought were yours can and does enforce “terms of use”. It is no different from the EULA you must agree to, as a condition to use software or internet services these days. If you use the property or service, you must agree to the terms.
The owners of the notes lay out any and all terms they think they can get away with. Limits on withdrawals from bank accounts, limits on deposits, limits on amount transported by plane or transmitted over the wires, are routine. Once you understand the issue of "terms of use", so much begins to make sense.
Now the bureaucracy of the “New Deal” makes sense
Understanding the above, we can finally understand why the “New Deal” brought such a tremendous burden of bureaucracy upon the nation. Immediately after the banks re-opened in 1933, Americans were suddenly and for the first time ruled by all manner of bureaucrats. They were required to get a license to do almost anything that involved earning those bits of green paper. Barbers needed a license to cut hair. Prior to that moment, people were free to do pretty much anything they wanted without government interference. Afterwards they effectively became slaves to a faceless bureaucracy. In light of what we have now learned, this makes perfect sense. It's called "TERMS OF USE".
Immediately after the banks re-opened after the gold was taken, Americans were suddenly and for the first time ruled by all manner of bureaucrats. They suddenly were required to get a license to do almost anything that involved earning those bits of green paper. Barbers needed a license to cut hair.
The Supreme Court initially objected to this radical upheaval of the American way of life, but FDR threatened to pack the court unless they accepted the terms of the bankruptcy proceedings he was overseeing. Regretfully, the courts eventually yielded and rubber-stamped the interest payments (taxes) and all the regulations that came with using privately issued and owned notes.
Prior to 1913, prior to the Federal Reserve, income taxes were deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme court. After 1913 it was ruled constitutional, but was only applicable to a very small group of people who directly benefited from those pieces of green paper (basically only government employees). This was because most people still used gold in almost all their affairs. After 1933, everyone was forced to use those pieces of green paper, so an ever-increasing number of people were required to pay. Now we know why. Rental fees = income taxes.
Voluntary Income Tax ????
It is often said that as a matter of law, income taxes are voluntary. We have all heard this. Yet, in the same breath, those that teach this maxim to us, tell us that we MUST pay it. This obvious contradiction is never adequately explained. Virtually every tax protestor in the last 30-40 years, no matter how smart and eloquent, has lost their case. Many of them landed in jail for their valiant efforts, despite reminding the courts that we are taught that taxes are voluntary. How is this bizarre set of circumstances possible?
It is often said that as a matter of law, income taxes are voluntary. We have all heard this. Yet, in the same breath, those that teach this maxim to us, tell us that we MUST pay it. This obvious contradiction is never adequately explained.
The tax courts are ruled by the presumption that using Federal Reserve notes is a voluntary act. If you don’t want to use them, you don’t have to. But if you do, then you must pay a usage/interest fee (which is called an income tax), which is therefore voluntary.
Hundreds of unfortunate American patriotic tax protestors did not understand that the Federal Reserve notes in their bank accounts are owned by the central bank. Thinking that their money belonged to themselves, they argued eloquently and yet they lost. They went to prison because their arguments were doomed to failure. Simply having a dollar-denominated bank account, or having a dollar-denominated credit card, was incontrovertible proof that the protestors owed a "rental fee", which they refused to pay.
Of course, this arrangement is far from fair from the perspective of the people who use Federal Reserve notes in total ignorance of the terms of use, which is 99.999% of the population. Indeed, it could (and should) be argued that the contract is fraudulent, since the system has deliberately hidden these facts from the population. Does not a valid contract presume that both sides understand the terms of the contract? If one party deliberately hides pertinent details, is not the contract voided? I’ll leave that question to the lawyers, but I’m pretty sure we know the answer.
My guess is that if a tax protestor effectively makes THIS argument, they may win. More likely, the court will dismiss the case rather than risk a loss which might expose the 'Big Con'.
Global Control
As a result of these circumstances we were born into, the owners of the world’s privately owned central banks now essentially own and rule the world, as they dictate terms of use and demand rental fees for almost all currencies globally. At this point, almost no countries own their own central banks which are answerable to the elected government. The few countries that do are routinely vilified and targeted for “regime change”.
Title to Property
Understanding that there is no lawful money in circulation is also the key to understanding why one cannot get lawful title to their properties or even lawful titles to their cars.
How can you actually pay for “real” items, with “fake” money? You cannot. So how can we take "real" title to anything? We cannot. (“Certificates of Title” certify that a title exists, but are not the title themselves.) Therefore, we can only receive "certificates" of title to our home and car. Because the real, actual title is held by the “true” owner of our house and car, we must register the car to drive it, and can be evicted from your fully-paid home for failure to pay “taxes”, which as discussed earlier, are usage/rental fees. People are forced from the houses they think they own every day, because we don’t hold title to our "property". We have 'certificates of title'. Not the same thing.
ENTER CRYPTOCURRENCIES
[Update - At the time I wrote this blog in 2014, I believed that Bitcoin offered a way out. It is now clear to me that Bitcoin was/is a GREAT idea but will never be able to free humanity. Nevertheless, the following explains how it could have possibly done the trick, had not a number of things gone horribly wrong...]
Unlike fiat currencies, cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin are not owned by the central banks. They are owned, wholly and completely, by the person who controls the address in which the bitcoin’s are registered. This is the reason that central banks are still struggling to find a way to regulate Bitcoin and the lesser-known altcoins. The central banks have been hamstrung and limited to exercising a modest degree of regulation over exchanges where crypto coins are converted to and from fiat currencies.
They can't regulate crypto itself, because they don't OWN it, as they own the Fed notes. But they want to make it appear to the average user that they can. By regulating the conversion back and forth from/to fiat they give the appearance of regulating the cryptocurrency. It is an illusion – they are only regulating the fiat. They know it, and are hoping that the rest of us never figure it out.
By regulating the conversion to/from fiat they give the appearance of regulating cryptocurrency. It is an illusion – they know it, and are hoping that the rest of us never figure it out.
Central banks want desperately to directly regulate and tax cryptocurrencies as freely as they do their fiat notes. However, in the absence of a central bank-issued crypto coin they will likely not do so directly. Why not? Because they are rightfully afraid that a successful court challenge would prohibit such regulation, and in doing so, they would expose to humanity the real reason central banks are able to tax and regulate fiat notes. Read that again if you missed the importance of that sentence.
The last thing the owners of the central banks want is for the public to learn of the secret ownership of Federal Reserve notes which has made them the de facto rulers of the world – far wealthier than the kings of old, the Tutors, and the popes ever dreamed of. This well-guarded secret could be inadvertently revealed to the public as a result of a successful court challenge to the illegitimate regulation of a (crypto) currency they do not own.
The Red Pill is available
For the first time in more than 100 years, the owners of the central bank are confronted with a means though which the people of the world might actually escape from their control. To date the central banksters have not figured out a way to stop it . (Of course, if they launch their own "crypto US dollar" they will be sure to exercise the same rights they currently have over the US dollar. They will likely at least attempt to launch such a crypto US dollar at some point.)
For 110 years there has been no viable way for the American people to be free of the debt-slavery that using Federal Reserve notes has brought upon them. But cryptocurrencies are offering a way out of the matrix. The red pill.
To make matters worse for the central banksters, cryptocurrencies are immeasurably more convenient than their “green paper” competitor. They can easily be sent to anyone without any government-mandated paperwork or oversight. No need to fill out a form or ask anyone’s permission. No interest or taxes accrue. No limits on how many you can take across the border, etc. They are easily usable down to 8 places to the right of the decimal point. The cryptocurrency is appreciating in value every year, whilst those green pieces of paper become increasingly worthless. How terribly inconvenient for the banksters. The solution to mankind’s slavery is also an infinitely better medium of exchange!!
When the day arrives that one can easily buy and sell virtually anything and everything without conversion to fiat, i.e., when most everyone understands and uses Bitcoin (or another altcoin) on a daily basis, to buy their coffee and donuts, to leave a tip for their waiter, etc, more than a 110 years of tyranny will start to unravel. The problem of title and ownership of real estate and other high value goods will still need to be worked out; but endless regulations, terms of use and rental/interest fees will rapidly come to an end.
May that day come soon.
[7/2024 Update:]
To answer the question of what do I see as the solution now that I see that bitcoin can not, and will not be the answer?
First, obviously, we need elected representatives willing to do whatever it takes to END THE FED. That should go without saying. Not easy to do when the owners of the FED own virtually everything, including the police, the courts and the military. They killed JFK because JFK was willing to try.
Second is the issue of the debt. The owners of the FED can and will make the argument that they had a lawful contract, and 'we the people' owe them $34 trillion dollars. Impossible to pay, but we owe it. WHAT TO DO?
The answer, imho, is relatively simple. After the FED is ENDED, we will once again be able to issue our own lawful money without any FED control/input. So my suggestion is that the US Treasury mint a single coin, out of some base/cheap metal, and stamp on it that it has a value of $34 trillion dollars. Destroy the mold so that the coin is never again issued, and give the coin to the owners of the FED.
The coin can never be sold as anything but a cheap novelty despite the ludicrous sum printed thereon. Despite it's magnificent appearance it is worthless - just like the $100 bill which is really just a worthless piece of paper!!! (A wonderful irony!) Still, the debt was paid, the people are free. The owners of the FED can bitch about it all they want, but we gave them a $34 trillion coin. They lose. We win.
But first, we MUST END THE FED. To do that will require "we the people" to wake up and understand the 'BIG CON'.
Comments