Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Validity of a Bill of Exchange?

rated by 0 users
This post has 5 Replies | 1 Follower

Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 516
Points 7,190
bbnet Posted: Fri, Sep 18 2009 12:04 AM

Took a tangent from one of Rockwell's blog posts lastweek concerning moonshine which led me to a site of a still maker who makes some interesting claims, see his page here

Here is a quote from the page linked above:

"You can pay off any and all debts regardless of what they are by making a simple bill of exchange with example below. Simply print, copy, write or use a clear transparency with a color copier in red ink the example below at a45 degree angle across any bill. Then sign and date it in red ink. Send it certified mail return receipt to whomever it is owed.  Examples include the mortgage company, IRS, government, phone bills, credit cards, traffic citations, judgements and etc… 

  By using UCC 1-308, you are reserving all of your rights protected by the constitution. U S Constitution article 1, section 10 says that states can only use silver and gold as payment and that states cannot interfere with contracts.  HJR 192 says that … obligee a right to require payments in gold or a particular kind of coin or currency, or in an amount in money of the United States measured thereby, is declared to be against public policy  and further states  "All coins and currencies of the United Stated (including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of the Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations) heretofore or hereafter coined or issued, shall be legal tender for all debts, public and private, public charges, taxes, duties, and dues, except that gold coins, when below the standard weight and limit of tolerance provided by law for the single piece, shall be legal tender only at valuation in proportion to their actual weight.'  Since you have the right to pay in gold and silver, and since gold and silver currency does not exist, then you can make a bill of exchange that is payable upon its presentation, when gold and silver currency becomes available. This is very unlikely. 
  The theory for using the phrase “Accepted as value / accepted for value…” is to say that you accept the value to the extent of what the Federal Note is worth in gold and silver coin. Since the bill is valued in Federal Notes and the Federal Note is debt and not tied to the gold standard and cannot be redeemed for gold, the amount of gold and silver due upon its presentment is zero. "

?

I imagine his arguement is legally flawed somewhere but did find the concept interesting. Y'all every here of such a thing or know anything about  it pro or con? If valid, it might help a few of my buds struggling to keep their McMansions.

We are the soldiers for righteousness
And we are not sent here by the politicians you drink with - L. Dube, rip

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 11,343
Points 194,945
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

bbnet:
Took a tangent from one of Rockwell's blog posts lastweek concerning moonshine which led me to a site of a still maker who makes some interesting claims

LOL, I ended up reading all over his site as well.

I've heard the argument where you declare yourself no longer a corporation, several times before.  It's in the same camp as the admiralty gold fringed flags stuff.

The reality is, if the state wants to screw with you, they just send in commandos from the IRS in swat gear and they make up BS charges.

I'd only test this stuff if I was super desperate.

It's not useful to your buddies, but Marc Stevens' ideas of arguing the validity of the law within the court, is probably something I would be more inclined to try.

"When you're young you worry about people stealing your ideas, when you're old you worry that they won't." - David Friedman
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 7,105
Points 115,240
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

liberty student:
It's not useful to your buddies, but Marc Stevens' ideas of arguing the validity of the law within the court, is probably something I would be more inclined to try.

Just a bit of pedantism from me, but I wanted to point out that from what I understand of Marc S, he makes it a point of principle only to challenge the law indirectly by the method of asking questions and waiting for the answers that come back to be contradictory, so he does not directly argue the validity of the law within the court. (only indirectly). 

Marc Stevens fanboy, signing off...

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 875
Points 14,180
xahrx replied on Fri, Sep 18 2009 8:47 AM

bbnet:
Took a tangent from one of Rockwell's blog posts lastweek concerning moonshine which led me to a site of a still maker who makes some interesting claims, see his page here

Those are works of art, aren't they?  I'm so tempted to take some of my wine and make a batch of brandy.  I've done it small scale with an ad hoc still on the stove, but it'd be nice to have a few bottles to share when people come over.  You make it by the glass on the stove.

bbnet:
I imagine his arguement is legally flawed somewhere but did find the concept interesting. Y'all every here of such a thing or know anything about  it pro or con? If valid, it might help a few of my buds struggling to keep their McMansions.

As do I, which is why I haven't yet used it to pay off the mountain of debt I earned myself as a moron kid partying in school.  I believe it's like every other claim to the constitution and/or law that seems to work in your favor against a powerfull special interest.  Sure, the judge will agree the letter of the law is on your side and perhaps even the spirit, and then he'll rule against you anyway.

Ah well.

I was thinking of trying this with a credit card and then making payments as well just to keep my credit good until the issue was settled.  I figure either way then I'm covered.  But I doubt it's worth the time and effort.  With my luck I'll do this, the economy will collapse along with the dollar, Ron Paul will win the next election and establish a libertarian utopia on Earth, and I'll be stuck owing gold to my creditors.

"I was just in the bathroom getting ready to leave the house, if you must know, and a sudden wave of admiration for the cotton swab came over me." - Anonymous
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Male
Posts 414
Points 5,255
Saan replied on Fri, Sep 18 2009 11:43 AM

I've tried it.  Fail.

 Criminals, there ought to be a law.

Criminals there ought to be a whole lot more.   Bon Scott.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 516
Points 7,190
bbnet replied on Mon, Sep 21 2009 11:17 PM

Lib Stud: figured it was flaky and on the 'fringe' but am always looking for that magic bullet to counter tyrants I suppose? Thanks for mentioning Marc Stevens, he really seems to have a great strategy goin' there, wonder if it works or if he is just trying to sell a book? Will certainly look into his ideas and accomplishments further, obviously a big Spooner fan.

NirgrahamUK: thanks for expanding my vocabulary, 'pedantism' !

Xahrx: yes they are very nice lookin' stills, perhaps I should put a down payment on his top line $11k model then pay the bill for the balance with his 'bill of exchange' stamp?

Saan: any details you'd like to share on the experience?

We are the soldiers for righteousness
And we are not sent here by the politicians you drink with - L. Dube, rip

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (6 items) | RSS