Real Christian position on the secular Gold Standard

This is also an interesting Facebook thread:

Tom's Wall

Noah Anthony Russell post to Tom Usher's Facebook Wall:

In my US History of Economics class I had to read something by Polyani that talked about how the Gold Standard was bad. What do you think about the gold standard?

Tom Usher said:

Hi ya, Noah,

Long time no see. I hope you're doing well. How's Japan these days where you are (if you're still there)?

Let's see, the Gold Standard, well, it's loaded with problems even in the secular sense.

The rich have most of it and would if we were to go back to it. Mining of gold is very polluting. The quantity of gold does not increase with productivity gains. That means gold "shortages" are/would be a bottleneck to expanding the economy to meet the needs and wants of the people. It was a major problem in the past.

In addition, it just isn't necessary in any sense. We can easily convert to United States Notes, which are interest-and-tax free.

I've been advocating for years now that we do that and peg the supply exactly to productivity and do it in real-time via supercomputers and transaction monitors.

That's original with me. I've never seen it anywhere else (and I've looked). I don't know why it hasn't caught on. I've mentioned it in many places to many people. I think they just can't see it because it's simple.

Doing that would completely eliminate the national debt and inflation and deflation — no more recessions of the unnatural kind (mammon). We could have endless economic growth. We could completely eliminate poverty in our time. The US is not like a typical family household on a budget and that can't create money for whatever productive projects it wants. The US can create all the money it wants to fund the projects the people need. It's simply a matter of making the decision. It's all very easy. The bankers lie when they say economics is difficult.

They want it to appear complicated so they may obfuscate. They do not want the people out from under because the banker's machine is their parasitic heaven (for a while, until you know when).

Now, all of that United States Notes idea is simply a stepping stone to the Christian Commons, concerning which I'm assuming you are familiar, and then Heaven proper.

I hope this has been a sufficient overview. If you have any questions, feel free to ask, my Christian brother!

Peace to that lovely girl friend of yours and to you,

Tom

Noah Anthony Russell said:

It has been a long time!! and well I moved from Japan back to Utah. I'm now attending the University of Utah trying to get an undergraduate degree in Bio-Medical Engineering. And thanks!!

Okay so What you said is kinda confusing to me, I guess it's one of those things that is so simple it flies right over my head. So your sayign we should convert to a interest and tax free american note, or is that how our note is right now? and could you maybe explain how it would have those positive effects? I'm taking the History of U.S Economics right now, I'm one of three people in the class with a perfect score which i'm proud of but I feel that I still don't know enough!! I am particularly interested in this because I always thought the gold standard was a good idea and that we should go back to it, but right now I'm starting to think it really is obsolete..

Tom Usher said:

Okay, well bear with me because it's at the end of a long work session for me and I'm not fresh sleep-wise.

First, I'm glad to hear you are in college, Noah! I'm sure you are going to do very well all the way through. Bio-Medical Engineering won't get boring, at least not until nearly everyone else has been replaced by robots and computers. We'll have to see if humanity will last that long in this anti-Christ world. I believe there will be a remnant.

I feel for the people in Japan about the nuclear disaster, but I'm not ashamed to say that I'm also glad you aren't there now because of the still dangerous situation.

Our current note is a private bank note, not a government note. It is interest-bearing by virtue of the National Debt and all the bonds that have been issued to cover the federal deficits, year-after-year.

United States Notes (USN) are completely different. No bonds are issued when USN are/would be issued. They aren't being issued right now. Lincoln's secretary of the treasury invented them I believe to avoid having to pay upwards of 30% to the bankers to fund the Civil War. Kennedy issued Silver Certificates too, which were also debt-free. They were immediately pulled by Johnson after Kennedy's assassination. The bankers hated them and hate United States Notes for reasons that I'm sure won't escape you.

The only argument against them concerns inflationary over-supply, which is called monetary inflation but also relates to price inflation, though there are many independent variables involved.

By amending the US Constitution to require a balanced budget in the form of issuing notes only for truly productive/non-speculative public enterprises, there would be zero inflation. All the funds would be adsorbed and/or the money supply would be reduced in real-time and without monetarism (the private Federal Reserve raising interest rates causing inflation eating up the savings of the poor but lowering the then net-present value of the funds used to repay loans).

The interest on the National Debt is paid for by people's taxes and goes to bond holders who often hold a gun to the heads of sovereign nation-states sucked into, or duped into, national debts. Some evil leaders have taken huge kickbacks to impoverish their nations to the bankers (banksters).

Under USN if they were handled correctly, we could have economic democracy and no taxes.

Everything, every decision, could be pushed down to the grassroots level where locals would decide what's needed that would be truly productive and the money would just be issued to cover it — debt free!

This form of democracy would also send signals up to the more centralized hub that would then share the best of the best ideas for productive projects with all the other nodes out there.

This form of democracy is one-person-one-vote where the current system is weighted way over to the super-rich, who do not look out for the interests of the single Christian or anyone else with few exceptions.

Compared with this system and even less radical (getting at the root of the problem) systems, the Gold Standard is positively Neanderthal, not that they were necessarily evil creatures. I can't say. They were though not "advanced" so to speak.

Gold is every bit as much an arbitrary choice for a medium of exchange as any other commodity. It has some interesting characteristics, but it's not something you want to lug around with you to buy everything you need.

Cyber currency in the form of USN is the way to go as a stepping stone to the moneyless society, which is in sync with Christianity by the way.

There is no money needed in Heaven to buy anything. It's all part of Isaiah's vision to have all the food we need without charging anyone anything. It's the true enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, Noah.

Well, if you need me to fill in any of the holes, just ask. It's good for me too to write about it and share it and be pushed regarding what-if's and such.

I hope this comment/reply has done justice to your genuine interest, which I appreciate very much.

Oh, one word to the wise on this: Your economics profs may give you a really hard time if you promote any of this in class or papers or in tests, etc. If you start down this road, be prepared to stand alone most of the time (unless you can generate a following.)

Pardon any typos, etc.

Noah Anthony Russell said:

Yeah I hope I do well, it's a very tough degree to get 85-95% drop out rate or something high like that. And I doubt it will get boring..lots of math.. math is tough..

I wonder how long the world will go till jesus comes back as well. We've been in the end days for nearly 2,000 years Ha!

And yeah Japan is doing better now, but the nuke situation hasn't really seemed to improve.. it's just kinda not talked about right now..I'm happy to be gone though. Away to get something done.

Mhmmm I need to do some more intense studying on this, but I guess that all makes sense to me. I just feel I don't understand the current system enough to make a good comparison. It sounds ideal though. And at the very least it'd probably be tons better then what we currently have.. which is obviously not working.

My economics teacher seems pretty opened minded, I'll ask him about his opinions on it and see why he thinks it's good or bad. I just know i need to learn more. Economics is a much larger study then most think.

but thank you for sharing this. your one of the only people I could think who'd have an opinion on such an issue. tha'ts one of my favorite things about you, your a thinker!! can't stop!! People say I'm the say way.. I hope I am:]

God bless you and your endeavors!

Tom Usher said:

"People say I'm the same way." You are! I saw it nearly instantly. We don't duck the tough questions. That's good! It's not immodest to say it either.

Let me know what your teacher has to say.

If he's not opposed, maybe he'd let you write a paper on it for credit.

Check into H.R. 2990. It's very similar to what I've been "preaching."

I add a layer of hi-tech with no shenanigans. That's required to do it right (short of the Holy Spirit just doing it all for us — someday — Heaven).

God bless you too, Noah,

Tom

Tom Usher said:

Who's your teacher, Maloney? Are you reading Heilbroner? "New School."

Noah Anthony Russell said:

I AM reading Heilbroner. Genius guess!! The great transformation book. It's pretty good I think.

I just got off for spring break so I'll have to talk to him next week.

And H.R 2990 as in the disabled military relief act?

Tom Usher said:

Here you go:
Text of H.R. 2990: National Emergency Employment Defense Act of 2011

Tom Usher said:

Here are some quick comments of mine concerning the bill:
Commentary on: H.R. 2990 "National Emergency Employment Defense Act of 2011": a monetary-reform act

Noah Anthony Russell said:

would you rather me comment on your comments on your website or here??

Tom Usher said:

I think if you want to comment at length about the bill, it would make most sense to do it on the blog post.

If you just want to continue this conversation in general, then I would think here would be best.

Does that make sense to you, Noah?

The bill covers a great deal of territory. How far into it do you want to go? That's rhetorical.

I'm interested in every aspect, of course.

Noah Anthony Russell said:

Well I agree with what you say about it. It's a start.. but I guess what popped in my head is just a minor detail about your comment on it.

I agree that the Federal government shouldn't be allowed to borrow...in general... I'm thinking that a government should only ever be able to borrow in a national emergency. It's off topic.

Tom Usher said:

No, it's right on topic, Noah.

Dennis Kucinich included it for exactly the reason you've mentioned; however, with the power to create as much interest-free money as we want, when would the government ever need to borrow and why? If things were to become so bad that everything would crash, there wouldn't be anyone from whom to borrow. What are we talking about here, a nuclear war?

I don't see the point in retaining an opening for the banksters.

Maybe this would have been good on the blog.

If you want to get going back and forth about the bill, let's take it over there if you are okay with it.

If that's pretty much it though, then I'll just work on a couple of new blog posts probably tomorrow where this will end up over there. It will automatically cross-reference to the post about the bill too because of the link in this thread.

Thanks for reading it!

Noah Anthony Russell said:

I think thats it for now:} I still need to absord all of the bill into my mind. And by the way you can always take anything I post or say and use it for whatever you like!!

Tom Usher said:

Ha! Okay.

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in United States Notes. Bookmark the permalink.