Question for you guys

[I am me, I am free]

If one is being 'paid'* for one's products and/or services with evidence of debt, i.e. FRNs or other Federal Commercial Paper under the UCC (anything other than gold or silver), how can it be said that one is 'making a profit' under such a scenario??

Under the circumstances, and realistically, wouldn't any such activity (i.e. being 'paid' with evidence of debt which one is then compelled to pawn off on others) be considered 'non-profit'??

*it is not possible to 'pay' a debt with a debt, to 'pay' means to extinguish the debt, NOT discharge the debt with limited liability under the current scheme of things

[I am me, I am free]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ot993G2aFek&feature=fvsr

Some people say a man is made outta mud
A poor man's made outta muscle and blood
Muscle and blood and skin and bones
A mind that's a-weak and a back that's strong

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

I was born one mornin' when the sun didn't shine
I picked up my shovel and I walked to the mine
I loaded sixteen tons of number nine coal
And the straw boss said "Well, a-bless my soul"

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

I was born one mornin', it was drizzlin' rain
Fightin' and trouble are my middle name
I was raised in the canebrake by an ol' mama lion
Cain't no-a high-toned woman make me walk the line

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

If you see me comin', better step aside
A lotta men didn't, a lotta men died
One fist of iron, the other of steel
If the right one don't a-get you
Then the left one will

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

[Ponce]

I am Free?...............nothng more than a musical chair where there will be a "Last Man Stanting" holding an empty bag...............don't be the last man..........own silver and gold.

First post of the day...............good morning to one and all.

[I am me, I am free]

I am Free?...............nothng more than a musical chair where there will be a "Last Man Stanting" holding an empty bag...............don't be the last man..........own silver and gold.

First post of the day...............good morning to one and all.


I comprehend where you're coming from Ponce, but you didn't answer my question re: non-profit status as a result of being 'paid' with evidence of debt.

[Ponce]

As long as "most" people believe that they are being paid with "real" money everything will be ok.........just be sure to spend your fiat as fast as possible.

[I am me, I am free]

As long as "most" people believe that they are being paid with "real" money everything will be ok.........just be sure to spend your fiat as fast as possible.


So what you're suggesting here is to go along with the insanity without protest, i.e. 'go along to get along'...right?

Your last post was unresponsive as well. lol

[Ponce]

Read my first post and don't be "Last Man Standing"..........it is now a musical chair where you have no choice but to play.......I saw it coming long ago and got ready for it and is one of the reasons as to why I hold silver, gold and foreign currency.

[Horn]

If you gotta enought dough you can twist the pretzel law definitions anyway you like'em.

[cedarchopper]

What you are asking depends on who you are asking...if you are asking the IRS or the Government, they'll put a gun to your head (figuratively, at first;] and tell you that FRN's are the legal tender of the USA and that you are attempting tax evasion. You can challenge them in court, but they have unlimited time and unlimited funds...and the people placed in power have already been vetted to agree with the PTB position.

It's getting tougher by the day to live a unharassed existence. This country is looking like a gulag.

[iOWNme]

If one is being 'paid'* for one's products and/or services with evidence of debt, i.e. FRNs or other Federal Commercial Paper under the UCC (anything other than gold or silver), how can it be said that one is 'making a profit' under such a scenario??



Your statement seems to assume that if you were paid in gold/silver you would somehow be 'making a profit'?

If you trade your labor for anything, YOU DID NOT MAKE A PROFIT.

Unless you think your labor is worth 0.

[Phoenix]

The Federal Reserve Note is "debt" only in the sense that there is an "obligation" to return it to the Federal Reserve with interest.

I have no such obligation, and neither do you!

Hence, it is, for our purposes, not "debt," and since most others accept it for goods and services, one remains endowed with "wealth" provided they're still accepted for said goods and services. (see also what Ponce wrote)

[Phoenix]

As long as "most" people believe that they are being paid with "real" money everything will be ok.........just be sure to spend your fiat as fast as possible.


So what you're suggesting here is to go along with the insanity without protest, i.e. 'go along to get along'...right?


Currency is whatever the common folk says it is. Until people en masse refuse to trade in Federal Reserve Notes, you've not much of a choice.

You can, in your own very small way, always protest FRNs by adding "something special" to the note.

[Phoenix]

I hold...foreign currency.


Why?

[DMac]

If one is being 'paid'* for one's products and/or services with evidence of debt, i.e. FRNs or other Federal Commercial Paper under the UCC (anything other than gold or silver), how can it be said that one is 'making a profit' under such a scenario??



Your statement seems to assume that if you were paid in gold/silver you would somehow be 'making a profit'?

If you trade your labor for anything, YOU DID NOT MAKE A PROFIT.

Unless you think your labor is worth 0.







Interesting point.

[iOWNme]

If one is being 'paid'* for one's products and/or services with evidence of debt, i.e. FRNs or other Federal Commercial Paper under the UCC (anything other than gold or silver), how can it be said that one is 'making a profit' under such a scenario??



Your statement seems to assume that if you were paid in gold/silver you would somehow be 'making a profit'?

If you trade your labor for anything, YOU DID NOT MAKE A PROFIT.

Unless you think your labor is worth 0.







Interesting point.


Everyone has lost the value of their labor. We file taxes for the money we 'made' that year. But if your labor has value (your private property), then you merely traded your private property for an equal amount of products/goods. To not put a value on your labor is to rob yourself of your own private property. - me

[Hatha Sunahara]

Profit is the net after expenses. Revenues minus expenses is Profit. What you sell your labor for is your 'Revenues'. Your expenses are what it costs you to live. Your profit is what you have left. You could save it or you can spend it. If you live beyond your means, you're bankrupt.

The willingness to borrow to live beyond one's means provides a limitless profit for whoever has a monopoly on granting credit. They know how to swindle everybody. By 'granting credit' (debt money) to everyone to live beyond their means. That's a classic signal of a bubble. Too many people living beyond their means, and they owe it all to the bankers. And the bankers will own everything when they default. And they will default en masse after the bankers stop lending money--shutting off the money spigot.

Can you make a profit using 'debt money'? I think we are all fooling ourselves about what profit is. It's what you 'own'. It's how much control you have. By that I mean it is your 'accumulated net worth'. That usually comes from maximizing revenues and minimizing costs over a long period of time. And making everybody else subsidize you. Some people--a small number have made undreamed of profits using 'debt money'. Everybody else has to work for a living. Yes. And that is how the elite got control of the whole world. Humanity has to rethink the concept of money. We will have no peace until we do that.

Hatha

[Ponce]

I hold...foreign currency.


Why?


No one stays aboard ship if it is sinking..........I hold Canadian fiat since they have one of the strongest economy in the world........they have timber, gold, oil, wheat and a lot more........what does the US holds? debts.

[Phoenix]

I hold...foreign currency.


Why?


No one stays aboard ship if it is sinking..........I hold Canadian fiat since they have one of the strongest economy in the world........they have timber, gold, oil, wheat and a lot more........what does the US holds? debts.


So you refused a free ticket on the Titanic only to pay good money for a ticket on the Lusitania?

Canada's current debt is 44.2% of GDP (i.e., too damn much).

[Ponce]

I never said "best".........however.......they will be able to recover faster than the US because they have more to export and deal with than us.......the US recover? hummmmmmm nawwwwwww, I misspoke.

[Phoenix]

I never said "best".........however.......they will be able to recover faster than the US because they have more to export and deal with than us.......the US recover? hummmmmmm nawwwwwww, I misspoke.


Canada is a satellite of the United States. What happens here happens there. If things get really bad, the US will simply occupy/annex Canada.

I'm shocked that the guy who coined "if you don't hold it, you don't own it" would invest in PAPER.

[Ponce]

You know Biker.......what I find very interesting about all this is the way that you persist in defending "those" people.........looks to me that they are very important to you.....for what ever reason.

So I ask........are you a Zionist? are you a Zionist sympathiser?..........what is going on between you and them? Why do you want to talk about them so much?

If you are a Zionist or a sympathiser then I have a lot of questions for you, and I do mean a lot........hope that you have the answers.

[keehah]

This is how it could play out (aka "If you don't hold it, you don't own it"):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQNt2ETKrSQ

[Ponce]

I never said "best".........however.......they will be able to recover faster than the US because they have more to export and deal with than us.......the US recover? hummmmmmm nawwwwwww, I misspoke.


Canada is a satellite of the United States. What happens here happens there. If things get really bad, the US will simply occupy/annex Canada.

I'm shocked that the guy who coined "if you don't hold it, you don't own it" would invest in PAPER.


Well, you should not be....... l like to have a plan behind the plan behind the plan and even the fiat is one of them, I already lost one of my plans what with my farm in Argentina but now I am working on something else.

[Phoenix]

Well, you should not be....... l like to have a plan behind the plan behind the plan and even the fiat is one of them, I already lost one of my plans what with my farm in Argentina but now I am working on something else.


What sort of "plan" is PAPER "money"? (not referring to the TP, of course)

[Ponce]

By your question you are showing your ignorance........go to bed, no dinner for you tonight.

[The Great Ag]

If one is being 'paid'* for one's products and/or services with evidence of debt, i.e. FRNs or other Federal Commercial Paper under the UCC (anything other than gold or silver), how can it be said that one is 'making a profit' under such a scenario??

Under the circumstances, and realistically, wouldn't any such activity (i.e. being 'paid' with evidence of debt which one is then compelled to pawn off on others) be considered 'non-profit'??

*it is not possible to 'pay' a debt with a debt, to 'pay' means to extinguish the debt, NOT discharge the debt with limited liability under the current scheme of things

Hey, IAMIAF:
I am going to rephrase your question to see if I understand what you are asking.

Can a taxpayer who receives FRNs for his services, either by "employer" or from a customer purchasing services directly, be considered a "non-profit" as FRNs by their very nature are evidences of debt? This is how I read your question.

The answer to my interpretation of your question would be, "no." The biggest reason being the person who received the FRNs, presumably, has not filed the appropriate documentation with the IRS to have a "non-profit" status. However, this does not change anything, other than the person can claim less on the 1040 tax form. Not sure if a person can receive a "non-profit" status, but it would be interesting to investigate the possibility. Stranger things have happened in the Universe.

When one receives FRNs* for any reason, there are three basic options.

Accept them unconditionally.
Refuse to accept them as they are debt instruments and not money.
Accept them "under protest."


Let's look at each option in detail.

Acceptance of FRNs unconditionally
This is the most common option (most people do NOT know they have options). As we know the FRN is an evidence of debt, a direct obligation of the gov't. We get this from US code 12USC411.

The said notes shall be obligations of the United States.
We all know this, but what many do NOT comprehend is when we have FRNs in our pockets, we are via operations of law considered a "holder in due course." This means that the "holder" of the FRN is liable for the debt, eventhough the holder was NOT a party to the original contract. Read that sentence as many times as it takes to be understood. Since nearly everyone has accepted FRNs unconditionally they have accrued a liability to pay the interest on the debt. Hence, the need for federal income tax for all people. As far as I have been able to research, I have yet to find a gov't document notifying the people that acceptance and use of FRNs obliges them to pay interest on the debt. If, I, in my private capacity, were to do a similar action, sooner or later I would be arrested and tried as a criminal. It is my opinion the gov't is acting in bad faith. However, one cannot claim an injury. The legal maxim

He who consents cannot receive an injury. rules in this case.

Refusal to accept FRNs
Every person (natural and artificial) can refuse to accept FRNs. The Bureau of Printing and Engraving's website www://moneyfactory.gov (http://www://moneyfactory.gov) states
However, there is no Federal statute which mandates that private businesses must accept cash as a form of payment. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a state law which says otherwise.
The question is do people usually carry something other than FRNs to purchase services? Most do not. A vendor would have a more difficult business experience refusing all FRNs. Unless one has the ability to exist outside the world of FRNs, this option would prove difficult at best.

Accepting FRNs under protest
The last option may prove to be the best choice. There are different types of protest. I will examine two.

First, my preferred, redeeming FRNs with first contact. From 12USC411 FRNs can be redeemed.

They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank
The key to understanding this sentence is to know the legal meaning of the words, "redeem" and "lawful."
From Black's Law Dictionary 5th, ed.

Redeem: To remove the obligation of.

Lawful:Legal; warranted or authorized by the law. The principal distinction between the terms "lawful" and "legal" is that the former contemplates the substance of law, the latter the form of law.
Many people think redemption of FRNs means receiving gold and silver coin. Not so. The gov't repudiated the gold contract in 1933 and silver in 1965. The gov't cannot be compelled to redeem FRNs in gold and silver. Infact, the only form of paper currency issued by the federal gov't for the public use is FRNs. The gov't CANNOT issue any other currency than FRNs. Redemption means to remove the obligation, so a redeemed FRN REMOVES the liability of the holder to pay the interest. In this sense it is "lawful" money. Gold and silver are merely a "type" of "lawful" money. "Lawful" money can take other forms, not just gold and silver. The key aspect of "lawful" money is that it, theoretically, cannot be taxed, except in a few instances consistent with the US CON. Redeeming money removes one's obligation to pay the interest on the debt, i.e. that person is no longer a "holder in due course," and consequentially reduces one's liability to pay taxes on the 1040. NOTE: Redemption of FRNs does NOT remove the liability to file a 1040 tax form for the US citizen. He/she must still file. The only difference is the amount claimed for tax purposes should be less. BE ADVISED I have not tried this. This is only a theory of mine. I do NOT recommend someone try this UNTIL he/she is satisfied with their own research. I may be a lunatic OR I may be brilliant. Either way, the decision is yours.

The second form of protest is to note on every paycheck, paper FRN, form of credit. . .etc, the notes received were done under protest. This can be accomplished by the use of a rubber stamped marked "received under protest" or the like, by signature, "The Great Ag under protest" or the like or verbally. Written is always to be preferred to verbal.

Any form of protest will reserve one's right to redeem the currency or accept it conditionally (under necessity) as there are no other options and one does NOT accept the obligation associated with it.

Here are some legal maxims to ponder on:

It is very natural that an obligation should not be dissolved but by the same principles which were observed in contracting it.

If you know not the names of things, the knowledge of things themselves perishes.

He is not deceived who knows himself to be deceived.

It is immaterial whether a man gives his assent by words or by acts and deeds

Every consent removes error

Every consent given to what has already been done, has a retrospective effect and equals a command.

The Great Ag

*What is interesting to note about the Bureau of Printing and Engraving (BEP) in their mission statement never mentioned printing "dollars." I took this a prima facia evidence that "dollars" are no longer made by the BEP. I do not know when the change occurred, perhaps to many phone calls and letters inquiring about this, but they have updated their website. to read:

The mission of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) is to design and manufacture high quality security documents that deter counterfeiting and meet customer requirements for quality, quantity and performance. As its primary function, the BEP prints billions of dollars - referred to as Federal Reserve Notes - each year for delivery to the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve operates as the nation's central bank and serves to ensure that adequate amounts of currency and coin are in circulation. The BEP does not produce coins - all U.S. coinage is minted by the United States Mint.
This does not change anything, a FRN is a FRN is a FRN regardless of how it is denominated.

[Ponce]

Uffffffffffffffff Great AG, you make my hear turn..........the Great Ponce hahahhaahahahaha.

[7th trump]

If one is being 'paid'* for one's products and/or services with evidence of debt, i.e. FRNs or other Federal Commercial Paper under the UCC (anything other than gold or silver), how can it be said that one is 'making a profit' under such a scenario??

Under the circumstances, and realistically, wouldn't any such activity (i.e. being 'paid' with evidence of debt which one is then compelled to pawn off on others) be considered 'non-profit'??

*it is not possible to 'pay' a debt with a debt, to 'pay' means to extinguish the debt, NOT discharge the debt with limited liability under the current scheme of things

Hey, IAMIAF:
I am going to rephrase your question to see if I understand what you are asking.

Can a taxpayer who receives FRNs for his services, either by "employer" or from a customer purchasing services directly, be considered a "non-profit" as FRNs by their very nature are evidences of debt? This is how I read your question.

The answer to my interpretation of your question would be, "no." The biggest reason being the person who received the FRNs, presumably, has not filed the appropriate documentation with the IRS to have a "non-profit" status. However, this does not change anything, other than the person can claim less on the 1040 tax form. Not sure if a person can receive a "non-profit" status, but it would be interesting to investigate the possibility. Stranger things have happened in the Universe.

When one receives FRNs* for any reason, there are three basic options.

Accept them unconditionally.
Refuse to accept them as they are debt instruments and not money.
Accept them "under protest."


Let's look at each option in detail.

Acceptance of FRNs unconditionally
This is the most common option (most people do NOT know they have options). As we know the FRN is an evidence of debt, a direct obligation of the gov't. We get this from US code 12USC411.

The said notes shall be obligations of the United States.
We all know this, but what many do NOT comprehend is when we have FRNs in our pockets, we are via operations of law considered a "holder in due course." This means that the "holder" of the FRN is liable for the debt, eventhough the holder was NOT a party to the original contract. Read that sentence as many times as it takes to be understood. Since nearly everyone has accepted FRNs unconditionally they have accrued a liability to pay the interest on the debt. Hence, the need for federal income tax for all people. As far as I have been able to research, I have yet to find a gov't document notifying the people that acceptance and use of FRNs obliges them to pay interest on the debt. If, I, in my private capacity, were to do a similar action, sooner or later I would be arrested and tried as a criminal. It is my opinion the gov't is acting in bad faith. However, one cannot claim an injury. The legal maxim

He who consents cannot receive an injury. rules in this case.

Refusal to accept FRNs
Every person (natural and artificial) can refuse to accept FRNs. The Bureau of Printing and Engraving's website www://moneyfactory.gov (http://www://moneyfactory.gov) states
However, there is no Federal statute which mandates that private businesses must accept cash as a form of payment. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a state law which says otherwise.
The question is do people usually carry something other than FRNs to purchase services? Most do not. A vendor would have a more difficult business experience refusing all FRNs. Unless one has the ability to exist outside the world of FRNs, this option would prove difficult at best.

Accepting FRNs under protest
The last option may prove to be the best choice. There are different types of protest. I will examine two.

First, my preferred, redeeming FRNs with first contact. From 12USC411 FRNs can be redeemed.

They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank
The key to understanding this sentence is to know the legal meaning of the words, "redeem" and "lawful."
From Black's Law Dictionary 5th, ed.

Redeem: To remove the obligation of.

Lawful:Legal; warranted or authorized by the law. The principal distinction between the terms "lawful" and "legal" is that the former contemplates the substance of law, the latter the form of law.
Many people think redemption of FRNs means receiving gold and silver coin. Not so. The gov't repudiated the gold contract in 1933 and silver in 1965. The gov't cannot be compelled to redeem FRNs in gold and silver. Infact, the only form of paper currency issued by the federal gov't for the public use is FRNs. The gov't CANNOT issue any other currency than FRNs. Redemption means to remove the obligation, so a redeemed FRN REMOVES the liability of the holder to pay the interest. In this sense it is "lawful" money. Gold and silver are merely a "type" of "lawful" money. "Lawful" money can take other forms, not just gold and silver. The key aspect of "lawful" money is that it, theoretically, cannot be taxed, except in a few instances consistent with the US CON. Redeeming money removes one's obligation to pay the interest on the debt, i.e. that person is no longer a "holder in due course," and consequentially reduces one's liability to pay taxes on the 1040. NOTE: Redemption of FRNs does NOT remove the liability to file a 1040 tax form for the US citizen. He/she must still file. The only difference is the amount claimed for tax purposes should be less. BE ADVISED I have not tried this. This is only a theory of mine. I do NOT recommend someone try this UNTIL he/she is satisfied with their own research. I may be a lunatic OR I may be brilliant. Either way, the decision is yours.

The second form of protest is to note on every paycheck, paper FRN, form of credit. . .etc, the notes received were done under protest. This can be accomplished by the use of a rubber stamped marked "received under protest" or the like, by signature, "The Great Ag under protest" or the like or verbally. Written is always to be preferred to verbal.

Any form of protest will reserve one's right to redeem the currency or accept it conditionally (under necessity) as there are no other options and one does NOT accept the obligation associated with it.

Here are some legal maxims to ponder on:

It is very natural that an obligation should not be dissolved but by the same principles which were observed in contracting it.

If you know not the names of things, the knowledge of things themselves perishes.

He is not deceived who knows himself to be deceived.

It is immaterial whether a man gives his assent by words or by acts and deeds

Every consent removes error

Every consent given to what has already been done, has a retrospective effect and equals a command.

The Great Ag

*What is interesting to note about the Bureau of Printing and Engraving (BEP) in their mission statement never mentioned printing "dollars." I took this a prima facia evidence that "dollars" are no longer made by the BEP. I do not know when the change occurred, perhaps to many phone calls and letters inquiring about this, but they have updated their website. to read:

The mission of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) is to design and manufacture high quality security documents that deter counterfeiting and meet customer requirements for quality, quantity and performance. As its primary function, the BEP prints billions of dollars - referred to as Federal Reserve Notes - each year for delivery to the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve operates as the nation's central bank and serves to ensure that adequate amounts of currency and coin are in circulation. The BEP does not produce coins - all U.S. coinage is minted by the United States Mint.
This does not change anything, a FRN is a FRN is a FRN regardless of how it is denominated.



Ok Great, how about a "nontaxpayer"? Someone who is not participating in Social Security.

[iOWNme]

If one is being 'paid'* for one's products and/or services with evidence of debt, i.e. FRNs or other Federal Commercial Paper under the UCC (anything other than gold or silver), how can it be said that one is 'making a profit' under such a scenario??

Under the circumstances, and realistically, wouldn't any such activity (i.e. being 'paid' with evidence of debt which one is then compelled to pawn off on others) be considered 'non-profit'??

*it is not possible to 'pay' a debt with a debt, to 'pay' means to extinguish the debt, NOT discharge the debt with limited liability under the current scheme of things

Hey, IAMIAF:
I am going to rephrase your question to see if I understand what you are asking.

Can a taxpayer who receives FRNs for his services, either by "employer" or from a customer purchasing services directly, be considered a "non-profit" as FRNs by their very nature are evidences of debt? This is how I read your question.

The answer to my interpretation of your question would be, "no." The biggest reason being the person who received the FRNs, presumably, has not filed the appropriate documentation with the IRS to have a "non-profit" status. However, this does not change anything, other than the person can claim less on the 1040 tax form. Not sure if a person can receive a "non-profit" status, but it would be interesting to investigate the possibility. Stranger things have happened in the Universe.

When one receives FRNs* for any reason, there are three basic options.

Accept them unconditionally.
Refuse to accept them as they are debt instruments and not money.
Accept them "under protest."


Let's look at each option in detail.

Acceptance of FRNs unconditionally
This is the most common option (most people do NOT know they have options). As we know the FRN is an evidence of debt, a direct obligation of the gov't. We get this from US code 12USC411.

The said notes shall be obligations of the United States.
We all know this, but what many do NOT comprehend is when we have FRNs in our pockets, we are via operations of law considered a "holder in due course." This means that the "holder" of the FRN is liable for the debt, eventhough the holder was NOT a party to the original contract. Read that sentence as many times as it takes to be understood. Since nearly everyone has accepted FRNs unconditionally they have accrued a liability to pay the interest on the debt. Hence, the need for federal income tax for all people. As far as I have been able to research, I have yet to find a gov't document notifying the people that acceptance and use of FRNs obliges them to pay interest on the debt. If, I, in my private capacity, were to do a similar action, sooner or later I would be arrested and tried as a criminal. It is my opinion the gov't is acting in bad faith. However, one cannot claim an injury. The legal maxim

He who consents cannot receive an injury. rules in this case.

Refusal to accept FRNs
Every person (natural and artificial) can refuse to accept FRNs. The Bureau of Printing and Engraving's website www://moneyfactory.gov (http://www://moneyfactory.gov) states
However, there is no Federal statute which mandates that private businesses must accept cash as a form of payment. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a state law which says otherwise.
The question is do people usually carry something other than FRNs to purchase services? Most do not. A vendor would have a more difficult business experience refusing all FRNs. Unless one has the ability to exist outside the world of FRNs, this option would prove difficult at best.

Accepting FRNs under protest
The last option may prove to be the best choice. There are different types of protest. I will examine two.

First, my preferred, redeeming FRNs with first contact. From 12USC411 FRNs can be redeemed.

They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank
The key to understanding this sentence is to know the legal meaning of the words, "redeem" and "lawful."
From Black's Law Dictionary 5th, ed.

Redeem: To remove the obligation of.

Lawful:Legal; warranted or authorized by the law. The principal distinction between the terms "lawful" and "legal" is that the former contemplates the substance of law, the latter the form of law.
Many people think redemption of FRNs means receiving gold and silver coin. Not so. The gov't repudiated the gold contract in 1933 and silver in 1965. The gov't cannot be compelled to redeem FRNs in gold and silver. Infact, the only form of paper currency issued by the federal gov't for the public use is FRNs. The gov't CANNOT issue any other currency than FRNs. Redemption means to remove the obligation, so a redeemed FRN REMOVES the liability of the holder to pay the interest. In this sense it is "lawful" money. Gold and silver are merely a "type" of "lawful" money. "Lawful" money can take other forms, not just gold and silver. The key aspect of "lawful" money is that it, theoretically, cannot be taxed, except in a few instances consistent with the US CON. Redeeming money removes one's obligation to pay the interest on the debt, i.e. that person is no longer a "holder in due course," and consequentially reduces one's liability to pay taxes on the 1040. NOTE: Redemption of FRNs does NOT remove the liability to file a 1040 tax form for the US citizen. He/she must still file. The only difference is the amount claimed for tax purposes should be less. BE ADVISED I have not tried this. This is only a theory of mine. I do NOT recommend someone try this UNTIL he/she is satisfied with their own research. I may be a lunatic OR I may be brilliant. Either way, the decision is yours.

The second form of protest is to note on every paycheck, paper FRN, form of credit. . .etc, the notes received were done under protest. This can be accomplished by the use of a rubber stamped marked "received under protest" or the like, by signature, "The Great Ag under protest" or the like or verbally. Written is always to be preferred to verbal.

Any form of protest will reserve one's right to redeem the currency or accept it conditionally (under necessity) as there are no other options and one does NOT accept the obligation associated with it.

Here are some legal maxims to ponder on:

It is very natural that an obligation should not be dissolved but by the same principles which were observed in contracting it.

If you know not the names of things, the knowledge of things themselves perishes.

He is not deceived who knows himself to be deceived.

It is immaterial whether a man gives his assent by words or by acts and deeds

Every consent removes error

Every consent given to what has already been done, has a retrospective effect and equals a command.

The Great Ag

*What is interesting to note about the Bureau of Printing and Engraving (BEP) in their mission statement never mentioned printing "dollars." I took this a prima facia evidence that "dollars" are no longer made by the BEP. I do not know when the change occurred, perhaps to many phone calls and letters inquiring about this, but they have updated their website. to read:

The mission of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) is to design and manufacture high quality security documents that deter counterfeiting and meet customer requirements for quality, quantity and performance. As its primary function, the BEP prints billions of dollars - referred to as Federal Reserve Notes - each year for delivery to the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve operates as the nation's central bank and serves to ensure that adequate amounts of currency and coin are in circulation. The BEP does not produce coins - all U.S. coinage is minted by the United States Mint.
This does not change anything, a FRN is a FRN is a FRN regardless of how it is denominated.




Ala David Merrill?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZHLwvytQkM

[The Great Ag]

Hey, 7th Trump:
You know the answer to that question better than I.

Consent is the key. A signed SS# is one's consent to receive gov't funds and via operations of law can be considered a gov't employee and subject to filing a 1040 tax form.

A non-taxpayer is still considered a "holder in due course" in my opinion. However, operations of law prevent the gov't from forcing a non-taxpayer to file a 1040 tax form.

the Great Ag

[The Great Ag]

Ala David Merrill?
Yes, I have incorporated his ideas into my theory. No man knows it all, but many can. I also used the UCC, Title 26 IRS, contract law and maxims of law to distill the above information.

David Merrill errs, in my opinion, in that he believes a redeemed FRN becomes a US Note or USN. I can find no code suggesting a transformation occurs from a FRN to a USN, as both are different forms of paper currency. I asked him about this and he was resolute that it must be so. I cannot make his theory fit with code and general principles of law, so I devised my own theory to fit the facts as I see them.

David did provide a lot of material for thought, much of it quite accurate. I am very appreciative of his efforts.

The Great Ag

[Ponce]

Why do some of you find the need to re-post everything all the time...........is that supposed to make you look smarter?........besides myself I don't think that there are any more idiots here, unless you think of yourself as one..........if you are re-posting from one thread to another then is OK but not on the same thread.

Take for example what I am typing wright now.......you know who you are so that I don't have to re-post what you typed.

If you feel like bitching about then .........COME ON DOWN >:(