Ripple coin

[golddust]

Does anyone have any info on ripple coins?
I have 300 ripples.

[Horn]

Does anyone have any info on ripple coins?
I have 300 ripples.

I think that was the coin I pointed out as the fool for all other crypto.

[golddust]

I think that was the coin I pointed out as the fool for all other crypto.

Why?

[golddust]

Ripple is to be more accepted over bitcoin. Can do more than bitcoin.

Ripple is designed to replace electronic wiring of money.
Suppose to knock out the middle man financial services.

I think I'll buy another 300 coins just because you called it a fool of all crypts.

[Horn]

I think I'll buy another 300 coins just because you called it a fool of all crypts.

The notion when Cryptos first started out is that they're "finite" which propels their attractiveness.

Ripple (if I remember properly) is designed to and works alongside many or some select other cooked up Crypto(s), thus removing any finite aspect.

Or a "fools crypto"

Its wider acceptance than the Prima-Bitcoin should give you a clue about who is financing it, that is of course unless you are a clueless fool... which still remains uncertain.

[golddust]

The notion when Cryptos first started out is that they're "finite" which propels their attractiveness.

Ripple (if I remember properly) is designed to and works alongside many or some select other cooked up Crypto(s), thus removing any finite aspect.

Or a "fools crypto"

Its wider acceptance than the Prima-Bitcoin should give you a clue about who is financing it, that is of course unless you are a clueless fool... which still remains uncertain.
Lol.....
Think I'll buy 600 more coins after that terrific opinion.
Bitcoin can't do what ripple was designed.
And bitcoin is no longer crypto since selling transactions are now reported.
Ripple was never crypto but a coin you can invest in without mining that would circumvent the banking route to exchange money.
Bitcoin is less atttactive.

[ziero0]

Back in the '60s and '70s the thing to get into to throw away money was penny stocks. If you want to gamble on currency a Vegas style coin pusher machine can't be beat.


https://youtu.be/9E1N37G9Zu0

[golddust]

Back in the '60s and '70s the thing to get into to throw away money was penny stocks. If you want to gamble on currency a Vegas style coin pusher machine can't be beat.


https://youtu.be/9E1N37G9Zu0

How much did you lose back in those days?

[ziero0]

How much did you lose back in those days?
Nothing. I always played with o..pi...um (OPM) ... Other Peoples Money ... just like you do today.

[golddust]

Nothing. I always played with o..pi...um (OPM) ... Other Peoples Money ... just like you do today.

Its always been someone else's money.
Even before the frns, it was the federal government's money.
They print it and stamp it with their seal.
US gold and silver coined money is not yours.
So how could you have eliminated debt with gold or silver if it's not your coins?

[Ares]

Ripple was never crypto but a coin you can invest in without mining that would circumvent the banking route to exchange money.
Bitcoin is less atttactive.

It's pretty clear you do not understand Ripple then. Ripple is a bankers coin, it's trying to branch itself into the space of inter-bank lending (Bank A lends money to bank B using the Ripple network instead of SWIFT), which is NEVER, let me tell you again so you'll understand NEVER going to happen due to financial treaties in place for SWIFT.

Ripple is a scam coin at best, a very poor investment at worst. There are other cryptos that do Bitcoin better than Bitcoin (Litecoin for example), but Ripple is absolute garbage. Stay away from premined centralized coins.

[Horn]

Bitcoin is based on blockchain technology, while Ripple doesn't use blockchain but uses a distributed consensus ledger using a network of validating servers (https://xrpcharts.ripple.com/#/validators) and crypto tokens called XRP (sometimes referred to as Ripples).
XRP tokens
XRP – which is the actual cryptocurrency – is a token which is used on the Ripple network to facilitate transfers of money between different currencies. Existing settlement systems generally use US dollars as a common currency for converting between other currencies. This incurs currency exchange fees and takes time – which is why bank transfers between accounts in different countries often take up to three days to process.


So its the XRP token that is infinite in its exchange and application to all currency, Bitcoin included?

It will infinitely divide/deflate a multiple of decimal points as it grows and everything else shrinks to it.

exchange will ultimately vary, well to Ripples benefit no doubt.

[Bigjon]

Its always been someone else's money.
Even before the frns, it was the federal government's money.
They print it and stamp it with their seal.
US gold and silver coined money is not yours.
So how could you have eliminated debt with gold or silver if it's not your coins?

Totally wrong again. FRN's are a private scrip currency borrowed into existence. Which suckers (US Citizens) borrow from that private system.
You have to redeem lawful money to get the gov US Note version of FRN which is issued by the US Treasury.

[ziero0]

how could you have eliminated debt with gold or silver if it's not your coins?
It is not the debt that was eliminated BY SPECIE. It is the contract that was extinguished.

Debt doesn't exist.

Follow along:

1. Nothing is defined as the absence of anything
2. Less than nothing is the greater subtracted from the lesser.
3. The Subset of items enumerated as less than nothing has a population of ZERO.

How do you have less than nothing when nothing is the absence of anything?

There is no debt. Show me a handful of coins in one hand and debt in the other. The other hand will by all appearances be EMPTY.

Q.E.D.

But there is CONTRACT.

[golddust]

Totally wrong again. FRN's are a private scrip currency borrowed into existence. Which suckers (US Citizens) borrow from that private system.
You have to redeem lawful money to get the gov US Note version of FRN which is issued by the US Treasury.

Lol...but you cant redeem lawful money. Its been settled already about lawful money. The courts say frn's are lawful money, therefore you get more frn's when you redeem. Or think you redeem.

[golddust]

Totally wrong again. FRN's are a private scrip currency borrowed into existence. Which suckers (US Citizens) borrow from that private system.
You have to redeem lawful money to get the gov US Note version of FRN which is issued by the US Treasury.

US treasury notes, gold and silver US coins are not your money. They are issued by the US treasury, not by you or anyone else.

There is no such thing as a "US note version FRN".

[golddust]

It is not the debt that was eliminated BY SPECIE. It is the contract that was extinguished.

Debt doesn't exist.

Follow along:

1. Nothing is defined as the absence of anything
2. Less than nothing is the greater subtracted from the lesser.
3. The Subset of items enumerated as less than nothing has a population of ZERO.

How do you have less than nothing when nothing is the absence of anything?

There is no debt. Show me a handful of coins in one hand and debt in the other. The other hand will by all appearances be EMPTY.

Q.E.D.

But there is CONTRACT.

You are slicker than a greased snake.
In other threads you say debt is eliminated by using specie. Now you say there was no debt to begin with, but a contract exist?
Ltfol......

[golddust]

Totally wrong again. FRN's are a private scrip currency borrowed into existence. Which suckers (US Citizens) borrow from that private system.
You have to redeem lawful money to get the gov US Note version of FRN which is issued by the US Treasury.

If its a private system having private money then what does the US seal mean that's stamped on the FRN?

[Horn]

If its a private system having private money then what does the US seal mean that's stamped on the FRN?

Fanfare for the common man, same with mounted busts of dead presidents

[ziero0]

In other threads you say debt is eliminated by using specie. Now you say there was no debt to begin with, but a contract exist?
Which came first? The debt or the contract?

I am endowed with five senses: touch, taste, smell,hearing and sight. Which do I use to detect debt? If I cannot sense debt then likely it is a construction of the mind. At any rate anyone who blathers on about me owing some debt had best produce a specialty that shows it is owed or at least to bypass the statute of fraud.

If anything your ideas are much slicker than mine.

Who do you work for? Some alphabet soup agency?

[Bigjon]

If its a private system having private money then what does the US seal mean that's stamped on the FRN?

It has two seals one for the private scrip and one when used as a US Note.

[Bigjon]

Lol...but you cant redeem lawful money. Its been settled already about lawful money. The courts say frn's are lawful money, therefore you get more frn's when you redeem. Or think you redeem.

Where do the courts say it's lawful money?
It is legal tender.
I would guess that when they say it's lawful money they are referring to it as a US Note indicated by the US Treasury seal.
They probably just omit that they are only referring to it one way and not admit it has a dual purpose.



Debunking the Federal Reserve
Conspiracy Theories (and other financial myths)by Edward Flaherty
(last updated September 6, 2000)

Myth #14. "Lawful money" is only gold or silver coin as prescribed by the constitution. The U.S. has been without any such money since 1968.
The constitution in Article I, section 10 reads "No state shall...coin money, emit bills of credit, make any thing but gold and silver a tender in payment of debts..." This means that the only constitutionally valid forms of money are gold or silver coin. This is called 'lawful money.' U.S. paper money used to be redeemable in lawful money, but no more. Our monetary system is based on unconstitutional forms of money. At least, this is how a few conspiracy theorists see it.The source of their confusion is easy to see and, in this case, easy to understand. Simmons (1939) and Cross (1939) shed some light on the subject. The phrase 'lawful money' had appeared repeatedly in the money and banking laws of the U.S. in the first half of this century, but had never been explicitly defined. It first appeared on February 25, 1862 when Congress authorized the issue of greenbacks and declared them to be "lawful money and a legal tender" for all debts, public and private. 1 (https://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/FederalReserve/FRconspire/lawful.htm#1) This terminology may have been adopted to promote the acceptability of the currency, since the occasion was the first in which Congress attempted to make a paper money a legal tender. 3 (https://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/FederalReserve/FRconspire/lawful.htm#3) At this point in time, then, the terms 'lawful money' and 'legal tender' had no distinct meaning. They were they same thing.
During the Civil War era Congress gave several types of money the status 'lawful money.' On March 17, 1862 Congress declared that Treasury notes (not the T-note debt instrument we know by that name today) were lawful money. February 12, 1862 saw Congress make clearinghouse certificates a lawful money. After the Civil War, on July 12, 1870, Congress placed the U.S. back on the gold standard and specified what types of money national banks could count to meet their legal reserve requirements. "The terms 'lawful money' and 'lawful money of the United States," the Act read, "when applied to these banks shall be held and construed to mean gold or silver coin of the United States." 1 (https://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/FederalReserve/FRconspire/lawful.htm#1) So, by 1870 greenbacks, Treasury notes, clearinghouse certificates, and gold and silver coin were all 'lawful money.' The annoying part, though, is that Congress never stated exactly what lawful money was supposed to be. The only concrete conclusion that can be reached is that lawful money and legal tender were two separate things. Lawful money was money that banks could count toward satisfying their reserve requirements. Legal tender was any money that government would accept in payment of taxes. Some money was lawful money, but not all lawful money was legal tender. And vice versa. Confused?
One last example of the confusion Congress created on the lawful money topic concerns Federal Reserve notes. Prior to 1933-34, they were redeemable at any Federal Reserve bank "in gold or lawful money," and Federal Reserve banks were compelled to hold a 35% reserve "in gold or lawful money" behind their deposits. Congress did not use the phrase "in gold or in other forms of lawful money." It definitely set the terms in contrast to each other. This leads one to conclude that Congress did not deem gold to be lawful money, which at the time would have been absurd. 1 (https://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/FederalReserve/FRconspire/lawful.htm#1)
After 1933 all forms of U.S. money were conferred with legal tender status. This set up a paradox for currency redeemability. Federal Reserve notes and U.S. Notes, for example, were redeemable in "lawful money," but what was lawful money? Because redeemability had ended, there was no longer any distinction between lawful money and legal tender. Federal Reserve notes were therefore redeemable with other Federal Reserve notes, or with U.S. Notes, or with any other legal tender.
To illustrate how some people were confused by this, consider the following correspondence between the U.S. Treasury and citizen of Cleveland. 2 (https://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanking/FederalReserve/FRconspire/lawful.htm#2)



December 9, 1947Honorable John W. Snyder
Sec. of the Treasury
Washington, D.C.
Dear Sir:
I am sending you herewith via registered mail one ten-dollar Federal Reserve note. On this note is inscribed the following:
"This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private, and is redeemable in lawful money at the United States Treasury or at any Federal Reserve bank."
In accordance with this statement, will you send me $10.00 in lawful money?Very truly yours,
A.F. Davis


*****

December 11, 1947Mr. A.F. Davis
12818 Colt Road
Cleveland 1, Ohio
Dear Mr. Davis,
Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of December 9th with enclosure of one ten dollar Federal Reserve note.
In compliance with your request, two five-dollar United States notes are transmitted herewith.
Very truly yours,
M.E. Slindee,
Acting Treasurer


*****

December 23, 1947Mr. M.E. Slindee
Acting Treasurer
Treasury Department
Fiscal Service
Washington 25, D.C.
Dear Sir:
Receipt is hereby acknowledged of two $5.00 United States notes, which we interpret from your letter to be considered lawful money. Are we to infer from this that Federal Reserve notes are not lawful money?
I am enclosing one of the $5.00 notes which you sent me. I note that it states on the face,
"The United States of America will pay to the bearer on demand five dollars."
I am hereby demanding five dollars.
Very truly yours,
A.F. Davis
*****
December 29, 1947
Mr. A.F. Davis
12818 Colt Road
Cleveland 1, Ohio
Dear Mr. Davis:
Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of December 23rd, transmitting one $5 United States note with a demand for payment of five dollars.
Your are advised that the term "lawful money" has not been defined in federal legislation. It first came to use prior to 1933 when some United States currency was not legal tender but could be held by national banking institutions as lawful money reserves. Since the act of May 12, 1933, as amended by the Joint Resolution of June 5, 1933, makes all coins and currency of the United States legal tender and the Joint Resolution of August 27, 1935, provides for the exchange of United States coin or currency for other types of such coin or currency, the term "lawful money" no longer has such special significance.
The $5 United States note received with your letter of December 23rd is returned herewith.
Very truly yours,
M.E. Slindee,
Acting Treasurer



*****It is understandable how reasonable people can become confused when studying the history of the terms 'lawful money' and 'legal tender' in U.S. history. The blame for this rests with Congress who never bothered to define lawful money when it first used the term. However, the line of thinking that it is defined by the constitution as only gold or silver coin is incorrect. The constitution makes no such definition. Moreover, the restriction that States not make anything but gold or silver a legal tender does not apply to Congress, only to the States. Congress may declare anything it wishes a legal tender. And as the history above shows, it certainly has.

References:
1. Cross, Ira B. (1938), "A note on lawful money," Journal of Political Economy, pp. 409-13.2. Ritter, Lawrence (1961), Money and economic activity: Readings in money and banking, Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
3. Simmons, Edward C. (1938), "The concept of lawful money," Journal of Political Economy, pp. 108-18.

[Horn]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1a/Seal_of_the_United_States_Federal_Reserve_System.s vg

A "system" just like Ripple - their house wins is the system

[Ares]

Lol...but you cant redeem lawful money. Its been settled already about lawful money. The courts say frn's are lawful money, therefore you get more frn's when you redeem. Or think you redeem.

That's bullshit, the only court case that gets sited for that "lawful money" argument is Milam v. U.S., 524 F.2d 629, in which if you actually read through the case does not say anything that FRN are lawful money.


W. Jefferson Davis, La Jolla, Cal., for appellant.

Robert H. Filsinger, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., for appellees.

MEMORANDUM

Before KILKENNY and TRASK, Circuit Judges, and CRAIG,* District Judge.

Appellant has filed a substantial brief and an adequate reply brief and has argued his full share of allotted time in support for a demand that his $50.00 Federal Reserve Bank Note be redeemed in "lawful money" of the United States, which he says, in effect, must be gold or silver. Appellant refused appellees' tender of an equivalent value in Federal Reserve Notes.

Appellant's contentions, in our view, were put at rest close to a century ago in Juilliard v. Greenman, 110 U.S. 421, 448, 4 S. Ct. 122, 130, 28 L. Ed. 204 (1884), in which it was said:

" . . . Under the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States, and to issue circulating notes for the money borrowed, its power to define the quality and force of those notes as currency is as broad as the like power over a metallic currency under the power to coin money and to regulate the value thereof. Under the two powers, taken together, Congress is authorized to establish a national currency, either in coin or in paper, and to make that currency lawful money for all purposes, as regards the national government or private individuals. . . . " (Emphasis supplied.)

The power so precisely described in Juilliard has been delegated to the Federal Reserve System under the provisions of 12 U.S.C. § 411. Appellant's challenge to the validity of this legislation is meritless. Cf.31 U.S.C. § 392.

While we agree that golden eagles, double eagles and silver dollars were lovely to look at and delightful to hold, we must at the same time recognize that time marches on, and that even the time honored silver dollar is no longer available in its last bastion of defense, the brilliant casinos of the houses of chance in the state of Nevada. Appellant is entitled to redeem his note, but not in precious metal. Simply stated, we find his contentions frivolous.

Judgment affirmed.

Now, take a look at 12 USC 411


Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. 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.

Can you tell me why you or anyone who is not a Federal Reserve Bank, or an Agent thereof is actually using Federal Reserve Notes? It specifically says they aren't to be used for that.

[golddust]

That's bullshit, the only court case that gets sited for that "lawful money" argument is Milam v. U.S., 524 F.2d 629, in which if you actually read through the case does not say anything that FRN are lawful money.



Now, take a look at 12 USC 411



Can you tell me why you or anyone who is not a Federal Reserve Bank, or an Agent thereof is actually using Federal Reserve Notes? It specifically says they aren't to be used for that.
You're confused and have a strong belief in a falsehood spread by people who want a conspiracy.

[golddust]

That's bullshit, the only court case that gets sited for that "lawful money" argument is Milam v. U.S., 524 F.2d 629, in which if you actually read through the case does not say anything that FRN are lawful money.



Now, take a look at 12 USC 411



Can you tell me why you or anyone who is not a Federal Reserve Bank, or an Agent thereof is actually using Federal Reserve Notes? It specifically says they aren't to be used for that.

Why do you ignore they are used for ALL debt and public dues?
Have any idea what those two items might be or you just playing stupid?

[Ares]

You're confused and have a strong belief in a falsehood spread by people who want a conspiracy.

You're confused reading into something about a court declaring something lawful money when they made no such declaration.

You also can't show me why you would use Federal Reserve Notes when it specifically states that they are not authorized for use outside of advances to Federal Reserve Banks and or their Agents.

[Ares]

Why do you ignore they are used for ALL debt and public dues?
Have any idea what those two items might be or you just playing stupid?

Why? Because It specifically states that if you're not a Federal Reserve Bank you are not authorized to use them.

Reading Comprehension isn't your strong spot is it sport?

Let's break this down because obviously you aren't grasping this simple language.


The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues.

This states in black and white that the notes are obligations of the United States, and that they will be receivable by all national and member banks and federal reserve banks FOR ALL TAXES, CUSTOMS, and OTHER PUBLIC DUES.

This says in black and white that said notes are to be used by banks, and the United States government to pay taxes, customs and public dues. No where in this USC does it state that said notes are authorized for use by people, or anyone outside of the Government or the Federal Reserve System.

[golddust]

You're confused reading into something about a court declaring something lawful money when they made no such declaration.

You also can't show me why you would use Federal Reserve Notes when it specifically states that they are not authorized for use outside of advances to Federal Reserve Banks and or their Agents.

I use frns to pay debt or a public due like everyone else including you.
It says all debt. What's hard to understand about that?
The courts agree.
The courts say frns are legal tender issued by the reserve system on the credit of the US.
Whats wrong with your common sense?

[Ares]

I use frns to pay debt or a public due like everyone else including you.
It says all debt. What's hard to understand about that?

You're stuck on all debts, but not the entire context of the USC. You sound like those idiots declaring the 2nd Amendment is for a militia picking out a word and not taking the entire statement in context. Like I said, reading comprehension does not appear to be your strong point.


The courts agree.

Really? Can you show me a court case that backs your assumption?


The courts say frns are legal tender issued by the reserve system on the credit of the US.

There is a difference between Legal Tender, and Lawful money. You are attempting to use the 2 interchangeably and wondering why we aren't drinking your kool-aid.


Whats wrong with your common sense?

Absolutely nothing, I've been using 12 USC 411 to redeem lawful money since 2012 without so much as a frivolous claim from the IRS.

What's wrong with your reading comprehension?

[Horn]

golddust needs to go watch the old Money Master Bill Still video,

then at least he can start arguing for government issue of fiat FRNs vs. the current private Reserve's issue of them.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9x986VJ9lI

Ripple's system is as much just like the Fed Reserves.

[Ares]

golddust needs to go watch the old Money Master Bill Still video,

then at least he can start arguing for government issue of fiat FRNs vs. the current private Reserve's issue of them.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9x986VJ9lI

Ripple's system is as much just like the Fed Reserves.

Probably why he's shilling so hard for Ripple.. One banker scam isn't enough, got to break into the digital space with another scam currency.

[golddust]

You're stuck on all debts, but not the entire context of the USC. You sound like those idiots declaring the 2nd Amendment is for a militia picking out a word and not taking the entire statement in context. Like I said, reading comprehension does not appear to be your strong point.



Really? Can you show me a court case that backs your assumption?



There is a difference between Legal Tender, and Lawful money. You are attempting to use the 2 interchangeably and wondering why we aren't drinking your kool-aid.



Absolutely nothing, I've been using 12 USC 411 to redeem lawful money since 2012 without so much as a frivolous claim from the IRS.

What's wrong with your reading comprehension?
Redeeming and no irs intervention huh?
Now I know you're lying.
There's no thread about you having success redeeming and not paying taxes anywhere on this site.
You'd think you'd spread your success to everyone on this site, but there's nothing.
And that's because you're spreading falsehoods.

David Merrill has been promoting the redeeming theory for years and he or his followers have any success.
In fact, the irs is now going after a few of them.

[Ares]

Redeeming and no irs intervention huh?
Now I know you're lying.
There's no thread about you having success redeeming and not paying taxes anywhere on this site.

Lying eh? Try using that search function that's been built into every single web forum since the mid to late 90s.

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?65910-David-Merrill-and-12-USC-411/page2&highlight=redeem+lawful+money


You'd think you'd spread your success to everyone on this site, but there's nothing.
And that's because you're spreading falsehoods.

Nope, When asked, I detail my success. No point in creating a thread about it as if you don't study it closely (I spent 5 years researching it before I made the jump) you'll wind up in prison.


David Merrill has been promoting the redeeming theory for years and he or his followers have any success.
In fact, the irs is now going after a few of them.

Nope, at most they have gotten frivolous filing penalties which have been thrown out as it's usually an automated selection system.

David Merrill mostly hangs out here: http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/forumdisplay.php?16-Private-Credit-vs-Lawful-Money&

There are multiple successes listed there in other subsections of the forum.

The one spreading falsehoods is you. I've asked you for information to back up your assumption of the courts have been settled on lawful money, you've produced absolutely nothing. I have court documents in a federal district court backing my success with redeeming lawful money. What do you have? A reading comprehension problem, failing to search a forum, derailing your own thread, accusing board members of lying to cover up your own ineptitude and incompetence.

You're off to a great start here, keep up the great work.... :rolleyes:

[golddust]

Lying eh? Try using that search function that's been built into every single web forum since the mid to late 90s.

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?65910-David-Merrill-and-12-USC-411/page2&highlight=redeem+lawful+money



Nope, When asked, I detail my success. No point in creating a thread about it as if you don't study it closely (I spent 5 years researching it before I made the jump) you'll wind up in prison.



Nope, at most they have gotten frivolous filing penalties which have been thrown out as it's usually an automated selection system.

David Merrill mostly hangs out here: http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/forumdisplay.php?16-Private-Credit-vs-Lawful-Money&

There are multiple successes listed there in other subsections of the forum.

The one spreading falsehoods is you. I've asked you for information to back up your assumption of the courts have been settled on lawful money, you've produced absolutely nothing. I have court documents in a federal district court backing my success with redeeming lawful money. What do you have? A reading comprehension problem, failing to search a forum, derailing your own thread, accusing board members of lying to cover up your own ineptitude and incompetence.

You're off to a great start here, keep up the great work.... :rolleyes:

You really think I'm foolish enough to believe that?
Your link doesn't document a damn thing.
No where does it say you got a refund.
But I'll go back and check again.

[golddust]

Nope!!!
As I originally thought no documentation or any detail you get refunds.
But I'm sure there's a few here that would chalk that up as proof.
No integrity what so ever.

[Horn]

If you're looking for a refund, you've come to the wrong forum, golddust.

Your poor mushroom boy fungus posting is non-refungable.

[Ares]

Nope!!!
As I originally thought no documentation or any detail you get refunds.
But I'm sure there's a few here that would chalk that up as proof.
No integrity what so ever.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/666/148/6ee.jpg

Says the guy who can't offer a single court case detailing that Federal Reserve Notes are lawful money.

I've received a refund for the full amount that my employer paid to the IRS every year since 2013.

Plenty of other success stories here: http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/forumdisplay.php?33-Success-Stories

So now will you supply a court case that concludes that Federal Reserve Notes are lawful money?

[golddust]

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/666/148/6ee.jpg

Says the guy who can't offer a single court case detailing that Federal Reserve Notes are lawful money.

I've received a refund for the full amount that my employer paid to the IRS every year since 2013.

Plenty of other success stories here: http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/forumdisplay.php?33-Success-Stories

So now will you supply a court case that concludes that Federal Reserve Notes are lawful money?

That's all you can do huh?
Attack my character by assuming I'm a jew?
Childish nonsense.

Furthermore, understand saying you get a full refund from the IRS is not proof of anything. Your word is nothing until proven. The courts call that hearsay and not permissible as evidence in court.
Lets try this as proof. Take all your 1040's to the IRS and have them look them over and use an honest moderator of this site as a third party correspondence as proof you're not bullshitting. Meaning the third party get the exact letters you receive from the IRS.

Lol, savingstosuitorsclub is a joke. None of them have any proof of any success except a friends friend employer got a letter in the mail from the IRS stating the IRS backed off because of this or that. I cant remember what it actually was but the IRS backed off because of a form that was filed. And they paid the IRS eventually. But none of that bullshit ever proved redeeming lawful money is tax free when W4 taxes are related to "Employment", not lawful money that has never been defined by Congress.

Do you see how pathetic you sound?
You claim, but never proven, that you get full refunds by redeeming frns into lawful money (which are FRN's in return) which lawful money has never been defined what exactly it is by Congress for the IRS to know what it is to process 1040's when the gold and silver standards have been "suspended".

And you think I'm stupid enough to believe that drivel?

I already supplied the court case in the link. Not my problem you cant comprehend what the court is saying by referring to the 100 year old case it used.

[Ares]

That's all you can do huh?
Attack my character by assuming I'm a jew?
Childish nonsense.

That's rich coming from the guy who called me a liar.... LOL


Furthermore, understand saying you get a full refund from the IRS is not proof of anything. Your word is nothing until proven. The courts call that hearsay and not permissible as evidence in court.

Except for the fact that I already have my lawful money demand in a misc. case file at a federal district court. Nice try though.


Lets try this as proof. Take all your 1040's to the IRS and have them look them over and use an honest moderator of this site as a third party correspondence as proof you're not bullshitting. Meaning the third party get the exact letters you receive from the IRS.

Why? I don't have anything to prove to you. You'll either believe me and the other evidence presented by others at the savings to suitors club or you won't. I don't give a shit either way. I'm just telling you I've used it and it works. I started researching this method back in 2007 and finally took the jump to redeem lawful money and haven't looked back in 2013. I don't pay income taxes, but I still pay social slavery, medicaid, medicare etc as I can't find a reliable way to extradite myself from that system.


Lol, savingstosuitorsclub is a joke. None of them have any proof of any success except a friends friend employer got a letter in the mail from the IRS stating the IRS backed off because of this or that. I cant remember what it actually was but the IRS backed off because of a form that was filed. And they paid the IRS eventually. But none of that bullshit ever proved redeeming lawful money is tax free when W4 taxes are related to "Employment", not lawful money that has never been defined by Congress.

Spoken like someone who hasn't studied any legal documents or case law. You make a lot of backward assumptions without any shred of proof to back them up yet you demand proof. You're hilarious. It's pathetically sad that you think you even have an understanding of the income tax system. You haven't shown any indication that you have a clue about what you speak. You idiotically I might add use the words Legal Tender and Lawful Money interchangeably when they are no where near the same in definition.


Do you see how pathetic you sound?

LOL Sure, and I have yet to see a single court case from you where the decision was that FRN's are Lawful Money. You sure do demand a lot and don't provide shit other than your idiotic half assed unresearched assumptions.


You claim, but never proven, that you get full refunds by redeeming frns into lawful money (which are FRN's in return) which lawful money has never been defined what exactly it is by Congress for the IRS to know what it is to process 1040's when the gold and silver standards have been "suspended".

Part of the confusion is Congress definition of lawful money (or the lack thereof) Lawful Money = Money issued by the U.S. Treasury. Legal Tender = Money issued by the Federal Reserve System. However your lack of education on the matter shows, because I'm not demanding silver, gold, or even USN because they are no longer in existence or accepted. It's the demand that is key. I demand lawful money, that's all that is required of me since I am not a Federal Reserve Bank, or an agent of the Federal Reserve Bank, I'm not supposed to be using them. If they give me FRN's in return I don't care, I made my demand for lawful money and and that is all that is required.


And you think I'm stupid enough to believe that drivel?

I wouldn't say stupid, but I would add pretty uneducated.


I already supplied the court case in the link. Not my problem you cant comprehend what the court is saying by referring to the 100 year old case it used.

LOL Uh huh, sure. can you show me where it declared that Federal Reserve Notes are Lawful money because the case you site makes no such claims. I can read just fine. It's your reading comprehension that needs some assistance.

[ziero0]

https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1328818216l/670572.jpg


It's your reading comprehension that needs some assistance.

Comprehension needs motivation. As long as he perceives an advantage in his position he might look but he will never see. And then there is the possibility that he is a paid disinformation agent.

[Bigjon]

https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1328818216l/670572.jpg



Comprehension needs motivation. As long as he perceives an advantage in his position he might look but he will never see. And then there is the possibility that he is a paid disinformation agent.

A troll's troll. I mention lawful money in your word play thread and bang there he shows up and begins his tirade about it. Must have megaphone (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaphone_desktop_tool) looking for keywords.

[Neuro]

Lack of reading comprehension, derogatory ad homs towards other members...

Golddust, you don’t happen to be a short in stature unionized electrician in Iowa by any chance?

;D

[Horn]

That's all you can do huh?
Attack my character ...
Childish nonsense.


Says the child creator of character attacking thread - http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?98526-Bigjon

[ziero0]

you don’t happen to be a short in stature unionized electrician in Iowa by any chance?
Beware ... demons have been summoned with less detail

[StreetsOfGold]

(Bank A lends money to bank B using the Ripple network instead of SWIFT), which is NEVER, let me tell you again so you'll understand NEVER going to happen due to financial treaties in place for SWIFT.

It is my understanding that the Lightning network is going to merge with Swift (already happening) and then many of these CC's will start getting involved in transactions.
This is the reason they started putting those chips in your credit cards, they will be required to "speak" to the Lightning network and the transition to crpytos will be more smooth as people are already CONDITIONED TO USING their credit cards.
There was recently 20 MORE AMT's put in place around Washington D.C. (where the dollars are) to BUY Bitcoin, this brings the number up to 200 (nationwide) and it's happening right under people's noses

[golddust]

That's rich coming from the guy who called me a liar.... LOL



Except for the fact that I already have my lawful money demand in a misc. case file at a federal district court. Nice try though.



Why? I don't have anything to prove to you. You'll either believe me and the other evidence presented by others at the savings to suitors club or you won't. I don't give a shit either way. I'm just telling you I've used it and it works. I started researching this method back in 2007 and finally took the jump to redeem lawful money and haven't looked back in 2013. I don't pay income taxes, but I still pay social slavery, medicaid, medicare etc as I can't find a reliable way to extradite myself from that system.



Spoken like someone who hasn't studied any legal documents or case law. You make a lot of backward assumptions without any shred of proof to back them up yet you demand proof. You're hilarious. It's pathetically sad that you think you even have an understanding of the income tax system. You haven't shown any indication that you have a clue about what you speak. You idiotically I might add use the words Legal Tender and Lawful Money interchangeably when they are no where near the same in definition.



LOL Sure, and I have yet to see a single court case from you where the decision was that FRN's are Lawful Money. You sure do demand a lot and don't provide shit other than your idiotic half assed unresearched assumptions.



Part of the confusion is Congress definition of lawful money (or the lack thereof) Lawful Money = Money issued by the U.S. Treasury. Legal Tender = Money issued by the Federal Reserve System. However your lack of education on the matter shows, because I'm not demanding silver, gold, or even USN because they are no longer in existence or accepted. It's the demand that is key. I demand lawful money, that's all that is required of me since I am not a Federal Reserve Bank, or an agent of the Federal Reserve Bank, I'm not supposed to be using them. If they give me FRN's in return I don't care, I made my demand for lawful money and and that is all that is required.



I wouldn't say stupid, but I would add pretty uneducated.



LOL Uh huh, sure. can you show me where it declared that Federal Reserve Notes are Lawful money because the case you site makes no such claims. I can read just fine. It's your reading comprehension that needs some assistance.

You made your demand and they either told you that they cannot or gave you more frns.
Here's a thought.
Would you have thought differently when redeeming they set a box of Susan B Anthonys dollars on the counter?
After all lawful money by your understanding is US Treasury issued money.
But that's not the case is i? You're not given US minted money.
Here's a challenge.
Ask your employer to pay you in US coin and demand they not take any taxes out. See what happens!

Your train of thought is tainted.
Problem here is evident that you and some others don't like to actually be woken up. You domt like the system which is understandable. But you have settled with your version of reality which is an appearance reality.
As long as you are satisfied believing your reality your happy. But if anyone should come along and rattle your reality to wake you up to your appearence of reality that person is identified and labeled

[ziero0]

You made your demand and they either told you that they cannot or gave you more frns.

The demand is for lawful money per 12 USC 411. This is not a demand for constitutional money in specie.

A priest draws water out of a tap. It is tap water. He blesses it. It is now holy water.

See how that works?

A FRN is not lawful money until you demand lawful money.

A FRN is NEVER constitutional money.

After the demand it still LOOKS like tap water but is now lawful. It was never about the note. It was about the demand!!!

In the case of tap water it was never about the water. It was about the blessing.

In common law there is a method of transferring property called 'livery of seisin'. It involves the buyer placing his jacket on the floor and the seller chucking a piece of dirt from the property being transferred onto the jacket. The piece of dirt is symbolic. Likely that little chunk of dirt is all of the substance being transferred but it is symbolic of all the property.

Gold and silver exists in law along the same lines as dirt. You don't need a pile of gold or silver. You only need one little piece. Then the transaction matches the phrase "one dollar and other valuable considerations" or "one dollar love and affection".

[Ares]

You made your demand and they either told you that they cannot or gave you more frns.
Here's a thought.
Would you have thought differently when redeeming they set a box of Susan B Anthonys dollars on the counter?
After all lawful money by your understanding is US Treasury issued money.
But that's not the case is i? You're not given US minted money.
Here's a challenge.
Ask your employer to pay you in US coin and demand they not take any taxes out. See what happens!

Your train of thought is tainted.
Problem here is evident that you and some others don't like to actually be woken up. You domt like the system which is understandable. But you have settled with your version of reality which is an appearance reality.
As long as you are satisfied believing your reality your happy. But if anyone should come along and rattle your reality to wake you up to your appearence of reality that person is identified and labeled

Nope, I can't demand USN or treasury notes because they have been taken out of circulation. But I can still make the demand which is all that is required. They don't have to give me anything different.

[golddust]

The demand is for lawful money per 12 USC 411. This is not a demand for constitutional money in specie.

A priest draws water out of a tap. It is tap water. He blesses it. It is now holy water.

See how that works?

A FRN is not lawful money until you demand lawful money.

A FRN is NEVER constitutional money.

After the demand it still LOOKS like tap water but is now lawful. It was never about the note. It was about the demand!!!

In the case of tap water it was never about the water. It was about the blessing.

Would you be satisfied with 12usc 411 being fullfilled when redeeming they gave you US coin in the amount demanding?

Lol
Just what exactly is constitutional money.
I gotta hear this one.

[golddust]

Nope, I can't demand USN or treasury notes because they have been taken out of circulation. But I can still make the demand which is all that is required. They don't have to give me anything different.

I didn't ask you to redeem USN or treasury notes.
I ask you to redeem your frns into US minted coin.
US minted coin by your understanding is lawful money even though Congress has never defined what lawful money is.
It's a relatively simple question that doesn't need confusion injected into it upon answering.

Simply put, US minted coin for frns upon redeeming.

[ziero0]

Would you be satisfied with 12usc 411 being fullfilled when redeeming they gave you US coin in the amount demanding?
Why should conversion to a different form of money be required? I am happy when they fulfill my demand for lawful money with another paper FRN.


Just what exactly is constitutional money.
How should I know? I didn't sign the constitution. And my definition of lawful money is what I receive when I demand it. Although I would express surprise if they distributed it in the form of Barbie dolls.

I gotta hear this one.
Do you hear many sounds coming from this intellectual forum?

[Ares]

I didn't ask you to redeem USN or treasury notes.
I ask you to redeem your frns into US minted coin.
US minted coin by your understanding is lawful money even though Congress has never defined what lawful money is.

Like I told you, you can't. They have been taken out of circulation. FRN are legal tender. FRN cannot be both Legal Tender and Lawful Money or they would have to change the federal reserves entire charter.

7th, should I issue you a perma ban for creating a sock account to get around your last perma ban? Only 7th would have this ridiculous circular logic, refusing to look at facts and still be this deluded with his own self importance.

The ISP you are using serves Iowa.

[golddust]

Like I told you, you can't. They have been taken out of circulation. FRN are legal tender. FRN cannot be both Legal Tender and Lawful Money or they would have to change the federal reserves entire charter.

7th, should I issue you a perma ban for creating a sock account to get around your last perma ban? Only 7th would have this ridiculous circular logic, refusing to look at facts and still be this deluded with his own self importance.

The ISP you are using serves Iowa.
You're skirting the question and now threatening me with a perms ban and an accusation.
US coins are minted by the US treasury, not issued by the reserve.
Coins are not US notes.

Is this how you treat members?

[golddust]

Why should conversion to a different form of money be required? I am happy when they fulfill my demand for lawful money with another paper FRN.


How should I know? I didn't sign the constitution. And my definition of lawful money is what I receive when I demand it. Although I would express surprise if they distributed it in the form of Barbie dolls.

Do you hear many sounds coming from this intellectual forum?
Why would you want more worthless frns when you could have US minted coin that by your understanding is bonified "lawful money"?

[Ares]

You're skirting the question and now threatening me with a perms ban and an accusation.
US coins are minted by the US treasury, not issued by the reserve.
Coins are not US notes.

Is this how you treat members?

No, it's how former members who were already permanently banned twice I might add get treated, first time for constant personal attacks, 2nd time for creating a sock account to get around the last perma ban.

[golddust]

No, it's how former members who were already permanently banned twice I might add get treated, first time for constant personal attacks, 2nd time for creating a sock account to get around the last perma ban.

Former member?

Ill ask again. Is that how you treat members?
I thought this site was a place that honored the 1st amendment.
Should I change my mind about this place being an advocate of the 1st?
I feel I'm being treated like Donald Trump by the jewmedia here.

I think your problem here is you don't like propositions that question your integrity.

[ziero0]

Why would you want more worthless frns when you could have US minted coin that by your understanding is bonified "lawful money"?
First, I have no understanding of US minted coins being lawful money. Just because Treasury mints a coin doesn't mean it is either of gold or silver. If they were of gold or silver then that would be (as I understand it) constitutional money which could then be used by the several States as a so-called 'tender'.

As to why my response would be "Why not?"

There is a problem with gold and silver. The problem is that while either might effect transfer of rem (things) from one party to another the act of the transaction presumes that both parties have the status to perform that transfer. Ask yourself ... in the current society what might you own that is not subject to seizure? Even yourself? Or rather especially yourself. If you have no remedy when your property is seized then quite possibly you lack the status yourself to qualify for that remedy. The focus transfers from gold/silver ownership (even this is in doubt when society doesn't recognize any ownership at all) to "how do I own myself?" Status. So say you do own a potful of gold who are you going to trade with? You yourself earlier pointed out that payment in lawful money by your employer was irrational. You are correct in pointing this out. But then as an employee you have a servant status and couldn't own anything your employer gives you anyway.

Gold is for sovereigns
Silver is for gentlemen
copper is for peasants
paper is for slaves

I don't have a clue as to what a Ripple coin, a Bitcoin or a payment made by credit or debit card says about your status. If society doesn't recognize ownership when you use gold do you suppose they are going to recognize ownership when you use Ripple or Two Buck Chuck? Or are they all considered to be EBT sources? For welfare people participating in the War on Poverty?

[Ares]

Former member?

Ill ask again. Is that how you treat members?
I thought this site was a place that honored the 1st amendment.
Should I change my mind about this place being an advocate of the 1st?
I feel I'm being treated like Donald Trump by the jewmedia here.

I think your problem here is you don't like propositions that question your integrity.

LOL, Yes YOU are a former member. 7th Chump, and I've asked you to provide a court case detailing that Federal Reserve Notes are "Lawful Money". You can be presented with all the facts, and have been shown in black and white that Federal Reserve Notes are not even to be used by you, but you don't care. You keep parading on with your complete and utter bullshit.

See ya later 7th.

[monty]

Since there is no lawful money one might have a letter on file with his/her bank similar to this

https://s19.postimg.cc/ca8a9mclv/FEBAE567-1_E73-4_F2_C-_AF5_D-_B8451_A3_DA7_DE.jpg

[vacuum]

Someone I know sent me some stuff on ripple:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQoZzk_NeYk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM5Y4bAn5QQ

Is there any possibility of it going way up?

I've never seen much positivity on it, but that doesn't mean it can't go up.

[StreetsOfGold]

Is there any possibility of it going way up? I've never seen much positivity on it, but that doesn't mean it can't go up.

There is ZERO doubt that XRP will be one of the most important cryptos in the entire crypto space.
If you held XRP on a supported exchange on Dec. 12th 2020 OR a supported wallet OR a ledger nano, you are eligible for the FLR/Spark token at a 1:1 ratio after the FLR network goes LIVE end of quarter 1, 2021.
FLR network, working with Ripplenet is a world wide game changer making Bitcoin and Ethereum look stupid in comparison AND Ripple has offices all over the world to implement this.
Ripple execs. "rub elbows" and are working with the IMF, the BIS, the Rothschilds and virtually every major bank in the world.

[StreetsOfGold]

FYI: If you want information on Ripple/XRP, this guy has been following them since 2013, he knows more about them than just about any YT influencer out there

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtQycmSrKdJ0zE0bWumO4vA

[Shami-Amourae]

Ripple is the company behind XRP.

XRP is their cryptocurrency. Don't call XRP "Ripple".


XRP is basically the QAnon of the crypto world, so I'd avoid it. It has a lot of insane QAnon type conspiracies behind it that never pan out to be true. Most of the XRP Army are literal Boomer Schizos.

Ripple does a lot of major business/banker dealings, but the SEC currently desires to wipe them out to put a feather in their cap. With most cryptocurrencies the government doesn't really have anyone they can go after, but Ripple is a literal established company with an office with named people, so the government wants to destroy them. They have a huge target on them and you're in like a Ruby Ridge or Waco situation where the government wants to go scorched Earth on them.

Most Bitcoiners hate XRP since it's considered "The Banker Coin" since they try to make friends with bankers. So far bankers just steal their tech and leave them in the dust, sicking the government on them. XRP is popular outside the US, especially Asia. If Ripple was smart they'd relocate to Japan so they don't have to deal with the US government. The Japanese love Ripple.


I sold most of my XRP for Polkadot when it was $5 since I knew the price was going to crash hard. I timed the top of the market since I got in XRP originally at $0.20, so about a 3x gain.

If you want high caps stick to Bitcoin, Ethereum, Polkadot, and Cardano only.

XRP will skyrocket if the case against them from the SEC is won and XRP is declared not a security, but I doubt that will happen. I do hope Ripple wins though.

[Neuro]

cRipple is fraud. I earned a bit of money on them last spring as I bought at 0.17 and sold at 0.32.

[StreetsOfGold]

Ripple is fraud.

Is this a new meme? the old meme is Ripple is scam but both are memes nonetheless.
Ripple is a multi-billion dollar, world wide company with offices all over the world, it's certainly not a "fraud" and if you think so, you're either Ill informed or just another shill.
That being said YOU should not own XRP and neither should anyone else LIKE YOU, it's for Visionaries ONLY!