Redeeming Lawful Money on Daily Paul

[Chex]

The quota system

Each member of the IMF is assigned a quota, based broadly on its relative size in the world economy, which determines its maximum contribution to the IMF’s financial resources. Upon joining the IMF, a country normally pays up to one-quarter of its quota in the form of widely accepted foreign currencies (such as the U.S. dollar, euro, yen, or pound sterling) or Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). The remaining three-quarters are paid in the country’s own currency.

Quotas are reviewed at least every five years. Ad hoc quota increases of 1.8 percent were agreed in 2006 as the first step in a two-year program of quota and voice reforms. Further ad hoc quota increases were approved by the Board of Governors in April 2008, resulting in an overall increase of 11.5 percent. The 2008 reform came into effect in March 2011 following ratification of the amendment to the IMF’s Articles by 117 member countries, representing 85 percent of the IMF’s voting power.

The Fourteenth General Review of Quotas was completed two years ahead of the original schedule in December 2010, with a decision to double the IMF’s quota resources to SDR 476.8 billion. Members have committed to using best efforts to making quotas under the Fourteenth Review effective in October 2012.

Earlier reviews concluded in January 2003 and January 2008 resulted in no change in quotas.

Gold holdings: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/finfac.htm

The recent decision by the members of the IMF to establish a trust fund for the benefit of the poorest countries financed by the sale of IMF gold was the second. http://www.princeton.edu/rpds/papers/WP_67.pdf

Role of gold. The Second Amendment to the Articles of Agreement in April 1978 fundamentally changed the role of gold in the international monetary system by eliminating the use of gold as the common denominator of the post-World War II exchange rate system and as the basis of the value of the Special Drawing Right (SDR). It also abolished the official price of gold and ended the obligatory use of gold in transactions between the IMF and its member countries. It furthermore required that the IMF, when dealing in gold, avoid managing its price or establishing a fixed price. http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/gold.htm

[EZrhythm]

Some thoughts here if the bank refuses your novation and a strike-thru of W-9 verbiage (declaring 'U.S. person or U.S. citizen), relative to presenting your FRB lawful-money demand letter/proof-of-service:

If your lawful money demand is consistently executed and your record-keeping is pristine in that regard, would you think there is still any conflict with signing to that W-9 verbiage i.e. 'U.S person/citizen'?

The W-9 section on the bank signature card is a permission granting the bank to share your account information with the IRS. In my experience it requires a separate initialing or signature on the form. I merely refused to sign it. The bank clerk then said that the account would not be able to received any interest on deposits. EXACTLY! That's what I asked for in the first place. "Do you offer any non-interest bearing checking accounts?"

They wanted me to sign the e-pad but I insisted on placing wet ink on paper. They said that after I sign the e-pad that they could print me a copy. I said I would be happy to have a copy of my wet ink signature on paper. ;-) They gave in.

[David Merrill]

The W-9 section on the bank signature card is a permission granting the bank to share your account information with the IRS. In my experience it requires a separate initialing or signature on the form. I merely refused to sign it. The bank clerk then said that the account would not be able to received any interest on deposits. EXACTLY! That's what I asked for in the first place. "Do you offer any non-interest bearing checking accounts?"

They wanted me to sign the e-pad but I insisted on placing wet ink on paper. They said that after I sign the e-pad that they could print me a copy. I said I would be happy to have a copy of my wet ink signature on paper. ;-) They gave in.

Very agile. That is the kind of de-conditioning I like to hear about!

[allodial]

Here here!

[gdude]

Great job EZ!

In my experience, the W9 was included as part of the signature card.

[Goldi]

[QUOTE=David Merrill;9600]

This plays integral role in your point AJ as 31 USC §371 has been repealed in order to peg US notes to the FRNs in value.
[QUOTE]

Actually David, 31 USC §371 has NOT been repealed. It has been moved, albeit circuitously. It was restated in the Revised Statute 3563 and then renumbered as 31 USC 5101.

[mikecz]

[QUOTE=Goldi;10078][QUOTE=David Merrill;9600]

This plays integral role in your point AJ as 31 USC §371 has been repealed in order to peg US notes to the FRNs in value.

Actually David, 31 USC §371 has NOT been repealed. It has been moved, albeit circuitously. It was restated in the Revised Statute 3563 and then renumbered as 31 USC 5101.

Umm.. this actually might be a big deal.

The only change I see between it and 371 is...

" and all accounts in the public offices and all the proceedings in the courts shall be kept and held in conformity to this regulation"

That is the part we need to find...

[Chex]

That is the part we need to find...

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/USC...nt-detail.html

[David Merrill]

Thank you Chex!


[QUOTE=mikecz;10084][QUOTE=Goldi;10078]

This plays integral role in your point AJ as 31 USC §371 has been repealed in order to peg US notes to the FRNs in value.


Umm.. this actually might be a big deal.

The only change I see between it and 371 is...

" and all accounts in the public offices and all the proceedings in the courts shall be kept and held in conformity to this regulation"

That is the part we need to find...

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/USC...nt-detail.html

[Goldi]

[QUOTE=mikecz;10084][QUOTE=Goldi;10078]

This plays integral role in your point AJ as 31 USC §371 has been repealed in order to peg US notes to the FRNs in value.


Umm.. this actually might be a big deal.



The only change I see between it and 371 is...

" and all accounts in the public offices and all the proceedings in the courts shall be kept and held in conformity to this regulation"

That is the part we need to find...

Here's how I see it. When you look up 31 USC 5101, it shows the authority as R.S. 3563. Revised statutes are to be nothing more than a restatement of the statute. How do I know this? I have a copy of Title 31 from 1940 [31 USC 371] showing the exact language of 1 stat 250-251, and it's source of authority in that version was 1 stat 250 and R.S. 3563. This was a restatement of section 20 of the 1792 coinage act @ 1 stat 250-251. So what we have here is a distinct modification of language of the original source in the current code, by the use of simply dropping a bunch of words from it. And you know what? They can drop all the words they want, but if you cite the origin of the code, you got them by the nuts. So don't cite the code, cite the source/authority for the code.