HA! now we begin to see the real "salsero." And could you ask Freed G. to come back - I have a question for him.
HA! now we begin to see the real "salsero." And could you ask Freed G. to come back - I have a question for him.
It is nothing more than a proposed mental model. Speaking for myself, METRO = Districts, I am authorized and so is the brain trust. I mark the currency as redeemed any time it pleases me. It has the effect of teaching others who handle it because the CODE can be found on Cornell's website.Originally Posted by salsero
I think that by deferring the fraud back to Congress and not patroling the bank a suitor is completely justified to be making his demand as this was the remedy designed for state and national banks.
But mainly this is a decision to be decided by the courts or Congress. And it has already been voiced. Nobody will touch it otherwise.
The statute is quite clear that a person (natural or otherwise) could only demand redemption on the occasion that he had FRN's, which he would naturally obtain at a Federal Reserve bank (like by cashing or depositing a check, receiving a direct deposit, etc, for which the FRB has already determined that you have chosen, or not denied, that you want FRN's; note that under the legal tender law, the banks can assume this, and the choice clearly favors them doing so), so the clear meaning of the statute is that the remedy (avoidance of FRN's) must be with the purveyors of same. There is no trust issue here; whoever came up with that was propagating red herrings, or was mis-directed by same. The CQVT could hold LM as easily as FRN's.
As to the lawsuit vs patrolling the banks, I perceive David's advice is this: you have no duty to force the bank to comply with your demand; that duty lies with the FRB. The statute designates their duty to 'supervise' the banks chartered under 12 USC, so let them do it. The suit is the simplest way, and it avoids all the confrontations, lies, and mis-direction you will likely get from the bank. I like it.
PS to JohnnyCash: like the trust, I am always here. Ask me anything. Freed G
Sometimes I feel that the OCC (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) may be more in charge of enforcement and imposed risk management.
Hi Freed, My question is about my parents and older folks generally. They have worked diligently for years and like yourself now receive SS benefits deposited directly into the bank. And I see we all agree that SS$ is tax-free. And despite all their hundred thousand$ earned and diverted to govt/banking cartel they did manage to put a little away – some in a fully qualified retirement plan and some just dollars. As you know, the Golden Years often arrive with more ailments and more health concerns. And some of that elder healthcare is very expensive and there's always a possibility one of them will require something very costly like a nursing home (although I would try to avoid it). I've heard several scare stories here like "they take all your money" or "well you know they cost 12 thousand a month?" etc.. So my question relates not to passing savings on to heirs but more ... how to preserve some of that savings for the healthier parent, so he/she isn't left destitute by the sicker one's medical costs? I've received differing advice from people. Some talk about "lookback period" and Special Needs trust, and so forth. Do you have any words of wisdom?
I too have questions about this. It is a very puzzling topic!
Could you please repost your comment as an opening post for a new thread?
Done. Thank you.
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...and-healthcare
This is AMAZING that I am reading this! I just, an hour ago, came from my bank asking to change/amend my signature card with the "Lawful Money" statement and the person I talked to said exactly what you have stated here. Thankfully she didn't make a decision based on her statement. She called "Legal" who said I must submit to them in writing why I want to add the statement to my accounts, which they will review and decide whether to approve the addition of said statement.
Any ideas what I should include as my "why"?
First off - get the request in writing.
As banks persist in exercising this option we might consider notifying the Fed about our demand, getting that into an evidence repository and just serving that same marked up Notice on the bank and forgetting about Signature Cards altogether. This is tiring.
Amen David!
*Make the demand by NOTICE.
*Use proper record forming.
Now where do the benefits of making the demand occur?
"...for all taxes, customs, and other public dues." [FRA Section 16 Note Issues; http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section16.htm ]
CC a copy of one's demand to any tax agency of perceived detriment and again don't forget proper record forming.
Last edited by EZrhythm; 03-26-13 at 06:11 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote