What is Money really and what its faults and

is backed up by trust and dependence

 

sure there is, your labor as a commodity. as a constitutor and accomodation party to the instruments created by the representatives, i.e. bonds.

http://indianpcpals.com/dictionary/legal/C/Constitutor.htm


Constitutor

Civil law. He who promised by a simple pact to pay the debt of another; and this is always a principal obligation.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/incode/26/1/3.1/26-1-3.1-419 Version a

Ind. Code § 26-1-3.1-419

(a) If an instrument is issued for value given for the benefit of a party to the instrument ("accommodated party") and another party to the instrument ("accommodation party") signs the instrument for the purpose of incurring liability on the instrument without being a direct beneficiary of the value given for the instrument, the instrument is signed by the accommodation party "for accommodation".

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Accommodation+Party

An accommodation party is liable to the person or business that extended credit to the

accommodation party, but not to the accommodated party. The accommodation party is liable for the amount specified on the accommodation paper. If an accommodation party repays the debt, he or she can seek reimbursement from the accommodated party.

does anyone know what suretyship is?

 

i think this thread and the following are bleeding together in a fashion:

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=410281

in fact, all that is holding up our monetary system is trust, and as pointed out in the linked thread, the 'mutually assured destruction' of the $ as the currency standard given that china is in bed with us.

 

yes trust is the word. what kind of trust though? when you say trust, when the fed talks about trust, they mean it specifically. the money that people are passing around today are trust funds, i.e. International Monetary FUND. or federal REServe.

http://answers.encyclopedia.com/question/trust-res-365211.html

What is a trust res?

The property that comprises the trust is the trust res, corpus, principal, or subject matter.


http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopica03.pdf

Alternative names for the property transferred to the trust are the:

Property
Capital
Corpus
Estate
Principal
Res


The written document governing the trust typically is given one of the
following titles, although no title is necessary:

agreement
declaration
deed
indenture
instrument
will/testament (for testamentary trust)

Is this relevant now

 

reb,

I disagree w/ you that macro concepts disappear on a micro level.
Certain (many) aspects of money and economic systems that apply on a macro level are relevant on a micro level.

I think one of the problems the current system is facing is that those in charge of macro policies have actually forgotten or disregarded that.

A small business suffering from a cash flow problem is in just as much danger as a country suffering from the same as is an individual.

I do agree that money makes different sense for the local entity than it does for the ruler.

I also agree that bernanke (and he's not the only one) who not so much as doesn't understand (shit, i understand it) but rather is too arrogant to not realize that they can not manipulate the system w/o causing adverse problems to the foundations of the system.

I'm not sure that money is inherently manipulable. Monetary policy is manipulable and that's why the free hand is so important, it is not subject to manipulation.


To me it doesn't seem like you have an issue w/ money but rather how it's handled. Not so much that you have an issue w/ money when you look at how the system is managed.

As for what the local person is interested in when they think of $20 that Sam owes Bill. That's the mistake the local entity makes when they think that the aspects that apply to the larger entity do not apply to them. This is one of the reasons people have no motivation to educate themselves. During my self education I've applied larger concepts such as cash flow and value add to my personal finances so I know that it can be done and the concepts do fit on a smaller scale.

Ascent of money.
The idea of value add is one of the insights I walked with.
Credit great. It gives business an opportunity to grow and expand that they otherwise would not have been able to accomplish. Their other option would be to hoard cash for many years while they save up to buy a new building, buy new equipment, generate new markets, etc...
Credit gives them the opportunity to get sstarted right away. This works for business because they are in the business of adding value. They buy components from various suppliers and crank out an end product. They have added value to the components by creating one larger item.

Credit does not work on the consumer level because they consumer is not adding value. They are not using the money to create economic growth.
This is the example of applying a macro concept on the micro level. I will point out that there is a problem w/ saying that credit is not good on the consumer level. W/o credit given to the consumer, they can not buy the item that business added value to.

 

The concept of money is quite simple, it is something that we all accept as a medium of carrying out trade, coins, paper, sea shells, or something else.

In todays world I think most persons, depending on where they live, would consider money to be dollars, Euros, Yen, Kip, Yuan, or any of the many fiat currencies used around the world which can generally be easily converted from one to another at a predetermined but varying exchange rate.

Accounting systems, attachments and legal ramifications have little to do with what money is.

Post #22 provided a dictionary definition of money.

 

Money in its current form is an addictive "substance" and as such can be used to control both individuals and populations.

 

Btw, I have no problem with and I believe this is a great system, its just the people don't know what they are doing with the "money"

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/usc_sec_26_00007701----000-.html

TITLE 26 > Subtitle F > CHAPTER 79 > § 7701

§ 7701. Definitions

(a) When used in this title, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof—
(30) United States person
The term “United States person” means—
(A) a citizen or resident of the United States,
(B) a domestic partnership,
(C) a domestic corporation,
(D) any estate (other than a foreign estate, within the meaning of paragraph (31)), and
(E) any trust if—
(i) a court within the United States is able to exercise primary supervision over the administration of the trust, and
(ii) one or more United States persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust.

 

Bernanke has to follow the systematic auditing instructions which apply to a system of qualifying the time and balance of wet accounts; quantity alas put aside we have to worry about the the opposite hand in the dealing (at arms length or NOT). WHy would the U.S. for instance be commited to borrowing from China, a communist country supposedly.

 

what does that have to do with the fact that you don't have any standing to claim any property as your own and if you use partnership credit, i.e. fed notes, and trust funds the property belongs to the partnership and the trust not you? what does that have to do with the fact that federal reserve notes are trust funds and you are not the grantor nor beneficiary? what does that have to do with you are not issuing the credit so you have no rights to subrogate anything purchased with it? since you don't own the land you are standing under, what makes you think you have rights to anything? if you don't know what I just said then I think you need to so that you can understand why what you just said has no merit, but I would love to make a small wager to see who is correct...

 

what is attachment?

Black's Law 1910


ATTACH. To take or apprehend by commandment
of a writ or precept. Buckeye
Pipe-Line Co. v. Fee, 62 Ohio St 543, 57 N.
E. 446, 78 Am. St Rep. 743.
It differs from arrest, because it takes not
only the body, but sometimes the goods, whereas
an arrest is only against the person; besides,
he who attaches keeps the party attached
in. order to produce him in court on the day
named, but he who arrests lodges the person
arrested in the custody of a higher power, to be
forthwith disposed of. Fleta, lib. 5, c. 24. See

When you claim to use or own fed notes, you are attaching yourself to the liabilities of the entity under trust issuing them or the issuer directly. please tell me how this is not relevant to money when there is a national debt?

 

Why do you feel a need to go off on a tangent to try and answer a simple question when a simple answer will suffice?

 

there are several different accounting systems with different rules, intermediate accounting, double entry, regular, can u tell me which one governs fed notes? how about your regular accounts? I apologize in advance if my posts are not consolidated enough.....

 

I don't know about addictive substance but I can see how it can be used as a form of mind control.

And I think we all know enough about mind control to know that some individuals are susceptible to mind control techniques.

 

I apologize in. but its not a simple answer. you are trying to simplify something more complex and if you think its simple then you need to understand more legalese. the system is set up by lawyers who use legalese, so if you claim to know the legal system, the monetary system and you cannot understand the legalese that I am using, then u may need to go and study it further, otherwise you maybe on a tangent not really and fully understanding what you are asking or saying. is there something wrong with being specific? and by the way can you answer those questions?


http://www.thefreedictionary.com/legalese

le·gal·ese (lg-lz, -ls)
n.
The specialized vocabulary of the legal profession, especially when considered to be complex or abstruse.

 

Seriously man, your posts would be so much more valuable if you stopped trying to prove your intelligence. Speak in layman's terms not this legalese BS. All I can make out of what you are saying is that there are some very strong laws on the books that most of us are unaware of. These laws basically say that we the people don't own shit.

 

ok , so you're saying that different accouting systems govern different transactions.

I don't know the answer to your questions. I guess what you're saying is is that you do. Yaaayyyy, you're smart.
I took accounting 101 and 102 and am aware that there are different accounting methods. I've also seen publically traded companies go from one system to another as they suit their needs. I also understand that even individuals can flip flop from one accounting method to another. From what I understand, when I trade stock I can use one method over another.

So go on.
What's your point?

 

This is not the board to flex your legalese muscle. I'm sure lawyers have a board for that.
Why don't you educate us.

I think many people here (maybe except those who feel a barter system - or one w/ no concepts of ownership is best) realize that the things we are talking about here are very complex and intertwined w/ seemingly unrelated matters.

 

The modern dictionary definition, (I prefer the 1828 version of Webster's myself), defines money as: "Something generally accepted as a medium of exchange, a measure of value, or a means of payment."

 

I am so sorry my intentions were not to make anyone feel bad, or anything like. I just know since I am presenting something that is so different and so specific that if I don't present it as such it may get blown off. I will definitely bring more clarity here in like 20 minutes if that is okay.