Senator Larry Craig of Idaho, a strong silver industry, has recently resigned from the Senate in matters relating to sexual misconduct. Who would want Larry Craig out and why?
Article 1 Section 10 Clause 1 of the US Constitution states: "No state shall ... emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts"
Currently, the Legal Tender of the US are Federal Reserve Notes that are NOT redeemable in Gold. The IRS requires tax liability to be calculated in terms of Federal Reserve Notes. As such there is a 28% rate gain on 'income' derived from investment in Precious Metals such as Gold or Silver. As we know monetary inflation of a fiat monetary currency results in depreciation of the currency relative to commodities.
As Alan Greenspan stated in "This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard."
Here is where the story gets interesting. In 2005 Senator Crapo sponsored and Senators Larry Craig, Wayne Allard, Max Baucus, Thad Cochran, John Ensign, Harry Reid, and Ted Stevens co-sponsored the Fair Treatment for Precious Metals Act. Under this Act the tax on Precious Metals would have been substantially reduced. The act is currently in the first stage of introduction.
It will be interesting to see what happens with the Fair Treatment for Precious Metals Act which has been reintroduced in 2007.
Did Larry Craig step too close to the Central Bankers fiat money monopoly and have to be taken out?
Will this Act pass or will the Senators befall a similar fate of Larry Craig? Will Ron Paul be able to accomplish as President the reinstitution of Sound Money?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment