 |
March 27, 2012, 06:01:26 PM Last edit: March 27, 2012, 06:14:46 PM by benjamindees |
|
It is unfortunate that Stossel repeated this mis-truth that private currencies are illegal. Though Ron Paul tends to spread this misconception as well, so he is not alone.
This is based upon an incorrect understanding of "powers" granted the Federal government by the Constitution.
In short, a "power" is basically permission to violate rights. In the case of the power to "coin money", the power conveyed and the right violated are subtle. It is not, as widely believed, the power to seize private property via monetary monopoly and inflationary confiscation. That would have been in direct violation of the "just compensation" required by the takings clause in the 5th Amendment, and a general nullification of the basic right to property.
The power to coin money is simply the power to violate the usual presumption that possession equals ownership, in the limited case of "coins" minted by the Federal government. That means that a coin, once minted by the Federal government, remains the property of the government even when placed in general circulation. That is the reason you cannot mutilate or destroy them, and they can be seized at will (as was the case with FDR confiscating gold coins). They are not yours.
Render unto Caesar...
Furthermore, the Federal government was never specifically granted the power to prohibit "competing" currencies. The Constitution does not grant a monetary monopoly. This is what is being claimed as an implied power yet, as we can all see, has terrible implications and is in direct violation of the Constitution and a threat to the fundamental right to private property. None of the founders would have deliberately intended this interpretation of the Constitution.
In fact, this lie of monetary monopoly was constructed by a few private bankers for their own lucrative gain, in order to outlaw competitors. These same private interests now control the US money supply through the private Federal Reserve Bank, and via their strategic control over key government officials, in order to maintain their monopoly rents through color of law.
That is not to say, however, that private currencies cannot be (and haven't in the past been) regulated for other reasons, such as to prevent fraud or outright theft. But that is another matter entirely, and not related to Bitcoin or the legality of private currencies in general.
|