Posted on 10/05/2021 10:15:30 AM PDT by JV3MRC
Sorry, but you just don't know the law:
31 U.S. Code § 5112 - Denominations, specifications, and design of coins
"(k) The Secretary may mint and issue platinum bullion coins and proof platinum coins in accordance with such specifications, designs, varieties, quantities, denominations, and inscriptions as the Secretary, in the Secretary’s discretion, may prescribe from time to time."
They are only legally authorized to mint platinum bullion or proof coins, and are not authorized to mint legal tender platinum coins. Proof coins would not be depositable in a bank account, and bullion coins would be valued at the current bullion price, regardless of the face value amount printed on the coin.
“Your paranoid conspiracy flake Luther is the person who added the ‘bullion coin’ and ‘token’ terms to what Krugman said.”
No, sorry, but it’s the US Code, the law of the land, that specifies the coin would have to be a bullion coin. Krugman, like yourself, was just too lazy to spend 5 minutes looking up the law before pontificating about it.
“Krugman had in mind a 1995 law about platinum coins that says, “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of the Treasury may mint and issue platinum coins “
Did you purposefully mangle the text of the law you are quoting to try and deceive people? You know it’s the internet age and everyone can look up what the law actually says, right?
Here’s the link for everyone to see who is lying here:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/5112
The Federal Reserve backs currency with your belief that the currency is worth something. That’s all. Krugman’s proposal that a $1 trillion dollar coin (or note) could be issued is quite accurate. His proposal that it be made of platinum is nice but it is not required. The 1995 law he was thinking of is actually obviated in this case by the 1933 Emergency Banking Act which set the legal framework for this statement by the Treasury:
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/legal-tender.aspx
“Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity, and receive no backing by anything This has been the case since 1933. The notes have no value for themselves, but for what they will buy. In another sense, because they are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are “backed” by all the goods and services in the economy.”
Do you have a $1 coin? What’s it backed by? Is the metal in the coin worth $1?
Do you have a $100 bill? What’s it backed by? Is the paper in the note worth $100?
Seriously, there is nothing backing the US dollar but your belief that it is worth something.
That said, a coin with a face value of $1 trillion dollars is functionally no different than a piece of paper with a face value of $100.
The 1995 act authorized the issuance of platinum coinage. It did not mandate it.
Also, see my post #33.
“It actually isn’t that complicated because the Treasury since 1933 has had the authority to issue currency in any denomination authorized by Congress.”
Congress has not yet authorized a $1 trillion dollar coin or note.
But they could and that was Krugman’s proposal.
His proposal seemed outlandish at the time but now with the total US debt (Fed, states, cities, people) at $84 trillion it’s not quite so outlandish as it had once been.
I was planning on doing away with Federal Reserve Notes.
Yes, the trillion dollar coin requires legislation.
As in, "Congress shall have the power to...COIN MONEY, AND REGULATE THE VALUE THEREOF"
Who do you suppose WROTE the US Code?
“Do you have a $1 coin? What’s it backed by?”
Irrelevant. Different part of the statutes apply.
“Do you have a $100 bill?”
Irrelevant. Same reason.
“That said, a coin with a face value of $1 trillion dollars is functionally no different than a piece of paper with a face value of $100.”
Not if it’s a platinum coin, since the only types of platinum coins that the statute allows the US Government to mint are bullion coins or proof coins, so it would very much be functionally different than legal tender.
Just accept that you were wrong and stop making things worse with your meandering further and further from the pertinent facts.
“Congress has not yet authorized a $1 trillion dollar coin or note.
But they could and that was Krugman’s proposal.”
No, it wasn’t. Krugman asserted the mint could do this right now, with their existing authority, not that he was advocating Congress to pass a new law to allow the mint to do that.
Besides, if they did pass such a law, this whole ploy wouldn’t accomplish what Krugman thought it would, but that’s an entirely different argument.
“Yes, the trillion dollar coin requires legislation.”
Meaning that Krugman is wrong, and Stewart was right. Glad you agree.
Congress has the power to authorize the Treasury and the Mint to issue whatever the hell currency that Congress wants.
US Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 5: The Congress shall have the Power to coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.
If Congress authorizes a $1 trillion dollar legal tender coin made out of wood then that’s what it’ll be. If they want platinum then so be it. That’s their authority under the Constitution.
Krugman’s main point was that a $1T coin could be issued and he was absolutely right that this could be done. His pondering about the way to do it was wrong on point.
This sideshow over platinum is a needless distraction.
Do you agree or disagree that Congress could coin a $1 trillion dollar coin (or a $40 trillion coin, for that matter), deposit in at the Federal Reserve in settlement of obligations, dissolve the Federal Reserve, coin actual gold and silver money and only permit the emission of bills of credit against gold and silver on deposit in the Treasury?
Congress is not inferior to the coinage laws, Congress MAKES the coinage laws.
“Congress has the power to authorize the Treasury and the Mint to issue whatever the hell currency that Congress wants.”
But they haven’t, so the Treasury cannot do it. Biden can’t order the Treasury to do what they aren’t legally allowed to do, so Krugman is wrong.
I’m not sure why anyone around here is wrapping themselves up like a pretzel trying to find a way to prove Krugman right. That’s always going to be an exercise in futility, and it just makes you look foolish.
I’m not dealing in speculations as to what future laws Congress might make. The argument is whether Krugman is right as the laws currently stand, and he is not. Argument’s over.
You’re lost in the minutiae of this discussion.
Krugman said that a $1T coin could be issued. He’s right. It could.
You’re obsessing over how it can be done. I doubt that he gave it as much thought as we have today.
“Congress is not inferior to the coinage laws, Congress MAKES the coinage laws.”
Some folks are unclear on this concept.
Actually, that's all you need to know about the limited knowledge and reasoning skills of typical east coast 'intellectuals'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.