This is an interesting bit of info that I picked up one while randomly stumbling across the web. Let me know what you think?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_11110
Executive Order 11110
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents [hide]
1 Purpose
2 Conspiracy theory
3 References
4 See also
5 External links
Executive Order 11110 was issued by U.S. President John F. Kennedy on June 4, 1963.
This executive order delegates to the Secretary of the Treasury the president's authority to issue silver certificates under the Thomas Amendment of the Agricultural Adjustment Act.
[edit]Purpose
The order was for the Treasury to issue silver certificates against all silver held by the government which did not already have certificates against it. The order was needed due to the passage of Public Law 88-36 which repealed the Silver Purchase Act and other related monetary measures. One result was that after the repeals, only the President could issue new silver certificates.[citation needed]
The Federal Reserve System could replace the certificates, but only in larger denominations. The thrust of the order returned the authority to issue new silver certificates (and specify denominations) back to the U.S. Treasury.
This executive order allowed for the Federal Reserve System to distribute and exchange currency at lower denominations that met the growing economic need. The authoritative basis for the Order was substantially nullified on September 13, 1982 with the passage of Public Law 97-258. [1]
The order was never directly reversed, but on September 9, 1987, Executive Order 12608 revoked the section that Executive Order 11110 had added to Executive Order 10289,[2] essentially nullifying the order.
And a more credible reference:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=59049
Executive Order 11110 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10289 as Amended, Relating to the Performance of Certain Functions Affecting the Department of the Treasury
June 4, 1963
Office of the Federal Register
Font Size:
Report Typo
By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:
SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended --
(a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j):
"(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption," and
(b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof.
SEC. 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.
JOHN F. KENNEDY
THE WHITE HOUSE,
June 4, 1963
By virtue of this order, the treasury could circumvent the Fed's power to centrally control the money supply in the US by issuing its own currency unaffected by the Fed. Interesting that, until now, I have never heard of this before. Given my background in Political Science. The things they don't teach us.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
The Revolution Begins
And so it starts. I will be addressing the tariff issue tomorrow, but in the mean time it is important to note that the revolution against massive government bailouts and perverse government spending has begun. Those who have acted irresponsibly should not be rewarded for their over spending. This bailout is not a function of government and should be stopped immediately. This video from YouTube showcases many hard working people finally reacting to the over stepping actions of the Fed.
the URL:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOxEvtChhkU
the URL:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOxEvtChhkU
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Additional Thoughts on Tax
Because of a well thought and said comment on my facebook notes section in response to the last post, I have decided to re-post my response here. I will be addressing the Tariffs and imports tomorrow. Thank you for reading. The respondent's name will not be posted with the comments. Original post on Facebook.
Comment to post,
"ok, so you're saying that rich people would still get taxed more because they consume more? Not always the case, if you're talking about low priced items then this is more than likely not the case. Let's say an average (poor) family wants to buy a new tv, such as myself. Then Not only is the price of the good very expensive in general, but it would have a larger tax on it than say buying a gallon of milk... I really don't see the benefit of this, this would make people outraged things would be sold under the table. Instead of penalizing people for how much they make (which is not always a tag of how much the person is worth but how much people are willing to give them) you punish people for just wanting to improve the quality of their life. I can't say that tarriffs are a terrible idea, but there is also no reason to punish other countries because they want to make money or deprive people in america (lets say Japaneese people for example) who want to buy Japaneese things..."
My response,
"Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts and commenting. In response, I agree that there exist instances where some my find it more difficult to buy items that are already quite pricey and adding a progressive sales tax would be a hinderance. I would hope that this idea on taxes would inspire savings and tighten the belt on runaway consumer spending that has occurred in the last few decades. This decade, for the first time in history, has seen spending out-pace income and savings. This means we have a negative savings rate in this country. It is important to keep the quality of life high for as many as possible but resorting to out of control spending is not the key. Additionally, affluent people tend to buy luxury items, yachts, exotic cars, mansions etc. Tax on a mansion 12,000,000 @ 15% = 1,800,000. LCD TV 800 @ 7% = 56. Its not the every day items that would be tax heavily but big ticket items in what would be higher brackets. I am transferring income tax brackets to sales"
second comment, same addressee,
"It's just too bad people like to spend more than they have, I find this to be funny, I still don't understand the concept... I don't have a credit card, so therefore have no credit, but yet am quite responsible, I suppose I am to flirt with irresponsibility and get one, but if I can't afford something now, why do I want to pay interest on the money I owe. I do understand better now what you mean if it were a literal tax transfer this would penalize those spending money one luxury items greater, I am still not so sure about tarriffs. It is a fine line to draw when people say "buy American" because there are so many of us (none) that are fully American, so why would we want to go and tax products from other countries when they may be things we can't/don't make in America. I don't think if I wanted an Imported CD/DVD/whathaveyou that it should then get an extra charge added to it just because it is foreign. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I see no problem with buying foreign."
I will be addressing the topic of imports and tariffs in tomorrows post. Thank you for reading.
If you have topics or ideas you wish to discuss or have commented on, please email (my email address was posted on a previous post) or comment and I will try to have it addressed. Thank you.
Comment to post,
"ok, so you're saying that rich people would still get taxed more because they consume more? Not always the case, if you're talking about low priced items then this is more than likely not the case. Let's say an average (poor) family wants to buy a new tv, such as myself. Then Not only is the price of the good very expensive in general, but it would have a larger tax on it than say buying a gallon of milk... I really don't see the benefit of this, this would make people outraged things would be sold under the table. Instead of penalizing people for how much they make (which is not always a tag of how much the person is worth but how much people are willing to give them) you punish people for just wanting to improve the quality of their life. I can't say that tarriffs are a terrible idea, but there is also no reason to punish other countries because they want to make money or deprive people in america (lets say Japaneese people for example) who want to buy Japaneese things..."
My response,
"Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts and commenting. In response, I agree that there exist instances where some my find it more difficult to buy items that are already quite pricey and adding a progressive sales tax would be a hinderance. I would hope that this idea on taxes would inspire savings and tighten the belt on runaway consumer spending that has occurred in the last few decades. This decade, for the first time in history, has seen spending out-pace income and savings. This means we have a negative savings rate in this country. It is important to keep the quality of life high for as many as possible but resorting to out of control spending is not the key. Additionally, affluent people tend to buy luxury items, yachts, exotic cars, mansions etc. Tax on a mansion 12,000,000 @ 15% = 1,800,000. LCD TV 800 @ 7% = 56. Its not the every day items that would be tax heavily but big ticket items in what would be higher brackets. I am transferring income tax brackets to sales"
second comment, same addressee,
"It's just too bad people like to spend more than they have, I find this to be funny, I still don't understand the concept... I don't have a credit card, so therefore have no credit, but yet am quite responsible, I suppose I am to flirt with irresponsibility and get one, but if I can't afford something now, why do I want to pay interest on the money I owe. I do understand better now what you mean if it were a literal tax transfer this would penalize those spending money one luxury items greater, I am still not so sure about tarriffs. It is a fine line to draw when people say "buy American" because there are so many of us (none) that are fully American, so why would we want to go and tax products from other countries when they may be things we can't/don't make in America. I don't think if I wanted an Imported CD/DVD/whathaveyou that it should then get an extra charge added to it just because it is foreign. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I see no problem with buying foreign."
I will be addressing the topic of imports and tariffs in tomorrows post. Thank you for reading.
If you have topics or ideas you wish to discuss or have commented on, please email (my email address was posted on a previous post) or comment and I will try to have it addressed. Thank you.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Thoughts on Tax
The foundation of any government's revenue is the tax levied on its people, corporations and its imports. These can take the form of tariffs, sales, and income tax as well as other forms of profit vexing schemes. Much of the revenue for the American government is generated from the graduated income tax. This tax is progressive and increases as the personal revenue of the individual or couple increase. This methods intention is to help relieve tax burned on the poor while increasing responsibility on those who profit greatly from our form of free-enterprise. The question I pose is whether or not this is the best way of collecting these revenues? Are we spending appropriately and efficiently on the functions of government that are truly necessary and what are necessary functions of government? This post will open dialogue concerning whether the income tax is the best way of achieve this equality of classes or if another approach would allow for a less punishing form of taxation that would still achieve the goals aforementioned. I propose using a graduated, progressive sales tax and removing the income tax from the people. Food and rent could be exempted from this tax, leaving other goods for taxation. Sales brackets could be set similar to the brackets that measure the percent of income taxation. As the price of a good increases so too does that tax on the item. Each item would be exclusively taxed and not the aggregate of all items. This would allow the higher taxation of those who consume more goods and make the most money. Tariffs would be imposed on imports that would promote the consumption of domestic goods or at least counter the effects of purchasing outside the country to avoid US sales tax. Since the US economy's GPD is based off 75% consumption, the government would be able to tap a (13x.75) trillion source of revenue. This would also promote savings and would reverse the debt culture that has made the US subservient to foreign treasury holders. Turning deficit to surplus should be the first order of business for the US policy makers and paying the ever increasing debt should be its primary goal. More will be posted on this subject in the following days. Please comment and contribute to the conversation. I would be happy to respond to any ideas.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Point of Interest
For a point of reference and indeed a treasure trove of information, please go to and read the information in the following link. It will direct you to the LP main site and their stance on the issues. Additionally, if you have comments, questions or suggestions about included content please email at:
more0196@gmail.com
LP site:
http://www.lp.org/issues
more0196@gmail.com
LP site:
http://www.lp.org/issues
Let the blogging begin
Let the blogging begin.
In a push to increase visibility and generate interest in my own brand of politics, I have decided to begin a blog centered around items and articles of interest and then to synthesis and analyze them through the ideology of libertarianism. As the maiden voyage of this blog, I will keep this short and make a loose promise to update regularly and include thoughtful critique of current events. With that I close this maiden voyage with this passage from Shakespeare.
"Brevity is the soul of wit."
Till next time.
In a push to increase visibility and generate interest in my own brand of politics, I have decided to begin a blog centered around items and articles of interest and then to synthesis and analyze them through the ideology of libertarianism. As the maiden voyage of this blog, I will keep this short and make a loose promise to update regularly and include thoughtful critique of current events. With that I close this maiden voyage with this passage from Shakespeare.
"Brevity is the soul of wit."
Till next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)