[CitizensTruth] Interesting Thom Hartmann article on Boston Tea Party

[Geri Perry]

My two cents,

The revolution was also, and primarily, about the ability to create a 
"sovereign" money system and through that mechanism a sovereign nation. 
This is why we find this national money element written into documents 
from Benjamin Franklin's 1754 plan for a Perpetual Confederacy to the 
Articles of Confederation to the Constitution itself. It helps to recall 
that the Constitution was essentially a commercial document.

This issue of taxation goes to the heart of money creation. Most of the 
founding fathers, Jefferson, Madison and Franklin among them, knew that 
taxes would be kept extremely minimal if the nation created debt free 
money, instead of allowing the banks to do so as is now the case.

We can see this in one of Thomas Jefferson's own remarks, "It is 
literally true that the toleration of banks of paper discount costs the 
United States one-half their war taxes; or, in other words, doubles the 
expenses of every war. Now think but for a moment, what a change of 
condition that would be, which should save half our war expenses, 
require but half the taxes, and enthral us in debt but half the time."

How is it so many miss this critical fact? Well, below is a partial 
explanation, excerpted from the first of a series of articles I am 
working on about the "Ron Paul Phenomenon":

<SNIP>The subject of taxation is irrevocably tied to money creation . . .

A good deal of the present-day confusion over how and who is charged 
with the creation of our money seems to stem from the works and writings 
of Alexander Hamilton. What is most important to keep in mind is that 
the early, hard fought money debate centered on whether the Hamiltonian 
model of using “implied powers” to allow a privately owned banking 
system to create our money out of debt was in fact Constitutional.

Author Olive Cushing Dwinnel offers some intriguing insight into 
Hamilton's arguments. After citing relevant quotes from Hamilton, she 
writes: “Pointing out the fraud of these arguments, it was one of the 
principles of the Colonial governments (even in that earliest Convention 
in Albany when the colonies met for protection, and peace with the 
Indians), as well as in the old Continental Congress and the 
Constitutional Convention, to create a uniform currency under Union 
authority, and discontinue the use of state power over issuing currency 
or emitting bills of credit. . .

“The [Hamiltonian] argument that because the States were not permitted 
to continue issuing money after the Federal Government was established, 
as pointing to the same policy for the Federal government, is not based 
in fact or on the Constitution, for the Constitution provides that the 
Congress SHALL have the power to coin money. . ..

“Such arguments of Hamilton show either his complete lack of confidence 
in our Republican form of government, or else a clever trickery and 
sophistry of words to force the use of a foreign and usurious system of 
banking and private control of money issuance on the new government. . 
.Also his statement that government cannot be trusted to use its power 
to issue sufficient currency while private banks and money lenders can 
be so trusted is another proof of his well known monarchial and 
imperialist sympathies and his complete distrust of a people's 
government.” (11)
<END SNIP>

For those needing still more support for the above, you need to read a 
recently published scholarly article on original intent appearing in the 
“Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy” which adds legal as well as 
historical evidence as to what is "Constitutional" money - and 
concludes, in part, that: “According to the original understanding, the 
Constitution's Coinage Clause granted to Congress the express power to 
coin money and bestow legal tender quality upon that money. . . In 
addition, the money thus "coined" did not need to be metallic. Paper or 
any other material that Congress selected would suffice.”

_http://www.umt.edu/law/faculty/natelson/articles/Coinage%20Clause.pdf_

Folks, we are running out of time on this! If we don't get a clue VERY 
soon America will be lost, and we will devolve into a third world 
country. We have, by some estimates maybe a year.

gerip





Mike Kirk wrote:

>

> It was an anti-corporation revolt ( East India Trading Co).

>

> http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/04/15-10

>

> "Although schoolchildren are usually taught that the American 

> Revolution was a rebellion against "taxation without representation," 

> akin to modern day conservative taxpayer revolts, in fact what led to 

> the revolution was rage against a transnational corporation that, by 

> the 1760s, dominated trade from China to India to the Caribbean, and 

> controlled nearly all commerce to and from North America, with 

> subsidies (government bailouts) and special dispensation (tax breaks) 

> from the British crown."

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> _______________________________________________

> CitizensTruth mailing list

> CitizensTruth at six.pairlist.net

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/citizenstruth

> website: http://citizenstruth.info

>