4 ms·

Yes, and the Constitution is very clear that only gold and silver are to be used in payment of debts. But here we are... Edit for the search-deprived: https:/

Yes, and the Constitution is very clear that only gold and silver are to be used in payment of debts. But here we are... Edit for the search-deprived: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_Clause https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_Clause

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
glennpratt 8y ago
Uhh, no, it doesn't. Edit for your edit: still doesn't.
Erem 8y ago
That clause describes the power of the individual states, not the federal government. And unless you've seen Oklahoma trying to pay their debts in OK Bucks I think it holds true today. The federal government is allowed to use whatever means they legislate to pay their debts.
- patrickg_zill 8y ago
  So do those who win state contracts get paid in gold and silver?
  - tptacek 8y ago
    You can literally just Google "gold and silver clause" to see that this is a Wesley Snipesian conspiracy theory. You might just as productively argue about gold-fringed admiralty flags here.
    - patrickg_zill 8y ago
      You are completely uninformed on this. Read up on the form of USA currency called the "Continental".
nickodell 8y ago
I can see how the clause could be read that way, but if you read that clause in the context of the entire document, you'll see that it has a much narrower meaning. For example, the contract clause also has a different part that prohibits states from coining money. In article 1, section 8, the constitution grants Congress the power to coin money. Read together, this means that a state can't issue money unless that money is backed by gold or silver. There are some fairly weird edge cases in this rule. State banks can issue bonds, and those bonds can be privately tradeable, which is quite a lot like issuing money. However, according to the cases that Wikipedia cites, that's perfectly legal. It's interesting how much of the Constitution is about creating an economic alliance, as much as a political or military one. Having federal bankruptcy courts, a postal system, banning tariffs on interstate trades, or a copyright system is really about creating a single common market with closely integrated economies. We don't generally think about those aspects of the Constitution, because we're so used to it. Sources: http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/general/a-brief-history-of-central-banking/money-and-the-constitution.php http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/general/a-brief-history-of-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_Clause#Bills_of_credit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_Clause#Bills_of_credi...

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

glennpratt 8y ago

Uhh, no, it doesn't. Edit for your edit: still doesn't.

Erem 8y ago

That clause describes the power of the individual states, not the federal government. And unless you've seen Oklahoma trying to pay their debts in OK Bucks I think it holds true today. The federal government is allowed to use whatever means they legislate to pay their debts.

patrickg_zill 8y ago
So do those who win state contracts get paid in gold and silver?
- tptacek 8y ago
  You can literally just Google "gold and silver clause" to see that this is a Wesley Snipesian conspiracy theory. You might just as productively argue about gold-fringed admiralty flags here.
  - patrickg_zill 8y ago
    You are completely uninformed on this. Read up on the form of USA currency called the "Continental".

nickodell 8y ago

I can see how the clause could be read that way, but if you read that clause in the context of the entire document, you'll see that it has a much narrower meaning. For example, the contract clause also has a different part that prohibits states from coining money. In article 1, section 8, the constitution grants Congress the power to coin money. Read together, this means that a state can't issue money unless that money is backed by gold or silver. There are some fairly weird edge cases in this rule. State banks can issue bonds, and those bonds can be privately tradeable, which is quite a lot like issuing money. However, according to the cases that Wikipedia cites, that's perfectly legal. It's interesting how much of the Constitution is about creating an economic alliance, as much as a political or military one. Having federal bankruptcy courts, a postal system, banning tariffs on interstate trades, or a copyright system is really about creating a single common market with closely integrated economies. We don't generally think about those aspects of the Constitution, because we're so used to it. Sources: http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/general/a-brief-history-of-central-banking/money-and-the-constitution.php http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/general/a-brief-history-of-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_Clause#Bills_of_credit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_Clause#Bills_of_credi...