Quantcast

Do You Think States Should Be Allowed to Mint Their Own Currency?

ABC News U.S. 2013/02/07 21:00:00
Related Topics: Currency
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Will Virginia start minting its own currency? It’s an idea worth considering, according to the state’s House of Delegates.

The lower chamber passed a bill Monday to study the possibility. The legislation, proposed by Manassas Republican Del. Robert Marshall, would create a new joint subcommittee made up of lawmakers, plus two outside experts, to “study the feasibility of a metallic-based monetary unit.”

The committee could spend up to $17,440 and would present its recommendations before the legislative session starts in 2014. Translation: Ten people would advise Virginia on whether to start making its own currency on a gold or silver standard.

minting currency

Read More: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/02/virgi...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Transquesta 2013/02/07 21:30:32
    No
    Transquesta
    +36
    Article 1, Section 10, The U.S. Constitution:

    "No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility."

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Kronan_1 Michael S. 2013/02/22 01:28:39
    Kronan_1
    +1
    I keep a few precious metals for that purpose too. I guess I'm more of a country Anarchist in my beliefs. Mostly libertarian I guess. I had better and more efficient medical care before Obama screwed it all up.
  • Michael S. Kronan_1 2013/02/22 01:52:19 (edited)
    Michael S.
    +1
    We're pretty close in our views then, and our differences are probably a matter of emphasis. :)

    Anyway, things are definitely worse under Obama, but in truth our healthcare system was already screwed up, which is what led us to our current crossroads. After all, it's been a long time since insurance was used for catastrophes and ordinary care was paid out of pocket...

    Ever since mandated HMO's in the Nixon era, healthcare costs have been skyrocketing in a manner totally inconsistent with actual demand and quality of care, and it has much to do with the government squeezing a middle-man into almost every transaction. We've gotten to the point where insurance is a near-necessity not only for catastrophic illnesses and injuries (the original intent) but even regular ailments. The political right has totally ignored this ("not our problem"), and instead of focusing on the real problem ("Why are costs so high?"), the political left has chosen to focus on, "Individuals can't afford these obscene medical costs, so how do we force someone else to pay for them?"

    Aside from expensive premiums, the existing system was decent enough for people who could get insurance through their jobs, but the perverse ties between employment and insurance helped create a system where you almost need to ...

    We're pretty close in our views then, and our differences are probably a matter of emphasis. :)

    Anyway, things are definitely worse under Obama, but in truth our healthcare system was already screwed up, which is what led us to our current crossroads. After all, it's been a long time since insurance was used for catastrophes and ordinary care was paid out of pocket...

    Ever since mandated HMO's in the Nixon era, healthcare costs have been skyrocketing in a manner totally inconsistent with actual demand and quality of care, and it has much to do with the government squeezing a middle-man into almost every transaction. We've gotten to the point where insurance is a near-necessity not only for catastrophic illnesses and injuries (the original intent) but even regular ailments. The political right has totally ignored this ("not our problem"), and instead of focusing on the real problem ("Why are costs so high?"), the political left has chosen to focus on, "Individuals can't afford these obscene medical costs, so how do we force someone else to pay for them?"

    Aside from expensive premiums, the existing system was decent enough for people who could get insurance through their jobs, but the perverse ties between employment and insurance helped create a system where you almost need to be employed to be insured...when serious health problems often end and preclude employment. Employers have given insurers such a huge base of customers that they don't need to deal with pesky individuals with preexisting conditions. This is quite peculiar: You'd think that in a free market, literally anyone should be insurable for the right price. Sure, preexisting conditions (known risks) wouldn't be covered, but everything else would...yet things actually work quite differently. To me, the complete inability of some people (called "uninsurable") to obtain health insurance is just another huge indicator of regulatory meddling breaking important parts of the market system.

    Unfortunately, all of this went ignored by complacent conservatives for so long that it led to a reactionary push toward greater corporatism (Obamacare) as a stepping stone to single-payer socialism. Now that a 1000-page healthcare law has been passed, we're in some pretty big trouble: Obamacare expands upon the problems that made healthcare so expensive in the first place, so we'd have to repeal it before we could fix the real problems in earnest...and yet the old system was in such disrepair that convincing enough people to repeal it is a terrible uphill battle. Ultimately, I expect the currency to collapse first, which brings us back to the topic of this thread. ;)
    (more)
  • Kronan_1 Michael S. 2013/02/22 03:33:22
    Kronan_1
    Insurance premiums have always been prohibitive here in Ky, We have also tried a version of healthcare like this Obamacare and it failed miserably. Our state economy is still reeling after 15 years. On a grander scale as Obie wants now ,I'm not sure we can ever recover if we don't stop it now. God help us all. People who pay insurance premiums should have unrestrained access to any medical care they need. People who don't have insurance now get that. It seems the ones who do play by the rules ,get less then those who pay nothing. The system is screwed. Everyone should be treated the same regardless of their finacial sitrep. Medical care should not be rationed. Too many charitable organizetions , not gov controlled, for anyone to be denied. I want to go back to the way things were done around the time of Daniel Boone. Extreme for us I know. Just my preference.
  • pantagruella 2013/02/08 03:57:29
    Yes
    pantagruella
    +2
    Absolutely. They are independent states with their own governments. Stamps too.
  • sneekyfoot 2013/02/08 03:37:29
    Yes
    sneekyfoot
    when bears can perform sex change operations
  • Booッ 2013/02/08 02:48:26
    No
    Booッ
    +1
    It'd take the economic crisis to a whole new level.
  • Kronan_1 Booッ 2013/02/08 17:13:06
    Kronan_1
    +2
    YOu're right. It would put it in check and reverse it at an exponitial rate.
  • Loverofcountry 2013/02/08 02:29:08
    No
    Loverofcountry
    No. For one thing, currency, the kind you carry in you billfold or pocket, is becoming obsolete. For another, it would create one big headache in exchange rates.
  • Kronan_1 Loverof... 2013/02/08 17:18:38
    Kronan_1
    +1
    No more so then going to Canada. 90% of citizens either never leave their home states or seldom do. If yo travel you already know what to expect. What would be different? As a part of the reciprocity pacts the states would have regarding thier own script the exchange rate would be nill. Every note would be accepted at face value and the states would guarantee the bill. Consider the collapse in the EU. Each country adopted the Euro and left their own currensy behind. When one country collapsed they all fell. When each country used it's own currency ,this could not have happened.
  • shenendoah 2013/02/08 02:25:10 (edited)
    No
    shenendoah
    +1
    Boy, couldn't those liberal states go shopping.
  • CocaColaCandy 2013/02/08 02:18:42
    No
    CocaColaCandy
    +1
    It worked so well under the Articles of Confederation.
  • Popeye CocaCol... 2013/02/08 23:19:06
  • CocaCol... Popeye 2013/02/08 23:38:16
    CocaColaCandy
    And that makes it less confusing and chaotic how? In a purely practical sense, if there are two forms of legal tender will the citizen/resident have their choice of which they receive from any source? What happens when an employee paid in VA currency travels out of state, deposits in an FDIC insured bank, pays an interstate bill or wants to make a purchase from a merchant who only accepts the dollar? Banks charge fees to exchange currency, and there is also usually a minimum amount they will exchange. How will Federal taxes work? The tax code won't be rewritten in both dollars and state equivalents. With both in circulation and presumably some establishments refusing one or the other currency, what will be the effect on commerce both within and between states? It didn't work in the 18th century, it's even less likely to make sense in a far more complicated and mobile 21st century world.
  • Popeye CocaCol... 2013/02/09 00:33:50
  • CocaCol... Popeye 2013/02/09 01:19:42
    CocaColaCandy
    Which doesn't answer the question of how state level currency would function in an interstate and national economy, how much extra it would cost both business and the user and what choice workers and consumers would have in utilizing the currency of their choice. Unless of course it's just a symbolic gesture of contempt for the dollar and will never be made or circulated? But then, what's the point in wasting time and money on it? What's in it for them?
  • Chitta Brick 2013/02/08 01:08:05
    No
    Chitta Brick
    +1
    I could care less, but I thought there was a federal law saying states couldn't.
  • illinoyed Chitta ... 2013/02/08 02:48:12 (edited)
    illinoyed
    +1
    There is. This is just more show legislation by states like Virginia. Wasting the state taxpayers money passing bills that will never be enacted.
  • Chitta ... illinoyed 2013/02/08 02:51:10
    Chitta Brick
    "Wasting the taxpayers money." kind of a silly reply considering how much the federal government screws off... So I take it your OK with that though.
  • illinoyed Chitta ... 2013/02/08 03:00:49
    illinoyed
    +1
    If Virginia residents want to pay their legislature to waste their time passing bills that are blatantly unconstitutional and will never go anywhere, just to make themselves feel powerful, that's their business. I guess a false sense of power is better than none.
  • Popeye Chitta ... 2013/02/08 23:21:09
  • Chitta ... Popeye 2013/02/09 01:25:46
    Chitta Brick
    +1
    ah, thanks for the clarification. I think that is a smart idea. Can't remember for sure, but while back I seen something about Montana wanting to do the same except have it backed by gold.

    With the Obama debt of 16 trillion and soon to be 20, it's not a question of "if" but of "when" the dollar goes toes up. I think more states need to get on this bandwagon.
  • Kronan_1 Chitta ... 2013/02/08 17:19:12
    Kronan_1
    +2
    Nothing in the constitution about federal script.
  • Chitta ... Kronan_1 2013/02/09 01:27:05
    Chitta Brick
    don't remember where it is, but something sticks out in my mind that you can't have your own currency.
  • Kronan_1 Chitta ... 2013/02/09 01:54:17
    Kronan_1
    +1
    Yep, I was mistaken . Here it is to prove me wrong. Bet you thought would never see someone admit they were wrong and give you the right information.

    Article 1, Section 10, The U.S. Constitution:

    "No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility."
  • Chitta ... Kronan_1 2013/02/09 02:03:48
    Chitta Brick
    +1
    you sir are an honorable and honest individual. No sin in being wrong
  • Sterling 2013/02/08 00:58:44
    Yes
    Sterling
    +3
    Everyone should be allowed to print their own currency. Just because you can print a currency doesn't mean you will, nor does it mean anyone else has to recognize it. I personally would never replace the dollar with a different currency unless it was backed by silver or gold. The fact that independent parties can't mint their own currencies is pretty ridiculous.
  • Kronan_1 Sterling 2013/02/08 17:20:23 (edited)
    Kronan_1
    +1
    Gold and silver prices are too volatile right now and gold is destined for a fall.
    sil
    you can see from the chart how silver fell sharply from an artificial high in '87. http://store.cpmgroup.com/ Gold also is way over valued and is directly tied to the lack of production. If gold is suddenly flooded into the market then all people who are buying gold now will be bust.
  • Wulfdane 2013/02/08 00:53:59 (edited)
    No
    Wulfdane
    +2
    Having 50 different currencies, each with a different value, would be insane.

    It is bad enough the federal government is out of control printing money, the last thing we need is all 50 States printing money like maniacs.

    Only a Liberal would come up with something so asinine, print your way into a welfare state.

    Fortunately it would be unconstitutional, States can only use gold and silver as their own currency.
  • illinoyed Wulfdane 2013/02/08 02:45:46
    illinoyed
    +1
    In this case, it's not a liberal, it's Republicans. Virginia currently has a bill passing through it's state legislature.
  • Popeye illinoyed 2013/02/08 23:18:24
  • illinoyed Popeye 2013/02/10 02:26:10 (edited)
    illinoyed
    Okay. Got it.
  • Popeye Wulfdane 2013/02/08 23:18:14
  • questionsparks 2013/02/08 00:47:16
    No
    questionsparks
    +1
    That means every time anyone wants to make a business transaction across state lines it has to be way more complicated than it is now.

    If we're going to do that we might as well all be individual nations. Sometimes I don't think that's such a bad idea.There are some states I'd rather not be associated with. But as long as we're sticking to this United States thing, we're keeping a federal currency.
  • illinoyed questio... 2013/02/08 02:47:06
    illinoyed
    +1
    If the U.S. became individual nations, we'd cease being the United States. The Founder's grand experiment will have failed. And China will become the world leader.
  • questio... illinoyed 2013/02/08 03:25:42 (edited)
    questionsparks
    Maybe Chinese provinces should become individual states too. Maybe we don't need a world leader.
  • illinoyed questio... 2013/02/08 03:48:05
    illinoyed
    +2
    Try telling China that. If we don't do it, they will.
  • Michael S. illinoyed 2013/02/08 10:29:45
    Michael S.
    Try telling the Founders that. ;)
  • illinoyed Michael S. 2013/02/08 14:38:50
    illinoyed
    I don't see dead people.
  • questio... illinoyed 2013/02/08 13:20:11
    questionsparks
    Try telling that to the kid who's digging to China.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    ...just in time.
  • joe mauro questio... 2013/02/08 23:01:44
    joe mauro
    they already are individual SLAVE states

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/11/24 19:25:23

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals