As for helping out Uncle Sam, it’s not the government’s money, it's yours. Legal tender is provided by the Federal Reserve as a method of satisfying debts (see above), but unless you use it to pay taxes, the government doesn’t own those notes.

If logitech recalls the mouse you aren't obligated to turn it in, for one thing. Secondly, logitech does not own the mouse, so long as you have purchased it. I woud agree that his analogy was not precise enough, due to the nature of the dollar and the complexity of its use, but much of his analogy between the logitech mouse and the dollar holds true. In both cases, they cannot be taken from the owner without something known as due process [of law]. This is a slightly vague term that comes up in Supreme Court cases a lot, as it is subject to interpretation, but what it means is there must be some reasonable process established by law to take something from a person. The Federal Reserve cannot simply waltz in and take your house, (the reason the IRS might be able to is because they have been established as a lawful institution, and even then they need to go through certain processes before they can take anything), and you could spit on President Obama's feet if he told you that you had to hand him your wallet. A policeman can't walk up to you and take your wallet either (unless perhaps he spotted you committing a felony, I'm not 100% sure about that). You might be curious as to how it is we own these federal reserve notes. When the government purchases something, or enacts fiscal policy to increase the money supply, transactions occur in which we gain ownership of dollar bills. At that point, do what you want with them. Give them away, burn them, spend them, eat them, leave them in a box for eternity, they're yours. (Just don't deface them, as that is a crime related to counterfeiting).

I wonder though, how much more discussion will it take to show you that money is real and valid? Is there anything I could say to you, some point that I could prove, that would in turn prove the larger aspect to you?

I wonder though, how much more discussion will it take to show you that money is real and valid? Is there anything I could say to you, some point that I could prove, that would in turn prove the larger aspect to you?

No, there isn't. Because money and debt !=.

I work/ed at a convenient store and they sent in a minor to buy tobacco. According to what the Police Chief told me and my father, if the minor is asked for ID, THEY MUST PRODUCE IT. Well, I asked her for ID, she never produced it. My stupid ass sold it to her anyways because I have seen 26 year olds come in that look like the minor did, so I was too trusting. Well, the policeman came in and gave me a citation/ticket for selling tobacco to a minor. Which is ILLEGAL ON HIS PART. For the simple fact that I asked for ID and she never produced it. They ENTRAPPED me. They do it all the time, all over the United States.

How can there be 'money' when there is TRILLIONS of DOLLARS of DEBT that our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) doesn't even put a dent into???

I work/ed at a convenient store and they sent in a minor to buy tobacco. According to what the Police Chief told me and my father, if the minor is asked for ID, THEY MUST PRODUCE IT. Well, I asked her for ID, she never produced it. My stupid ass sold it to her anyways because I have seen 26 year olds come in that look like the minor did, so I was too trusting. Well, the policeman came in and gave me a citation/ticket for selling tobacco to a minor. Which is ILLEGAL ON HIS PART. For the simple fact that I asked for ID and she never produced it. They ENTRAPPED me. They do it all the time, all over the United States.

this is a really interesting topic that touches on many areas of our society. the problem is in this world is that the average person has very limited access to information surrounding these issues, directed by the media and other restricted data sources. however, enough research will inform you of many lies and flaws in our systematic society of apparent freedom and justice. just look at the education system for example. people are actually convinced it was created for direct education purposes. the truth is, its the brainwash people. more specifically speaking, to reward the people who dont argue with the system and spit back out on a piece of paper what they were told (which is the people the government wants) and to cast out the people who question the system, because they could get in the way of this slave-like human race as they are the independant thinkers who who see through the lies and unbalance of our society. all those who fall into the category i just talked about, feel free to tell me how stupid and wrong i am in suggesting these things. i find it quite amusing how people, as much as we are like sheep, following the sheep ahead of us, we are also our own shepherds who keep each other in line if we speak out against what we are taught or question the official version

neither there is proof to say its wrong. and yeh i kinda expected reply like that. its why i encourage people to do their research before making an opinion bases on what they think they know about the world. so all of a sudden, because i have access to information that the average person does not, im instantly an out-cast, wrong or like you suggested, a crack-pot. its a shame some people are so narrow-minded and arrogent enough to think they know everything or cant even consider another viewpoint. fairly immature really. then again, im probably a bit older than most of you guys so its understandable.

This topic reminded me that if we change our society, most crimes will be eliminated. Almost every crime and war has to do with money and/or religion. I know the Venus Project is pretty far from happening, but it will do nothing but generally benefit man kind because nothing can please every single person.

Why is it that you feel this system is better than the current monetary system?
Look at some of the things that the Venus Project proposes (and the consequences):
1). No Law.
Perhaps for some, this may be an ideal state, but I at least have always regarded the creation of law (if perhaps not always the enforcement) as one of man's achievements. Law, when reasonable, is the agreement that says "we shall agree to abide by certain rules of conduct so that we all may benefit, and have some standard of equality among us, extended by this agreement." Should there be no Law, murder is as righteous as giving birth, theft the same as charity, corruption and evil are nonexistent, due to the fact there is no standard by which to call them evil. (Omitting here the standard provided by certain religions, but that can be equated to law in its own way). And this is only the conceptual part. With no Law, whose responsibility is it to stop serial murderers who maybe, are just killing for fun?

2). No money
Money itself, is an object. As I have called it many times throughout the length of this topic, a standard of value. Money itself is neutral; not evil; it is rather those who wield it as a weapon or shield against law that are evil. In its purest sense, money is our compensation for the value within us. I work 8 hours a day at some job, and the company hires me at $8/hour, so if I agree to be hired then I value my time and ability to do that job at 8$/hour (or less, in which case I'm getting overpaid, or possibly more, but I settle for 8$/hour through necessity or some other factor). When I get my 64 dollars at the end of my day, that is my employer saying "you have produced 64 dollars worth of useful 'stuff'" (of course they don't actually say it, this is in the purest case).
Should there be no money, what am I to be compensated for my work? Maybe I am a good person and I need no compensation except the admiration of my peers for being a hard/good/smart worker. However, there are many types of people in the world, and the ones that do not follow this trend will fail to produce useful and mutually beneficial 'stuff' Perhaps the Venus Project has an answer to this, which brings me to my next point.

3). Indoctrination and Prescription
If we are indoctrinated with certain beliefs nowadays, as some may argue, it is nothing to what the scale of the Venus Project would have to accomplish to succeed as a society. Without a reward-based-incentive, there must be some other incentive to get people to do the necessary work for the maintenance of the society. How is this accomplished without reward? Well, the next most effective way would be through fear. (If you ask Machiavelli, fear might actually supercede reward). This 'fear' even exists within our own society to some extent, but to a lesser degree. It is the fear that if we do not accomplish useful things, we will be ostracized by our peers. The fear that a person may have to not 'fit in' Perhaps this might not be enough. Many folks might be pressured by this into being good citizens, but many might not also. What is the next degree of incentive? Taking away things. Maybe someone doesn't get their daily machine-delivered shipment of food if they haven't clocked in their hour of work. It is ludicrus to believe work will be eliminated completely in this society, so naturally the society must draw upon its human resources. If those resources are unresponsive, the society will fail.
In this manner, it follows that the society must instill in its citizens some natural tendency to do the required social activities (wrk, or whatever they'll call it to make it sound better). This would be nothing but a Prescription for their life. Let me show the difference between this proposition and our modern one:
Modern Day: "You may do as you please. You will succeed or fail based on your merits, and the consequences of your actions are owned by you."
Venus Project: "We have a society that we must perpetuate. You must do your part in it because it is necessary for the perpetuation of the society."
The current way leaves us a choice, the venus project delivers an ultimatum.



There's just way too much grey area and bad stuff in there for me to answer that question "yes" I much prefer our standards of value and morals.

this is a really interesting topic that touches on many areas of our society. the problem is in this world is that the average person has very limited access to information surrounding these issues, directed by the media and other restricted data sources. however, enough research will inform you of many lies and flaws in our systematic society of apparent freedom and justice. just look at the education system for example. people are actually convinced it was created for direct education purposes. the truth is, its the brainwash people. more specifically speaking, to reward the people who dont argue with the system and spit back out on a piece of paper what they were told (which is the people the government wants) and to cast out the people who question the system, because they could get in the way of this slave-like human race as they are the independant thinkers who who see through the lies and unbalance of our society. all those who fall into the category i just talked about, feel free to tell me how stupid and wrong i am in suggesting these things. i find it quite amusing how people, as much as we are like sheep, following the sheep ahead of us, we are also our own shepherds who keep each other in line if we speak out against what we are taught or question the official version

Kellimus did not have the intent to commit a crime, and would not have done it if the under cover guy didn't break the law and lie about his age.

I work/ed at a convenient store and they sent in a minor to buy tobacco. According to what the Police Chief told me and my father, if the minor is asked for ID, THEY MUST PRODUCE IT. Well, I asked her for ID, she never produced it. My stupid ass sold it to her anyways because I have seen 26 year olds come in that look like the minor did, so I was too trusting. Well, the policeman came in and gave me a citation/ticket for selling tobacco to a minor. Which is ILLEGAL ON HIS PART. For the simple fact that I asked for ID and she never produced it. They ENTRAPPED me. They do it all the time, all over the United States.

CAFG: I'm not quite sure at what point she lied about her age.

As for the 'Money = Debt' thing, I think I can sum it up fairly simply:

Interest.

Federal Reserve: "You need a dollar? Okay, we'll loan you a dollar, but you'll owe us back the dollar and a dime."

Since the Federal Reserve makes all the money, you have the dollar, but the dime doesn't exist, because the Reserve hasn't made it. Therefore, you are now permanently ten cents in the hole; you can't pay back money that you don't have.

This problem is compounded in that every loan (Reserve to government, banks to everyone, etc) comes with interest. It's impossible to pay off every loan due to that fact that more money is owed then exists, due to interest being theoretical money that is owed, rather than real money.

Indeed he touched on that, but it's not that hard to explain.

Let us call the sum total of all money in the U.S. (we could use the world here, but let's keep i to the U.S. just for ease) = X = 10,000,000
Lets say the bank starts with 5,000,000, you start with 0, and everyone else starts with 5,000,000
Now, the bank loans you 1,000,000, so X = You + (bank-1,000,000) + everyone else. Now, you spend that 1,000,000 on something, so "everyone else" gets +1,000,000, and we're still all evens, namely
10,000,000 = 0 + 4,000,000 + 7,000,000
The next step occurs over time. Today, when you were given the million, there is only so many tangible and untangible things of value in the world. Laptops, cars, hours of peoples time (like a psychiatrist or something). Now some of these things expire, which
detracts from the total value of our sum (like the psychiatrists time, once your hour is up that valueable time is gone). However, some things, like a laptop or a car, don't expire. If the net value of all new things (nonexpired - expired) is positive, than our sum X will no longer = 10,000,000. The above equation becomes invalid, and becomes something more like this: 11,000,000 = 0 +4,000,000 + 7,000,000. (Note: these are simply values meant to show whats going on, and not exact.) Now, when it comes time for you to pay back the bank, where are you going to get that money? You have to work, or play the stock market, or hell, someone gives you a 1.1 million dollar gift. Look what happens to our equation.
11,000,000 = 1,100,000 + 4,000,000 + 5,900,000
Then, wheny you finally pay back the bank,
11,000,000 = 0 + 5,100,000 + 5,900,000.

As long as people continue to do their jobs, invent new things, make ipods and cars and steel and houses, there will not be some money that doesn't exist. Even if the sum WAS fixed, like such:
10,000,000 = 0 + 4,000,000 + 6,000,000
You still get the money to pay back the bank from other people.
10,000,000 = 1,100,000 + 4,000,000 + 4,900,000
Then
10,000,000 = 0 + 5,100,000 + 4,900,000

Perhaps we should open a new topic about money, but I will continue to reply here. Certainly your father's signerature on a loan to him means he is in the banks debt to repay that loan, but I wasn't talking about that in my previous post. I was talking about the actual federal reserve note: The Dollar. In the case of your father, that really has little to do with the existence of money, that sounds more like a case of bad accounting, or perhaps corruption, on the banks part. Banks especially should know that sort of thing. In any case, loans and interest are still a value which is standardized by the dollar, and they don't simply create a value out of nothing. The Note for 40,000 dollars has a value, and they sold it to someone else for that value presumably. However, that note says something like so: "this is the contract that the value given to your father by the bank shall be repaid, plus the value of interest as determined by the terms of the contract" Perhaps if you want to be utterly strict and technical, you have a case. The 40,000 dollars does not exist yet, so perhaps there is a value created out of "nothing." However, it is reasonably assumed that the person who owes the value will create that value over time and holder of the note will be repaid; just as reasonable as it is to assume that a man who works a steady job (or is in some other way qualified of the trust of repaying the note), and by steady job, I mean he exchanges the value of his time and effort for the standardized value of money, that that man will create value over time. In such a fashion it is reasonably assumed that the value of the note will be created, despite it not existing currently. This certainly supports the reasonableness and existence of money as a standardized value.

CAFG, in your own citation suggests that it is required to prove that
"the law enforcement officers induced the person to commit the crime."
"Simply affording the defendant the opportunity to commit the crime does not constitute inducement."
Kellimus was simply afforded the opportunity, and from his own story it sounds like even if the person who he carded wasn't a law enforcemet agent, he would have comitted the crime anyway.

CAFG: I'm not quite sure at what point she lied about her age.

lololol, Kellimus fails for the same reason police bike/car traps work. They provide an easy opportunity to commit the crime, but you still commit the crime.