As far as I’m aware money is any unit that is accepted as a method of exchange. Just because you can’t redeem it for a set amount of some commodity doesn’t mean that it’s not money.

There are reasons to argue against fiat currency, but claiming that it isn’t money is in my opinion not the best route to take.

Watch the video again, I show that “legally” a “note” is a promise to pay money. A promise to pay money is not money.

I disagree that because the word “note” is written at the top of the currency that it is a promissory note.

Your premise is based on the idea that it is necessarily a promissory note because it says “note” at the top, but clearly there is no contract or promise to give the holder of the fiat currency a payment in some other form.

I think it’s clear that because it is exchanged for goods and services that it is currency/money.

I think there are other better non-semantic arguments to make.

Please spare me that tired “semantics” argument, I hear that enough from tax agents.:^D

The FRN is issued by a bank. I agree there is no contract or promise to pay. However, it is NOT semantics, when a bank issues a note it is not just a name put on there for the way it looks or sounds.

I didn’t say the FRN was a real note though, it’s only meant to appear as if it’s a real mote.

So what would make it money? You can use it as a method of exchange, I don’t understand what else is required for it to be considered money.

Aside from demonstrating that it isn’t a promissory note I don’t understand how it has been shown that it isn’t money, since clearly promissory notes are not equivalent to money.

I think the fact it isn’t what it purports to be and the fact people are forced to use them. Anytime an alternative is brought to the market they are crushed. If the market freely chose to use FRN’s, knowing they are not what they purport to be, then maybe I could accept them as money.

It seems loony to me to accept as money, fake notes, fake notes which are supposed to be a promise to pay money. Oi vey.

Thanks, that clarifies the purpose of the video significantly.

Make our own money!!!!!

I have an old $20 FRN that says “…this note is redeemable in lawful money….”.

Of course, all current $20 FRN’s just say “This note is legal tender….” No more promise to redeem in “lawful” money.

So, what is “lawful” money then? What don’t current FRN’s still say that they are redeemable in “lawful” money?

Good question, the answer is funny, in a sick political way.

FRN’s are “legally” redeemable in “lawful money”, but that only means you can swap an old FRN for a new FRN. I think the statute regarding that is in title 31 USC.