dpwozney

RCM pennies minted from 1997 through 1999 are 98.4% zinc and only 1.6% copper. RCM pennies minted since 2000 are 94% steel, 1.5% nickel and only 4.5% copper.

They did not tell me, at any point, to either leave or to wait for security.

The Forum / Weblog Rules do not state your second quote in brackets, which is irrelevant anyways.

Just to ensure that everyone reading this is aware of some rules, the following quotes are excerpted from Forum / Weblog Rules: “Please respect others using this board and treat them with respect and dignity.” “Do not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people.” “Any messages that we deem unsuitable will be deleted or edited.”

Today, July 22, I was in another financial institution building with a “Government of Canada” cheque payable to me. (Signatures appear on the cheque for the "Receiver General for Canada” and the "Deputy Receiver General for Canada”). The cheque states: “To/À”, and then my name and my street address, and then “Pay/Payez SIXTY AND 50/100 DOLLARS SOIXANTE ET 50/100 DOLLARS”. I asked the customer service representatives: “If I sign and endorse this cheque here, how and with what would you pay me dollars?”. They offered to pay me with Bank of Canada notes and RCM coins. I explained: (1) The Bank of Canada notes do not claim to be dollars. They instead just have the word “DOLLARS” written on them without claiming to be dollars; (2) The RCM coins do not claim to be cents. They instead just have the word “CENTS” written on them without claiming to be cents; (3) The Bank of Canada notes claim to be legal tender. Legal tender is not the same as dollars and cents. Financial transactions, that do not involve any legal tender, are claimed to be conducted in dollars and cents; and, (4) Bank of Canada notes used to be promissory notes. Before 1969, they contained the phrase “WILL PAY TO THE BEARER ON DEMAND” and then some number (“ONE”, “TWO”, “FIVE”, “TEN”, “TWENTY”, “FIFTY”, or “ONE HUNDRED”) and then the word “DOLLAR” or “DOLLARS”. The dollar always used to refer to something real. For example, the dollar in North America used to refer to the Spanish dollar, a coin made mainly of silver. In 1969, the phrase “WILL PAY TO THE BEARER ON DEMAND” was simply omitted on new Bank of Canada notes but the word “DOLLAR” or “DOLLARS” was conveniently left on. I asked the customer service representatives to prove that the Bank of Canada notes are dollars; they could not prove that the Bank of Canada notes were dollars. Our discussion also involved the stated value of the dollar, the actual value of the dollar, the possible non-existence of the Canadian dollar, nickel metal as a monetary standard, the concept of paper bank notes backed by real physical assets, the present and past composition of RCM coins, and associated intrinsic values. Anyways, at the end of our discussion, I left the building holding the “Government of Canada” cheque which I still have in my possession.

Legal tender is not the same as dollars and cents. Financial transactions, that do not involve any legal tender, are claimed to be conducted in dollars and cents.

Bank of Canada notes claim to be legal tender. This Bank of Canada webpage provides the following answer for the question, “What is ‘legal tender’?”: “A ‘tender’ is an offer of payment of a debt. In Canada, legal tender consists of coins issued by the Royal Canadian Mint and bank notes issued by the Bank of Canada.” A lawful offer is not dollars.

The above does not prove to me that Bank of Canada notes are dollars. I do not agree that Bank of Canada notes are dollars. A lawful offer is not dollars. Merely having the word “DOLLARS” printed on a bank note is not proof that the bank note is dollars.

As I previously stated, I am not confused. Additionally, I am not bothered. Can you prove that any Bank of Canada note is dollars?

Whether nickel, gold, silver, or some other metal is used as a monetary standard, the value amount of the money supply could be both: (1) higher than the value amount of the metal (the “standard metal”) used as the standard for the money supply; and, (2) completely backed by real physical assets. (See my previous post in this thread where I already stated this.) Many people are already exploring the world for gold right now. By the way, I do not advocate a gold standard. One disadvantage of gold as a standard is that it is too high-value for small-change circulation coin, unless low-percentage-gold alloys are used. Some people prefer purity, and pure gold is too soft for coins that circulate. Pure nickel is hard enough for circulating coins.

The Bank of Canada note, that has written on it “THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER", has the word “CANADA" written on it. Do you also claim that the note is Canada? The Bank of Canada note has the phrase “BANK OF CANADA” written on it. Do you claim that the note is the Bank of Canada? The word “denomination” is not found on the Bank of Canada note. The term “dollar note” is not found on the Bank of Canada note. The symbol, “$”, is not found on the Bank of Canada note. Can you prove that the Bank of Canada note is dollars?

I am not confused.

Speaking of fixing prices, the price of gold is fixed, twice a day by telephone, by five members of the London Bullion Market Association. Gold prices are fixed in the USD, the GBP (or STG), and the EUR. The price of silver is fixed in CENTS, PENCE, and EUR-CTS, once a day by telephone, by three members of the LBMA.

Financial transactions, that do not involve any legal tender, are said to be conducted in dollars and cents.

All current Bank of Canada notes and RCM coins are referred to as legal tender. Legal tender is not the same as dollars and cents.

One disadvantage of gold as a standard is that it is too high-value for small-change circulation coin, unless low-percentage-gold alloys are used. Some people prefer purity, and pure gold is too soft for coins that circulate. Pure nickel is hard enough for circulating coins. Whether nickel, gold, silver, or some other metal is used as a monetary standard, the value amount of the money supply could be both: (1) higher than the value amount of the metal (the “standard metal”) used as the standard for the money supply; and, (2) completely backed by real physical assets. Such a monetary system would involve paper notes backed by any real physical asset of market-equivalent-value of a specified mass of the standard metal. No type of physical asset, that does the backing, would need to be specified; the requirement would be that the physical assets could be marketed and sold for a specified mass of the standard metal. Any metal, real estate, stock, bond, or other physical item, that could be exchanged for a specified mass of the standard metal, would be sufficient. Whatever physical assets, that are doing the backing, however, may be required to be reported to interested parties. The paper notes would be required to be contractually backed by any physical asset, or combination of physical assets, that could be exchanged any time, or within an indicated reasonable amount of time, for a specified mass of the standard metal. Any such time period should be indicated on the paper notes. In the case of on-demand availability, of the standard metal, any time during business hours, something like “on demand” should be indicated on the paper notes. For the sake of convenience, the physical asset, or combination of physical assets, could be exchanged for a convenient intermediate item, such as bank notes, which would then in turn be exchanged for the specified mass of of the standard metal.

Money should be a store of value. Bank of Canada notes and most RCM coins are not really an instrinsic or legally-backed store of value, creating risk and uncertainty over time. Converting Bank of Canada notes and most RCM coins to an instrinsic store of value, or paper legally backed by a real physical store of value, involves costs, commissions or fees. So does converting back the other way. This unnecessarily increases the cost of saving or storing wealth.

All current Bank of Canada notes and RCM coins do not claim to be dollars or cents. They just instead have the word “DOLLAR”, “DOLLARS”, “CENT” or “CENTS” printed on them. Bank of Canada notes used to be promissory notes. Before 1969, they contained the phrase “WILL PAY TO THE BEARER ON DEMAND” and then some number (“ONE”, “TWO”, “FIVE”, “TEN”, “TWENTY”, “FIFTY”, or “ONE HUNDRED”) and then the word “DOLLAR” or “DOLLARS”. The dollar always used to refer to something real. For example, the dollar in North America used to refer to the Spanish dollar, a coin made mainly of silver. What, then, is one Canadian dollar, physically and quantitatively? Does the Canadian dollar even exist? Without knowing what a Canadian dollar is, or will be in the future, how can one confidently make long-term investments, decisions or commitments based on the stated value of the Canadian dollar?

Today, I was in a financial institution building and I asked to withdraw one hundred dollars from my account. The teller asked me if wanted twenties and I said that whatever is one hundred dollars is fine with me. She gave me five Bank of Canada notes each with the words “TWENTY” and “DOLLARS” written on them. I said: “By the way, you know, these Bank of Canada notes, they don't claim to be dollars. They just have the word ‘DOLLARS’ written on them without claiming to be dollars. Like, if this Bank of Canada note is twenty dollars, then what is one dollar? Is one dollar one-twentieth of this bank note?”. She said “Yeah, like you can't rip it up into pieces.”. I told her that I would let it go today and that I won't make this an issue now. But then I said that next time, I don't know what I'll do.

Do you believe that Canadians should stop buying into the idea that Canadians can afford to continue to lose the lives of Canadians in Afghanistan? According to Wikipedia, “Canada's role in the invasion of Afghanistan, as an active combatant in operations against the Taliban and other insurgents, has produced the largest number of fatal casualties for any single military mission since the 25th Canadian Brigade served in the Korean War. A reported total of 71 members of the Canadian Forces have died in Afghanistan between February 2002 and September 29, 2007.[1]â€.

Does Elizabeth II provide for the security of Afghans but not for the security of Canadians? “What Canadians don't know about basic financial concepts could fill a book and it is harming their financial security, says a report by Canadian Policy Research Networksâ€, according to Julian Beltrame, The Canadian Press. “Canadians are deeper in debt than ever before, according to a new study by the Certified General Accountants Association of Canadaâ€, according to CTV.ca News Staff.

Afghans have much less debt than Canadians, yet Canadians are being asked to pay the cost of providing security for Afghans. Are Canadians going to receive any financial benefits such as debt forgiveness, or are Canadians going to be continued to be burdened with large unpayable debts incurred partially by providing for the security of non-Canadians? Who is providing for the financial security of Canadians?

According to CBC News, “Gov. Gen. Michaëlle Jean delivered the speech from the throne, ...â€. The Governor General of Canada is a “corporation soleâ€, according to Elizabeth II in this document. A “corporation sole†is defined and recognized as being a corporation. It is a fiction that a corporation is a person. “A corporation is a fiction, by definition, ...â€, according to Patrick Healy in a statement found in evidence provided to Parliament's Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in 2002. “A corporation is a ‘fiction’ as it has no separate existence, no physical body and no ‘mind’â€, according to Joanne Klineberg in a presentation to the Canadian Aviation Safety Seminar in 2004. Is your faith such that you believe a corporation is real? Who would be a defender of faith like that?

The Bank of Canada note, with the words “hundred” and “dollars”, was a Christmas gift. Circulating “ELIZABETH II” coins in Canada have intrinsic metal value. A perpetual debt money system is a larger issue. A money system with more debt denominated in “dollars” than money supply denominated in “dollars” is a larger issue. Not knowing what a “Canadian dollar” is physically and quantitatively, and therefore not being able to make an adequate determination of the value of the “Canadian dollar”, are larger issues. There are other larger issues. This is consistent with statements made by Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada from 1934 to 1954: “Each and every time a bank makes a loan (or purchases securities), new bank credit is created — new deposits — brand new money.” “The manufacturing process consists of making a pen-and-ink or typewriter entry on a card in a book. That is all.”

One reason why I am trying to make an adequate determination of the value of the “Canadian dollar” is because nearly all of the businesses and companies located in my local trading area buy and sell goods and services in “Canadian dollar” terms and I am trying to adequately determine fair and appropriate values in “Canadian dollar” terms for some of these various goods and services.