NavigationBanners
Active forum topicsRecent blog postsUser loginWho's new
Who's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 885 guests online.
|
Add new commentChecks and bearer certificates fall out of this, too. A check is just a spend with 0 for the amount and the recipient. The customer signs the check, with value filled in, over to a recipient later. If he signs the same check to two different recipients, the first one to cash it wins, and the other has a verifiable claim against the customer. If his balance won't cover the check when it first comes in, the recipient has a verifiable claim against him. A bearer certificate is a spend with 0 for the recipient. Its value is removed from the customer's account right away, so there's never an account balance shortfall. It has to be signed over to someone before it can be cashed. Or it can be returned to credit the account. A certificate can accumulate a signature chain when passed from hand to hand, if every recipient trusts that nobody in the existing chain will fraudulently cash it. The first person to turn in a bearer certificate signed to him gets the value. If a second person turns one in, the bank can prove who spent it, but it isn't the bank's responsibility to make good the second or subsequent time. If the redeemer has the value, though, the bank can transfer it. If he doesn't, then the bank can ignore the second demand, or put a lien on the redeemer's account. There's room for policy differences here. Note that check and bearer certificate records need to be kept for all time, so banks will likely charge extra for them. Or they could have expiration dates. Reply |
BlogrollLewRockwell.comQuotesEvery man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission. -- L. Neil Smith Reread that pesky first clause of the Second Amendment. It doesn't say what any of us thought it said. What it says is that infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is treason. What else do you call an act that endangers "the security of a free state"? And if it's treason, then it's punishable by death. I suggest due process, speedy trials, and public hangings. -- L. Neil Smith Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents. -- John Lott, commenting on the National Academy of Sciences report (PDF) on gun control laws Zero Aggression Principle ("Zap") "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim." -- L. Neil Smith Formerly called the "Non-Aggression Principle", or "NAP" Why Did It Have to be... Guns? Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put. If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you. If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims. What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him? -- L. Neil Smith "Tell me," I was once asked, "What do you think about gun control? Give me the short answer." To which I replied, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you." -- Mike Vanderboegh The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war. -- Bill St. Clair Monthly ArchivesTTLB |
Recent comments
23 hours 45 min ago
1 day 12 hours ago
1 day 19 hours ago
4 days 13 hours ago
5 days 7 hours ago
5 days 22 hours ago
5 days 23 hours ago
1 week 2 days ago
1 week 3 days ago
1 week 5 days ago