30 thoughts on “Whaddya Mean You Don’t Take Dollars?”

      1. Even $50 silver will probably seem like a pretty good buy before too long.

        1. Don’t forget that ‘tactical metals’ like Montana lead, Arizona copper and brass WILL be substantially more important on a daily basis than silver or gold, as one CAN’T use either in firearms during a “failure of civility”.

          NorthGunner – The Truth Is It’s OWN Defense!

  1. I’m thinking that EBT card might not buy as much in the future. Better get spending on spandex and pork rinds.
    This whole game of cards has been built upon since 1913. It can only get worse. My friend who grew up in LALA land as one of the anointed, went to college on her grandfather’s gold coins. He did not want her to pay any taxes, so he gifted her with $100,000 in gold on her 18th birthday. She cashed them in as needed. The rich have always been different-or maybe more tuned in-then the rest of us.

  2. What do you think the joggers will do when their EBT cards “cahn buy sheeit!”. Think they may take to the streets and roads and boulevards in search of whitey and his sheeeeit? NFAC indeed. I keep thinking of that old Michael Caine movie……..what was that tune? Oh, yes, Men of Harlech, stop your dreaming, can’t you see their spear points gleaming………Welshmen never yield.

    1. How cool would it be to find the NFAC’s ‘costume department’ BEFORE the actors got there….. and re-allocate some of the best costumes for other, uh…. less privileged ‘theater companies’??????

  3. GOP coronavirus bill includes at least $7 billion for weapons programs

    “The GOP Senate’s new $1 trillion coronavirus stimulus bill restores hundreds of millions of dollars in Pentagon spending that the Trump administration redirected to help pay for President Trump’s border wall.”

    “Navy planes and ships and Air Force aircraft that the Trump administration canceled earlier this year so the money could go to pay for the wall have reappeared in the GOP bill that was introduced on Monday. The programs are part of $30 billion in defense spending…..”



    1. Sadly….who does one trust any longer ? It certainly is not the scum one calls “government”.

      1. Trust your heart to prayer, quiet, and looking out for what is best for your family.

        You will know what to do and when to do it when the time is right.

        Turn off the TV, and use the quality time we have left to build memories for your children.

        When they go to bed, let your rage silently build while you dry fire, oil what needs oiling, fill what needs filling and prep what needs prepping.

        1. your goD has failed abysmally and yet you cling to the ruined remains of your indoctrination

          think about it

          so many cucks who believe(d) with all their heart and yet.. this god has allowed your lives to be sucked down the toilette with the non-believers

          of course, you will perform absolute impossible acts of mental gymnastics to cover for it’s inability to actually do anything to solve any problems

          always making excuses for failure reminds me of my former employees…..

  4. https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/3/3-603

    § 3-603. TENDER OF PAYMENT.

    (a) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the effect of tender is governed by principles of law applicable to tender of payment under a simple contract.

    *** (b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused, there is discharge, to the extent of the amount of the tender, of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.

    (c) If tender of payment of an amount due on an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the obligation of the obligor to pay interest after the due date on the amount tendered is discharged. If presentment is required with respect to an instrument and the obligor is able and ready to pay on the due date at every place of payment stated in the instrument, the obligor is deemed to have made tender of payment on the due date to the person entitled to enforce the instrument.

    Pay particular attention to § 3-603 (b)…

    If ANYONE or ANY STORE refuses Legal Tender as Payment – there is discharge.

    That means their refusal PAY’s for what you came to purchase.

    Print that out and carry it with you. When they make a big stink, insist that they call the cops/Sheriff, preferably a Sgt or higher (some brains help) and hand them the law they just violated. If they choose to operate under private law then screw them over with it.

    I do know of 1 person so far that used this at a Walmart – cops said OK have a good day and don’t forget your stuff. Employee’s and Mgr where dumbfounded.

    Be sure to have multiple carts stuffed.

    1. § 3-603 of the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”) pertains to tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument. You can look up the definition of ‘instrument’ under § 3-104. Generally speaking, an ‘instrument’ is a negotiable instrument including a check, cashier’s check, teller’s check, traveller’s check and certificate of deposit. It does not appear that simply receiving an offer of goods (i.e., a bill) at Walmart is itself a negotiable instrument invoking § 3-603 of the UCC. More important, whether one realizes it or not, the whole process of going to the check-out counter is a negotiation in and of itself. All those prices marked on the goods are merely offers for sale; legally, they are only enforceable if accepted the offer, but theoretically you could try to negotiate the final price for each of your goods at check-out. Now, in reality, it simply does not work this way, and everyone simply pays whatever is rung up. Moreover, when the cashier tells you it’s X amount of dollars, this is in effect still an offer; your remitting payment is acceptance of this offer. Not until payment has been rendered does one take actual possession of the goods one brings up the check-out counter. In that regard, I do not believe § 3-603 applies in such situations.

      Now, if you can get some untrained cop to back you up, the more power to you. But you’re just shoplifting.

      See, e.g., https://blogs.findlaw.com/free_enterprise/2019/08/is-it-legal-for-businesses-to-refuse-to-take-cash.html


      1. Your foundlaw.com article asks the federal reserve what its policy would be, mentions how stores shouldn’t discriminate against people without access to alternate methods of payment via the civil rights act, and finishes with city and state governments actively banning cashless stores.

        Oh, but GLOBAL trends, on the other hand (along with the fed/banks) seem to be in support of commerce banning physical currency, so there’s that…

        If I’m that cop, that latte is free…

        1. If I’m that cop, that latte is free…

          Maybe, but it’s also reason #4567 why, despite everyone bitching about them, lawyers exist. UCC § 3-603 is simply not applicable in the described scenario.

        2. BTW, what part of the second article I linked to above, where it explicitly states that “…there is no [Federal] law prohibiting a business from going cashless…” did you not understand?

          1. I didn’t bother with the second article.

            We clearly have different opinions concerning lawyers, lol.

      2. § 3-104. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT.
        Primary tabs

        (a) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), “negotiable instrument” means an unconditional promise or order to pay a fixed amount of money, with or without interest or other charges described in the promise or order, if it:

        (1) is payable to bearer or to order at the time it is issued or first comes into possession of a holder;

        (2) is payable on demand or at a definite time; and

        (3) does not state any other undertaking or instruction by the person promising or ordering payment to do any act in addition to the payment of money, but the promise or order may contain (i) an undertaking or power to give, maintain, or protect collateral to secure payment, (ii) an authorization or power to the holder to confess judgment or realize on or dispose of collateral, or (iii) a waiver of the benefit of any law intended for the advantage or protection of an obligor.

        (b) “Instrument” means a negotiable instrument.

        (c) An order that meets all of the requirements of subsection (a), except paragraph (1), and otherwise falls within the definition of “check” in subsection (f) is a negotiable instrument and a check.

        (d) A promise or order other than a check is not an instrument if, at the time it is issued or first comes into possession of a holder, it contains a conspicuous statement, however expressed, to the effect that the promise or order is not negotiable or is not an instrument governed by this Article.

        ***(e) An instrument is a “note” if it is a promise and is a “draft” if it is an order. If an instrument falls within the definition of both “note” and “draft,” a person entitled to enforce the instrument may treat it as either.

        (f) “Check” means (i) a draft, other than a documentary draft, payable on demand and drawn on a bank or (ii) a cashier’s check or teller’s check. An instrument may be a check even though it is described on its face by another term, such as “money order.”

        (g) “Cashier’s check” means a draft with respect to which the drawer and drawee are the same bank or branches of the same bank.

        (h) “Teller’s check” means a draft drawn by a bank (i) on another bank, or (ii) payable at or through a bank.

        (i) “Traveler’s check” means an instrument that (i) is payable on demand, (ii) is drawn on or payable at or through a bank, (iii) is designated by the term “traveler’s check” or by a substantially similar term, and (iv) requires, as a condition to payment, a countersignature by a person whose specimen signature appears on the instrument.

        (j) “Certificate of deposit” means an instrument containing an acknowledgment by a bank that a sum of money has been received by the bank and a promise by the bank to repay the sum of money. A certificate of deposit is a note of the bank.

        OK – but as the “Dollar” is Federal Reserve Note (a Dept Instrument) and a promise to pay (as you can not pay a debt with a debt), it would qualify under § 3-104 (e)

        1. Go back and re-read § 3-603(a) wherein it states “[i]f tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument….”

          Again, what the check-out lady says you owe on your purchase when everything is added up is not an “instrument” but is in fact an offer for you to pay; if the store does not accept cash, guess what…. that is a conditional offer… the condition being that you pay in whatever fashion they desire. If they do not take cash, and you only offer cash, you’ve in effect rejected their offer! Again, UCC § 3-603 does not apply in that situation.

      3. So refusal to accept FRN’s for payment on a debit card (“instrument”) or similar invokes § 3-603 (b)?

        OR refusing FRN’s for payment of say rent or mortgage, or a bill for food already consumed similar?

        Asking for a friend.

  5. Don’t forget that silver is overleveraged 100 to 1 as reported
    a few years ago by GATA. And that was a few years ago.

Comments are closed.