Utah Passes Bill To Expand Raw Milk Sales: Step To Nullify Federal Prohibition Scheme

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (Feb 15, 2018) – Yesterday, a Utah Senate committee passed a bill would expand raw milk sales in the state. Passage into law would take an important step toward rejecting a federal prohibition scheme in effect.

Sen. David Hinkins (R-27) and Rep. Marc Roberts (R-67) introduced Senate Bill 108 (SB108) January 23. The legislation would expand existing laws relating to raw milk sales from producer to consumer in the state. Under the proposed law, a milk producer would be able to sell up to 120 gallons of raw milk per month to consumers without meeting stricter requirements under the current law and permitting program, providing certain conditions are met.

Under the proposed law, the raw milk could only be sold directly to the consumer on the premises where the milk is produced for household use, not resale. SB108 also includes handling, sanitation and record-keeping requirements for unlicensed producers of raw milk. The milk bottle would have to include the warning “This raw milk has not been licensed or inspected by the state of Utah. Raw milk, no matter how carefully produced, may be unsafe.”

 

The proposed law would also allow licensed producers to sell raw milk from a mobile refrigerated truck where the raw milk is maintained at 41 degrees Fahrenheit or a lower temperature.

The Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee approved an amended version of SB108 by a 6-0 vote. The amendment stripped a provision from the bill that would have allowed licensed producers to sell raw milk at farmers’ markets.

Under the current law, raw milk sales are only allowed on the farm, or from a retail store owned by the producer under strict licensing guidelines. Passage of SB108 would relax requirements for small producers, and expand legal sales. This would allow the raw milk market in Utah to grow.

According to nofamass.org, “With a growing demand for raw milk and a decreasing number of raw milk dairies, many consumers are unable to purchase this product.”

Impact on Federal Prohibition

FDA officials insist that unpasteurized milk poses a health risk because of its susceptibility to contamination from cow manure, a source of E. coli.

“It is the FDA’s position that raw milk should never be consumed,” agency spokeswoman Tamara N. Ward said in November 2011.

The FDA’s position represents more than a matter of opinion. In 1987, the feds implemented 21 CFR 1240.61(a), providing that, “no person shall cause to be delivered into interstate commerce or shall sell, otherwise distribute, or hold for sale or other distribution after shipment in interstate commerce any milk or milk product in final package form for direct human consumption unless the product has been pasteurized.”

Not only do the feds ban the transportation of raw milk across state lines, they also claim the authority to ban unpasteurized milk within the borders of a state.

Saint Pascual Making Bread

“It is within HHS’s authority…to institute an intrastate ban [on unpasteurized milk] as well,” FDA officials wrote in response to a Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund lawsuit against the agency over the interstate ban.

The FDA clearly wants complete prohibition of raw milk and some insiders say it’s only a matter of time before the feds try to institute an absolute ban. Armed raids by FDA agents on companies like Rawsome Foods back in 2011 and Amish farms over the last few years also indicate this scenario may not be too far off.

Legislation like SB108 takes a step toward nullifying this federal prohibition scheme.

As we’ve seen with marijuana and industrial hemp, an intrastate ban becomes ineffective when states ignore it and pass laws encouraging the prohibited activity anyway. The federal government lacks the enforcement power necessary to maintain its ban, and people will willingly take on the small risk of federal sanctions if they know the state will not interfere. This increases when the state actively encourages the market and nullifies federal prohibition in effect.

We’ve seen this demonstrated dramatically in states that have legalized industrial hemp. When they authorized production, farmers began growing industrial hemp, even in the face of a federal ban. Despite facing the possibility of federal prosecution, some growers were still willing to step into the void and begin cultivating the plant once the state removed its barriers.

In the same way, removing state barriers to raw milk consumption, sale and production would undoubtedly spur the creation of new markets for unpasteurized dairy products, no matter what the feds claim the power to do.

It could ultimately nullify the interstate ban as well. If all 50 states allow raw milk, markets within the states could easily grow to the point that local sales would render the federal ban on interstate commerce pointless. And history indicates the feds do not have the resources to stop people from transporting raw milk across state lines – especially if multiple states start legalizing it. Growing markets will quickly overwhelm any federal enforcement attempts.

WHAT’S NEXT

SB108 will now move to the Senate floor for a vote. If you live in Utah, contact your senator and ask her/him to vote “yes” on SB108. You can find contact informaiton for your senator HERE.

Tenth Amendment Center

Related News

Source Article from https://politicalvelcraft.org/2018/02/16/utah-passes-bill-to-expand-raw-milk-sales-step-to-nullify-federal-prohibition-scheme/

Medical marijuana is causing a dip in alcohol sales: Researchers confirm a correlation


Image: Medical marijuana is causing a dip in alcohol sales: Researchers confirm a correlation

(Natural News)
Have you ever wondered what legalizing medical marijuana in your state could do to alcohol sales? A group of researchers used that question as the basis of a new study that they conducted, and now they have an actual answer. According to the group of researchers, which hailed from two U.S. colleges and one Peruvian university, there was a noticeable decrease in the sales of alcohol in states where medical marijuana was legal. And what’s more, this appeared to be true, no matter what the state they examined.

The researchers gathered the data they needed for their study by analyzing publicly available data on 90 different alcohol chain stores from the year 2006 to 2015, according to one report. Then they took their data and contrasted the changing trends with the information from the medical marijuana laws of individual states. In the end, they found that there were “significant reductions” in alcohol sales in all states where medical marijuana had been legalized.

According to the authors, a possible reason for this is that the medical marijuana is being used as a clear substitute for alcohol, mainly since it’s able to offer similar effects to its users. It’s not clear whether or not any legislators were aware that legalizing medical marijuana would have this kind of effect, but the data shows that indeed it does.

The researchers note in the text of their study that they have some remarkable data to back up their conclusions. “Remarkably,” they said, “our findings are quite robust to a broad array of tests.”

Legal medical marijuana was found to be particularly damaging to wine sales in particular, which suffered as much as a 16.2 percent reduction in sales. This was markedly worse than the sales dip for beer, which dropped 13.8 percent in sales.

In counties that are located on borders between two states, the researchers found that alcohol sales dropped a staggering 20 percent. And it didn’t matter much whether it was wine or beer — both of them were affected negatively in much the same way.

Based on the data they’ve gathered and the results that they’ve found, the researchers concluded that the corresponding drop in sales in states where medical marijuana is legal is a net positive. After all, it could “help focus on the positive first order impacts of pursuing cannabis legalization,” where they are likely referring to alcohol-related injuries or deaths.

In one earlier study, another group of researchers has also shown that legal medical marijuana can also cause a decreased reliance on addictive prescription medications. That is, patients increasingly turned to legal medical marijuana instead of prescription drugs that they otherwise need to take.

Medical marijuana is known to be quite effective in treating chronic pain in patients. And compared to other alternatives — such as prescription drugs and even alcohol — it can deliver much better results. This new information that links it to a reduction in alcohol sales only adds more credence to the idea that medical marijuana should be legal in as many states as possible.

Learn more about the positive effects of medical marijuana in CannabisCures.news.

Sources include:

DailyMail.co.uk

Docs.Google.com[PDF]

<!–

–>

Source Article from http://www.naturalnews.com/2018-02-13-medical-marijuana-is-causing-a-dip-in-alcohol-sales.html

As Tamiflu Hits Record Sales, It’s Making Kids Hallucinate and Turn Deadly Violent

tamiflutamiflu

The 2017-2018 flu season is turning out to be one of the worst outbreaks in recent history. Already this year, the flu has claimed the lives of dozens of children and hospitalized countless others. In the midst of the turmoil and sickness, however, the medication to treat the flu—Tamiflu—is also reportedly claiming lives.

As this is one of the worst outbreaks, the makers of Tamiflu are seeing record sales. However, this is not good for the children whose parents are coming forward to expose the horrendous side effects caused by the medicine which—in some instances—have proven to be far worse than getting the flu.

Oseltamivir, the antiviral medication marketed as Tamiflu, is used to treat flu symptoms caused by influenza virus in patients who have had symptoms for less than 2 days. While there are plenty of common side-effects ranging from hives to difficulty breathing, some of the less common side effects have parents crying foul.

Some people using Tamiflu have had rare side effects of sudden confusion, delirium, hallucinations, unusual behavior, or self-injury. Adding to the ominous nature of these side-effects is the fact that these symptoms have occurred most often in children.

Last month, 16-year-old Charlie Harp was given Tamiflu, the entirely normal boy then took his own life hours later.

“Had I known this was an issue, I would’ve never given it to him,” remarked Jackie Ray, Harp’s aunt and guardian.

The parents of a six-year-old little girl gave their daughter Tamiflu and she began hallucinating, ran away, and then tried to kill herself by jumping out of a window.

“She was about to jump out the window when my wife came up and grabbed her,” recalled the girl’s father, who wanted to stay anonymous.

As KRBK reports, the Wallens say their 2-year-old son, Steven, was twitching, hallucinating, and slamming his head in pain after taking the medicine after being diagnosed with the flu.

“When I walked in the room I was greeted with him slapping me across the face, and then continually smacking his head into the pillow saying ‘ouch, ouch, ouch,’” says Andrea Wallen, Steven’s mother.

When they stopped giving him Tamiflu, the erratic behavior stopped.

“Tamiflu, like any medication, has potential side effects,” Dr. Amy Edwards, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at University Hospitals Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital explained to News 5 Cleveland.

Among them: “neuropsychiatric” side effects.

Because there are so many people now taking Tamiflu, the side-effects are skyrocketing. “We are seeing the side effects more this year than we’ve seen it in previous years, but that’s just because the total number of kids taking the medication has gone up, not because there’s something wrong with the medicine itself,” cautioned Dr. Edwards.

However, while these dangerous side effects are rare, they are experienced by one to two percent of children. A one in fifty shot that your child may try to take their own life is a pretty big deal. Parents are now faced with the choice to medicate their kids to fight the flu virus or let them ride it out.

Doctors are urging parents to consider their options when their child has the flu, only recommending that high-risk children get the medicine and if they do take it, watch them closely.

“For the parents who are insisting that their kid get Tamiflu because of how scared they are about the pediatric deaths we’ve had, if your kid is not high risk, then you do need to think about the fact that this drug does come with side effects, and so we do not give it to every person that has influenza routinely,” Dr. Edwards explained.

If your child has taken Tamiflu, experts are saying to take them to the hospital immediately if they experience any change in behavior.

Source Article from http://thefreethoughtproject.com/tamiflu-hits-record-sales-side-effects-kids-violent-suicidal/

H&M is closing stores as sales shrink

Could it be that fewer people are comfortable buying cheap, disposable clothing made in horrific conditions?

H&M is struggling. The Swedish fast fashion retailer saw sales drop 4 percent in the last quarter of 2017 and 14 percent across the entire fiscal year. As a result, H&M plans to shutter 170 stores and open 390 new ones, meaning it will add a net 220 stores this year — significantly less than last year’s 388 new stores.

The slowdown is attributed in part to fewer customers visiting brick-and-mortar locations. Online shopping is on the rise, and H&M has not been as effective as other fast fashion retailers at capturing online sales.

Retail Touchpoints reported that H&M’s “online presence has floundered compared to that of its major competitors,” and that its number of website visits grew only 22 percent from March 2014 to March 2017, compared to its rival Zara’s increase of 71 percent and Uniqlo’s 470 percent. However, it’s worth noting that even Zara’s sales slowed in late 2017, but regained pace by November.

H&M’s CEO Karl-Johan Persson said the results were “clearly below our expectations”:

“Our online sales and our newer brands performed well but the weakness was in H&M’s physical stores where the changes in customer behaviour are being felt most strongly and footfall has reduced with more sales online. In addition, some imbalances in certain aspects of the H&M brand’s assortment and composition also contributed to this weaker result.”

This could be a reference to H&M’s supply chain being less flexible than that of its main rival Zara. As Business Insider explained, Zara manufactures its clothes in-house, which means it has a much shorter lead time than other apparel brands. Meanwhile, Fortune reported that H&M has had inventories pile up over the past two years.

While H&M is scrambling to figure out its next steps and reassure investors, some of us are wondering if this indicates a global shift in people’s attitudes toward fashion. Could it be that fewer people want to waste their money on clothing that’s made to be essentially disposable? Or perhaps events such as the tragic Rana Plaza factory collapse in Dhaka, Bangladesh, in 2013 alerted shoppers to the atrocious conditions in which most garment workers work and have led them to question their role in supporting the fast fashion industry.

From growing interest in minimalism and frugality, to higher-quality capsule wardrobes and concern over carbon footprints, Persson is absolutely right when he says “the fashion industry is changing fast.” It just might not be changing in the direction he’d like to see.

Source Article from https://www.treehugger.com/economics/hm-closing-stores-sales-shrink.html

Amazon Q4 sales soar 38% to $60.5B

Dive Brief:

  • Amazon.com on Thursday said fourth quarter net sales rose 38% to $60.5 billion, up from $43.7 billion in the year-ago quarter — or 36% excluding a $1.1 billion favorable impact of foreign exchange rates in the period. Operating income rose 69% to $2.1 billion, up from $1.3 billion in the year-ago period, according to a company press release.

  • Net income in the quarter was $1.86 billion, or $3.75 per diluted share, up from $749 million, or $1.54 per diluted share in year-ago period, the company said. The results handily bested the Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S forecast for profit of $1.85 per share on revenue of $59.83 billion cited by Reuters

  • For the full year, net sales rose 31% to $177.9 billion, up from with $136 billion in 2016 while operating income fell 2% to $4.1 billion, from $4.2 billion in 2016. Net income was $3 billion, or $6.15 per diluted share, up from net income of $2.4 billion, or $4.90 per diluted share last year. The report factors in a provisional benefit of some $789 million, thanks to tax reform passed in December.

Dive Insight:

Amazon sends out a litany of accomplishments with its earnings reports, but in his statement Thursday CEO Jeff Bezos was all about Alexa. The company set optimistic projections for the virtual assistant last year,  and they were exceeded, he said. “We don’t see positive surprises of this magnitude very often — expect us to double down.” 

Bezos said the technology has “reached an important point where other companies and developers are accelerating adoption.” There are now more than 30,000 skills from outside developers, customers can control more than 4,000 smart home devices from 1,200 unique brands with Alexa and the company is seeing strong response to its new far-field voice kit for manufacturers. Amazon didn’t, however, say exactly how many devices it had sold, except to note that the Fire TV Stick and Echo Dot were the best-selling products of the year and that Amazon customers purchased “tens of millions” of Echo devices in 2017.

The e-commerce giant had a very good holiday quarter, and not just because online sales online grew 20% to $ 35.4 billion. But also because fulfillment operations were more efficient, thanks to favorable weather and warehouses running at high capacity, CFO Brian Olsavsky said in a conference call with analysts.

Shipping costs in particular are problematic and grew 31% year over year, while in other quarters they outpaced sales.

All told in 2017, more than 5 billion items shipped with Prime worldwide and more new paid members joined Prime in 2017 than any previous year — both worldwide and in the U.S., the company said. “Given this is above the trajectory of recent growth, it is safe to say that Amazon shows no signs of slowing down. Excluding the impact of Whole Foods, product sales grew by 20.2% overall,” GlobalData Retail Managing Director Neil Saunders told Retail Dive in an email.

While the company is gaining market share in several categories, Saunders believes that Amazon’s primary growth opportunities now lie in services. “Prime and subscription revenue for example, increased by 46% over the prior year,” he said. “This is an impressive uplift and demonstrates Amazon is pulling more and more consumers into its ecosystem of content and services. Allied with the increase in Prime membership is the hike in sales of Echo devices.”

These were popular gifts at the holidays and Amazon has a clear edge over other smart device manufacturers, according to GlobalData Retail’s research. “This, and the fact that Prime offers far more benefits and services than rivals means Amazon should be able to withstand increasing competition from Apple, Google and others as they launch and upgrade their smart speakers and connected home products,” Saunders said. 

It’s not just the device sales that are important to Amazon, but also the opportunity the company has to bring Alexa into more homes, said Keith Anderson​, Profitero vice president of strategy and insights.

“Given the aggressive discounting that they did on Alexa devices, just selling the device itself is not enough to get them excited,” he told Retail Dive in an interview. “There’s mounting evidence that Alexa households that are Prime members tend to spend more.”

Alexa has potential beyond retail sales too, considering that advertising could bring another revenue stream, something the retailer is considering. Anderson also expects Amazon to continue advancing Alexa’s technology with capabilities like voice-to-screen that could boost search and make it that much easier to enlist Alexa when shopping for apparel, which both Saunders and Anderson said are a rapidly growing market for the e-commerce giant.

Amazon’s international sales, which seemed to be a focus in recent years, were $18.04 billion in the quarter, overshadowed by its North America operations, which rose 42.2% to $37.3 billion. Amazon’s approach of introducing services in new markets — first its marketplace and then options like “Subscribe and Save” — will continue to allow for steady growth abroad, but not at the clip many previously expected.

“There was a time when everybody thought Amazon was going to be the borderless behemoth and they would dominate the globe, but North America represents a slightly larger piece of the overall pie,” Anderson said.

AWS continues to provide the company a comfortable revenue stream, although it may be facing increased competition from Google and Microsoft.

“What I’ve always noted about Amazon, is the most interesting stuff is what they’re not talking about,” Anderson said, adding that the company didn’t say much about Whole Foods, which was acquired last year, or its growing B2B business. Ultimately though, few should be surprised by yet another quarter of impressive growth from Amazon, according to Anderson. “One of the biggest misunderstandings that people have about Amazon is thinking that growth will slow now that they’re so big,” he said. “They can maintain the pace of growth even at their scale.”

But that brings some risks, Saunders warned. “Amazon is now rapidly moving to a company that supports consumers across multiple aspects of their lives,” he said. And while that’s an opportunity, it also comes with two dangers — the increased risk of regulatory intervention and a backlash from consumers concerned about its power. “Neither of these is at the tipping point, but with each innovation and each spurt of growth, Amazon moves closer to these potential problems,” he said.

Source Article from https://www.retaildive.com/news/amazon-q4-sales-soar-38-to-605b/516169/

Thirty-Six States Have Nullified Sales Taxes From Silver & Gold: Alabama & Tennessee Preparing To Nullify Taxes In 2018

In 2017, Arizona, Louisiana, Virginia, Texas, and North Carolina, and even Minnesota made progress on the sound money front. In 2018, other states could do so as well.

Thirty-six states have already removed sales taxes from precious metals transactions, and bills being introduced this year by sound money advocates in Alabama and Tennessee could add to that list.

Both Utah and Oklahoma have already passed legal tender laws recognizing gold and silver as money. The monetary metals can be used freely as a means of payment.

Meanwhile, a new Wyoming bill next month would repeal both sales and income taxes on bullion while affirming gold and silver as legal tender and strengthening gold clause contracts.

Other states, including Arizona and Idaho, have moved forward on legislation to exempt gold and silver bullion from capital gains taxes.

Last year, a bill to eliminate capital gains taxes on precious metals passed the Idaho House. Money Metals Exchange President Stefan Gleason testified before the House Committee on Revenue and Taxation, and here is some of what he had to say

Stefan Gleason: Our mission is to educate people also about precious metals and help them diversify into this reliable and more stable form of money, really truly a Constitutional money with tremendous history going back to the founding of our country. Gold and silver have been chosen for thousands of years as money because of their qualities as financial insurance, as a store of value, and its practicality as a medium of exchange. The bill I want to talk about today is a straightforward bill. Basically, we don’t want to tax money in Idaho. Idaho already does not tax precious metals with its sales tax, and we’re asking for it to be removed from the calculation of income tax in Idaho.

The Founders of our nation dealt with the collapse of the un-backed continental dollar, and that was fresh in their minds when they created our monetary system and established gold and silver as our nation’s money. In fact, the dollar was defined as a fixed amount of silver, and even in the Constitution the Founders restricted states from making payment in anything other than gold and silver coins for payment of debt. For the first hundred years, our nation’s money gold and silver coinage maintained its purchasing power pretty much consistently, except for a small period of time during the Civil War when we went off the gold standard.

But then about 100 years ago the Federal Reserve was created, and since that time we’ve seen a dramatic decline in the purchasing power of what is now considered the dollar but really is called the Federal Reserve Note. Of course, the last link to gold was severed officially in 1971, and that has led to an acceleration of this devaluation in purchasing power and an explosion in federal government debt during that same period of time.

The people that are most harmed by inflation are wage earners and savers. When the dollar goes down in purchasing power, they lose. Fortunately, an increasing number of citizens are recognizing that owning gold and silver as an alternative form of savings is a good way of protecting some of their wealth, protecting some of their purchasing power, and standing against this ongoing devaluation. It’s also something that helps in periods of financial turmoil, which seem to be increasing under our current system. Gold and silver are a safe haven.

Under current law, however, when a taxpayer sells their precious metals, they may end up with a capital gain because it’s measured against the Federal Reserve Notes that they sell it for. Now it may not be a real gain. In most cases, it’s not a real gain. It’s a nominal gain. It’s an illusory gain. Yet it’s still something that triggers taxation at the federal level, and a taxpayer has to include that in their taxable income if they sold gold and silver bullion or coins.

It’s even taxed at a discriminatorily high 28% rate for long-term capital gains… It’s 15 and 20 for other types of assets. Then Idaho in the calculation of Idaho taxable income essentially carries forward that income number, and then there’s some adjustments that are made on various things according to Idaho statutes to arrive at the Idaho taxable income.

This legislation simply would back out the federal income or loss that somebody reports on precious metals out of their Idaho taxable income. This is something that Idaho can do. Obviously, we can’t mess with federal tax laws, but Idaho decides what it’s taxing as income, and we propose with this legislation that precious metals be removed, because it’s money.

Also weighing in on behalf of Idaho’s bill to free precious metals from state taxation was an executive of a freedom-minded group in the Gem State.

Fred Birnbaum: My name is Fred Birnbaum, with the Idaho Freedom Foundation and I’m here to speak in support of this bill. I’ll be very brief. I think Mr. Gleason covered just about everything. But I’ll make a parallel point. Recently, actually this week, there was a lot of debate about a constitutional amendment, article five convention. I’m not going to re-open that debate. But I think it’s relevant, to some extent, to this bill. I certainly don’t want to overplay that point. What came up and one of the central issues was the unbalanced federal budget, if you will.

And the fact that we’ve accumulated about 20 trillion of federal debt and I think sometimes it’s hard to think of the inflation that we currently have as inflation. It certainly varies. It hasn’t been very significant, say in gasoline. It is in property. But the potential for inflation is huge because the Federal Reserve has now issued about 4 trillion dollars of digital money into the economy. It’s pushed it since the recession. So, I think what this bill does, in many ways, is it’s a prospective measure in that those folks who either own gold or silver now or may in the future, if we do have a real bout of inflation, this will protect them from that.

One of the challenges in getting this and similar bills passed is educating legislators on why gold and silver, being constitutional money, are different from other asset classes. Some politicians just don’t grasp the fundamental distinction.

Committee Chair: Questions for Mr. Gleason? Representative Gannon?

Rep. Gannon: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Sir, one question I always have asked of me is, if we pass a bill like this, is, well are we picking winners and losers? What about if I invest in a gold stock and I make money on my gold stock or what about oil companies? If we open up the door to one particular kind of investment for a tax break like this, how do I explain to constituents that their particular investments don’t get the same kind of tax break?

Committee Chair: Mr. Gleason?

Mr. Gleason: Okay. Mr. Chairman. Representative Gannon. It’s a good question. The key distinguishing characteristic here is that gold and silver are money. They’re not a stock, they’re not a piece of property and when it comes to mining stocks and things like that, obviously that’s not covered here.

We’re talking about taking away taxation on the exchange of one form of money with another. So, people are not unfortunately able to deduct the loss that they take when they have Federal Reserve Notes and they dramatically decline in their value. There is no deduction for that. The deduction is basically everyone is paying the inflation tax and they are not able to recoup that or protect themselves against that, so gold and silver is another alternative form of money. It’s actually much more stable and a historic form of money, and so that’s how I distinguish this. This is about sound money and preserving people’s savings and not giving any kind of special break for an investment class.

Fortunately, there are politicians who understand that not taxing money in any form is a matter of consistency. Idaho State Representative Ron Nate made a strong case for treating gold and silver the same as the Federal Reserve Note when it comes to taxation.

Rep. Nate: Thank you Mr. Chairman.

 (I’m) in favor of the motion, this isn’t just an investment. This is a money. And so, Federal Reserve Notes are the nationally recognized money, but according to Article I, Section X of the Constitution, the only thing that the states can declare as money, we can’t coin our own money, the only thing we can use as money is we can declare silver and gold as money.

 So, it’s the only real state money that we have control of. And if holding money becomes something that is subject to taxation, then we have – I think – a perverse incentive in our government here, that the money that they declare, that the government declares is legal tender suddenly becomes a tax instrument for them as well.

 This makes sense for consistency. If gold and silver coin are money, then we should not tax it when it increases in value. If you argue that we should tax it when it increases in value, then you should also argue that Federal Reserve Notes, when they diminish in value because of inflation, we ought to be able to declare capital losses on those on our tax forms as well.

 But because we don’t allow that, we shouldn’t be taxing either capital gains or losses on gold and silver coin. This is a matter of consistency with regards to currency and the tax treatment of it. Thank you.

Last year, the Arizona Senate Finance Committee heard testimony from none other than former Congressman Ron Paul. Dr. Paul was the leading voice in the U.S. Congress for sound money issues during his tenure there. He turned the once obscure idea of auditing, reforming, and ultimately ending the Federal Reserve into a national campaign issue when he ran for President in 2008 and 2012.

Ron Paul said the following in support of Arizona’s ultimately successful bill to eliminate income taxes on gold and silver:

Dr. Ron Paul: It would be legalizing competition in a constitutional fashion. It isn’t like saying, “Okay, Arizona wants to print their paper currency again.” Because you’re not allowed to do that. On the monetary issues, the states are talked about in the constitution and they have restrictions, they can’t print money but they also have been told in The Constitution that they can only use gold and silver as legal tender. So, the responsibility is one the states to follow the rules and that meant nobody was supposed to use anything other than silver and gold as legal tender. We’ve had a mess, it’s gotten worse, it started in 1913, there was a climactic end in 1971 but the problems have continued.

 If you look at some of the charts, things have been really rocky since ‘71, with the destruction of the value of the money. Since 1971, we’ve lost 95% of the value of the dollar. Believe me, the Gold Standard was invented a long, long time ago, from the beginning of recorded history. Five thousand years ago they used gold and silver, biblically gold and silver, real weights and measures, that’s what they count it by. So, this is not brand new, it’s the governments and the people who seek power are always undermining the restraints placed on governments by honest money. So, I congratulate you for hearing and dealing with this bill, because I think if you do pass this bill it will be a great step forward for a lot of people to understand the money issue and the freedom issue. Thank you very much.

 Chairman: Thank you very much Dr. Paul.

Similar sound money efforts are springing up in other states. Of course, states won’t be able to abolish the discriminatory federal taxation of precious metals. But state level reforms will catch the attention of members of the U.S. Congress. Sound money victories at the state level will help build political momentum for sound money legislation at the federal level.

Groups such as the Sound Money Defense League are advancing the sound money movement by educating the public on the problems of our inflationary monetary system as well as working with allies in elective office to enact reforms.

Setting gold and silver free as competing currencies to Federal Reserve Notes won’t be easy and it won’t happen overnight, but real progress can be made and is being made one step at a time.

Tenth Amendment Center

Related News:

  1. Silver Expected To Outperform Gold In 2018
  2. Global Silver Institute: Physical Silver Supply Deficit Since 2004
  3. Bill Clinton Father Of The Financial Fallout: Clinton’s 1999 Deregulation Of Rothschild Wall Street.
  4. Silver Is a Strong Buy 2018: “The Last Straw” For The Large Paper Speculators, who have “thrown in the towel”
  5. Gold’s Global Supply Artery: Declining Supply Heading For Cardiac Arrest With Increasing Demand Vs Debt Clock
  6. Why Silver & Gold Are Not Presently $728.00/Ounce & $5,996.00/Ounce Respectively: The Economy Is One Big Scam

Source Article from https://politicalvelcraft.org/2018/01/30/thirty-six-states-have-nullified-sales-taxes-from-silver-gold-alabama-tennessee-preparing-to-nullify-taxes-in-2018/