pull down to refresh

there's a difference between paying and discharging money can pay when there's no money in the system it can only be discharged
ok, this doesn't seem very important
From investopedia:
Legal tender is anything recognized by law as a means to settle a public or private debt or meet a financial obligation
That's what gold was
reply
50 sats \ 6 replies \ @Lux 5 Apr
this doesn't seem very important
it makes all the difference.
a discharge doesn't cancel the debt, it just removes the charge, and for any practical purpose in a fiat system, the debt is settled. but, lawfully speaking, it's not payed, there was no exchange of a tangible asset
we both get that fiat is a scam legal tender vs lawful money you should know the diff between legal and lawful
reply
I appreciate the importance of legal vs lawful, I just don't think you're using the term "legal tender" right.
I'm open to persuasion, if you want to support your usage with some sort of evidence or argument.
reply
50 sats \ 4 replies \ @Lux 5 Apr
I just don't think you're using the term "legal tender" right.
we share the same opinion :)
I thought i just gave you arguments.
legal have the force of law by contract (consent). we can agree in a contract to use anything as money, but it doesn't make it lawful money.
legal tender means that the authority you/we/anyone consented to subject decided that when legal tender is tendered for debt repayment and not accepted, the debt is discharged, if the particular contract doesn't say otherwise
reply
What part of that was missing from gold during the gold standard era?
Is it just this particular use of "discharge" that your including in the definition?
That's the part I don't think is part of the definition though.
reply
50 sats \ 2 replies \ @Lux 5 Apr
in a gold standard the debt is payed with lawful money in a fiat system the debt is payed(discharged) with legal tender, a legal fiction
the state inc. doesn't have jurisdiction over lawful money, only over that wich it creates
reply
Ok, so even though gold was legally recognized as money, because it had been used as lawful money, it doesn't become legal tender.
Is that the distinction you're getting at?
reply
50 sats \ 0 replies \ @Lux 5 Apr
they had to make the "institution of legal tender" for to remove lawful money from the system this at least what I learned, if I'm wrong, I will happily adjust