Money "Under the Mattress"

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

On various Q&A Forum sites here, one can read about people withdrawing cash, or even closing out their bank accounts, converting stocks, bonds, and other investments into cash, etc., and I know personally of others doing the same--maybe I am, too???? I ain't talkin'! Does anyone think it possible big brother WJC and cohorts in Congress could pass a law requiring all to surrender their "kittys", or have them confiscated? Would all US citizens meekly do this? Are there enough "goon squads" (on horseback or pedal bikes!) to enforce it? I'm old enough (a great granny) to remember a time when gold had to be surrendered.

-- Holly Allen (Holly3325@juno.com), June 15, 1998

Answers

Holly asked:

"Does anyone think it possible big brother WJC and cohorts in Congress could pass a law requiring all to surrender their "kittys", or have them confiscated?"

There is already Legal Language, regarding having cash. Most Banks will ask you questions if you try to withdraw a large sum of cash.

Go the your bank and ask for $1000 in Quarters, dimes and nickels. See what happens.

Best to have small denomination bills; 20s,10s,5s, and 1s.

You might have to pay $20 for a loaf of bread, because you don't have change.

The Federal Government already has the right to confiscate Gold in any form. In a "State of Emergency", the Feds can take whatever they need from the Public sector.

-- Dave Jones (dfj@fea.net), June 15, 1998.


This info provided by Mary Mostert:

Does anyone recall President Roosevelt's Proclamation 2039 which began, "Whereas there have been heavy and unwarranted withdrawals of gold and currency from our banking institutions for the purpose of hoarding...." The purposes of hoarding? The gold belonged to individuals. They were withdrawing the gold because they didn't trust the banks. The proclamation provided that anyone violating the presidential order by withdrawing their own money from the bank "would be fined not more than $10,000 and jailed for not more than 10 years." In 1933 a $10,000 fine was equivalent to at least $100,000 in today's money. Ten years in jail is a greater sentence than given today in many cases for murder. And for what reason? For withdrawing their own money from the banks.

-- Nick Chase (nick15@eve.assumption.edu), June 15, 1998.


The government could also issue a new form of currency and allow for conversion of the old form of currency only to a limited extent, with a date at which old currency will no longer be legal tender. I fully expect them to do this with $100.00 bills some day. I believe that one of the reasons for coming out with the new $100.00 bill was so that eventually they could cancel the old ones and thus "confiscate" money from drug dealers and other criminals. Of course, other people who had been "hoarding" their own money would get trapped as we

-- bran (bran@usa.net), June 16, 1998.

These answers to my question verify, to me, the greater wisdom of turning cash into goods: food, food supplements, bottled water, first aid items, medicines, paper goods, hygiene items, firewood, etc. Should "Uncle" wait until 1/1/2000, when there are no communications, no mail service, etc., citizens could not receive any edicts to surrender cash or coins. However, it is possible "Uncle" might declare such an order by the Fall of '99, or sooner???? Maybe that is all the more reason for stashing goods, rather than cash. Goods can be bartered, too, and even shared with others!

-- Holly Allen (Holly3325@juno.com), June 16, 1998.

Gold confiscation was a complex issue. In those days gold *WAS* money, and since you can't make more gold in a hurry those who were hoarding it were arguably further damaging a weak economy, because a bank couldn't lend what it didn't have. These days it's a moot point, because the central bank can always print or electronically generate more money (given any approximation to a functioning banking system)

Also a government can in practice attempt to confiscate anything or everything (regardless of any constitutional rights). A wise government will resort to draconian legislation and enforcement only in extremis and only if it is certain that the vast majority of the population will at least acquiesce to the action (which was the case with the 1930s gold confiscation). An unwise government will simply start a civil war.

Then there's also the other sort of confiscation to worry about: the illegal variety, performed by common thieves or, in extremis, by desperate, previously law-abiding citizens. Money etc. under a mattress is particularly vulnerable to this. Government bonds etc. (other than bearer documents) aren't, just as long as the government survives and we don't see hyper-inflation.

I'm afraid I don't have any potted answers to contribute. I suspect that there are no good answers, only arguments about the least bad ones, and of course the course of action you take depends on your assessment of just how bad Y2K will be.

-- Nigel Arnot (nra@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk), June 17, 1998.



Thieves and the government can't take what they can't find. You can always bury your money and gold. Be creative, just don't forget where you stashed it! Furthemrore, you have a right to protect your property, your family and yourself. When things start to heat up and civil unrest in the cities, and no paychecks for police, fire, etc., (they'll be home taking care of their own), how will you protect your property? You'll be on your own.

-- Barb Douglas (bardou@yahoo.com), June 21, 1998.

Just a quick note. There is apparently a law in force which requires you to file certain forms for cash withdrawls of more than $12000 in one year (I believe).

Here is a URL for more information:

http://www.the-moneychanger.com/html/banking_mistakes.html

As an aside, even if you do file the paperwork, do you really think they'll have time to come after you???

Just something to think about.

-- Kevin Beverage (corwyn@thuntek.net), August 21, 1998.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ