The gold coin pictured here was a private issue by Christopher Bechtler. It reads: Carolina Gold; 140 G[rains]; 20 carats, August 1, 1834, The reverse reads: 5 Dollars, C. Bechtler, Rutherford[ton, NC]. More information about this coin can be found at this link.
Christopher Bechtler and his son, August, and later Christopher Bechtler, Jr., a nephew, were of German origin. They lived near Rutherfordton, North Carolina. Between 1831 and 1840, they minted over $ 2.2 million in coins, mainly from ore mined in the Carolinas. They have the honor of producing the first gold dollar made in the United States. “The government mint did not release the first regular series [of gold dollars] until 1849.”
As I noted in my article, “Hard Money in the Voluntaryist Tradition,” what they did was entirely voluntary: they received raw gold ore from local miners and prospectors and turned it into recognizable and standardized discs which people accepted and were willing to use in trade. They provided a desired service; they exercised their common law right; and they defrauded no one. There was no political law to stop them. In fact, during the Civil War, Bechtler gold coins were much preferred to Confederate paper money.
The silver token, which reads: “From The Land Of Feed And Tires; I Am One Ounce of Real Money; Value You Me As You Please; 2001; .999 Fine Silver,” was made by SilverTowne Mint for Inman Tire Service and Inman Feed Mill. This silver round is only one of many barter pieces that have been produced to satisfy the demand for something tangible and real. The story behind their making may be found in my article, “Value You Me As You Please.” A limited number of these pieces are available for sale. Please email for their current price and availability.
In contrast to our first two pictures, Bitcoin is a form of virtual money. Although Bitcoin cannot be classified as a true commodity money, it does have many features that voluntaryists applaud. As mentioned in the Bitcoin Primer, it cannot be forged, or double-spent; it cannot be controlled or inflated by any government; nor is it impeded by any political boundaries. It is a voluntary digital medium of exchange which is completely transparent to all interested parties. We consider bitcoin a hard digital currency because the algorithm for its creation is intrinsically tied to the maintenance of a transaction record that grows exponentially more permanent, but one which is accessible to anyone who understands how to read it.
As we noted on our “Support Us” page, you may consult the following for more information:
“Hard Money in the Voluntaryist Tradition”
“Private Money Firsts”
“Hard Money, Soft Money, and Government Money!”
“The Master Plan for Tightening the Noose”
“Trust Not in Princes”
“Value Me As You Please”
“Paper: No Substitute for Gold!”
“Fed Up with the Federal Reserve”
“A Comparison of Real Money, Counterfeit Notes, & Federal Reserve Notes”
“Freedom to Choose Your Own Money”
“A Basic Primer on Using Gold & Silver”
“What Are We Using For Money?”
“A Comparison of Monies”
WHAT HAS GOVERNMENT DONE TO OUR MONEY? by Murray Rothbard, (First Printing January 1964).
“Christopher Bechtler” by William Stevenson
For general information, see the Bitcoin Primer
For more information about Bitcoin, check out The Libertarian Introduction.
Return to “Support Us” Page
“Credit expansion does not mean expansion of the real“ factors of production; “it merely means expansion of the money supply through credit markets.”
– Jorg Guido Hulsmann, MISES (2007), P. 781.
“It will always be impossible to keep a bank solvent by law. The law that specifies the maximum risk a bank may legally take with other people’s money turns out to be a law of minimum security. A good banker will not take a risk simply because the law says he may; he will use his own judgment. On the other hand, a reckless banker will find a way to do what his greed desires, no matter what the law is, even a legal way.”
– Garet Garret, A BUBBLE THAT BROKE THE WORLD (1932), p. 125 (conclusion to the chapter titled “The Gold Invention”).
Bitcoin, like paper money, has zero intrinsic value.
– Egon von Greyerz, www.goldswitzerland.com, January 12, 2017.
If precious metal coins are in circulation which are intrinsically worth their true value, the only kind of counterfeiting possible is with false, disguised metals. This has often been done, and was a major impetus to alchemy, and the manufacture of spurious gold and silver. But paper money invited counterfeiting by its very nature, since the essence of it is not its inherent substance but the authority on which it was issued. Paper money is a symbol. To counterfeit is therefore not to fabricate a substance but to impersonate the authority issuing it. Since anyone can print on pieces of paper, the authority must make the processes of manufacture of its paper money so intricate that they cannot be exactly reproduced.
– Robert Temple, THE GENIUS OF CHINA (1986), p. 118.
No legal tender law is ever needed to make men take good money; its only use is to make them take bad money.
– Stephen Byington.
Nothing comes from nothing. Fake money produces fake prosperity. Take away the fake money … and the fake prosperity goes “poof.”
– Bill Bonner in CASEY DAILY DISPATCH, July 15, 2017.
Paper money eventually reaches its intrinsic value – zero.
Referring to the U.S. government’s paper money: “Pieces of paper with dead criminals printed on it controlled by communist bureaucrats.”
– Jeff Berwick of THE DOLLAR VIGILANTE.
Paper ‘Money’ The Chinese invented paper “money” at the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth century AD. Its original name was ‘flying money’ because it was so light and could blow out of one’s hand.
– Robert Temple, THE GENIUS OF CHINA (1986), p. 117.
The Money Was Really Gone!
When the bottom dropped out of the stock market, the wealthy were hit first. But it wasn’t long before the Depression came sweeping through our little town. “The banks went broke and closed their doors. It was hard to believe that the money we’d saved there was really gone.”
– Cecil Culp in WE HAD EVERYTHING BUT MONEY (Deb Mulvey, editor, Greendale: Reiman Publications, 1992, p. 14).
“Diluting the money supply with paper [and credit] is the moral equivalent of diluting the milk supply with water.”
– Henry Hazlitt, THE FREEMAN, January 1977, p. 44.
[Why do fractional reserve banks dominate the money market?] The answer is that the courts deciding these matters everywhere are state courts. Only if a single court possesses a territorial monopoly of jurisdiction is it possible that the dispute at hand [the legitimacy of creating fractional-reserves] could be settled once and for all. And that it has been uniformly settled in the way that it was, by permitting rather than prohibiting fractional reserve banking, follows from the interest of every court and judge qua state court and state judge. The owners and agents of the state recognize fully as much as the bankers the potentials of money counterfeiting as a source of income. In permitting bankers to issue fiduciary media (rather than prohibiting the practice as counterfeiting), banks are made existentially dependent upon the state. They can only operate because the state, due to its territorial monopoly of jurisdiction, shields them from counterfeiting suits; and the state does so only under the provision that banks will share with it in the extra revenue and credit derived from legalized counterfeiting. Hence, by permitting fractional reserve … banking the state actually creates the first and preliminary form of a joint-bank-state-counterfeiting cartel under its own ultimate control.
– Hans-Hermann Hoppe, et. al., Volume 1, Number 1 of THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS, p. 35.
“The best way to penetrate the mysteries of the modern monetary and banking system is to realize that the government and its central bank act precisely as would a Grand Counterfeiter.”
– Murray Rothbard, THE FREEMAN, Sept. 1995.
“How Governments Create Money”
How does this system of money creation work? A simplified but true explanation: The government needs ten billion dollars (aside from what it takes in from income taxes or from what it borrows). So the government then prints ten billion dollars of interest-bearing US government bonds. Next, it takes the bonds to the Federal Reserve. The Fed accepts the bonds, and then places ten billion dollars in a checking account. The US government then writes checks to the tune of ten billion dollars against their checking account. But where was that ten billion dollars before the Fed issued the money? The money didn’t exist. Can you believe that the money was created by the Fed “out of thin air?”
In other words, the Fed lends the US government the money – and the crowning irony is that the Fed then charges the government interest forever on the bonds that the US government sold to the Fed in the first place. And the debts build and build and the national debt grows ever-larger … [and] the government taxes us to pay for the interest on [its] ever-expanding national debt.
– Richard Russell, “The Best of Richard Russell,” July 1, 2008. www.dowtheoryletters.com.
The power [of coining money] itself is a frivolous one, of little or no utility; for the weighing and assaying of metals is a thing so easily done, and can be done by so many different persons, that there is certainly no necessity for it being done at all by a government. And it would undoubtedly have been far better if all coins – whether coined by governments or individuals – had all been made into pieces bearing simply the names of pounds, ounces, pennyweights, etc., and containing just the amounts of pure metal described by those weights. The coins would have then been regarded as only so much metal; and as having only the same value as the same amount of metal in any other form. Men would then have known exactly how much of certain metals they were buying, selling, and promising to pay. And all the jugglery, cheating, and robbery that governments have practised, and licensed individuals to practise – by coining pieces bearing the same names, but having different amounts of metal – would have been avoided. And all excuses for establishing monopolies of money, by prohibiting all other money than the coins, would also have been avoided.
– Lysander Spooner, A LETTER TO GROVER CLEVELAND, Sec. XXII (1886), p. 72.
The really true principle of coinage should be the creation of pieces of metal of a definite weight and fineness, with all the denominations having decimal relations with each other. Then buy and sell merchandise for so much weight of gold or so much weight of silver, and when payment is made, count the weight.
I. W. Sylvester
– Conclusion of a letter published in THE NEW YORK TIMES, Dec. 10, 1883, and reprinted in Murray Rothbard and I[siah] W. Sylvester, WHAT IS MONEY? 1884-1963, New York: Arno Press & The New York Times, 1972, p. 31.
“How Would Money Be Produced In a Free Society?”
Who has the right to modify the quantity of money? … [I]n a free society, the obvious answer is: all producers of money have the right to produce more money, and all the owners of money have the right to use their property as they see fit.
In a truly free society, the production of money is a matter of private initiative. Money is produced and sold just as any other commodity or service. And this means, in particular, that in a free society the production of money is competitive. It is a matter of mining precious metals and of minting coins, and both mining and minting are subject to the competition emanating from all other market participants. In selling his product, the money producer competes with all other people who own money and seek to buy the same goods that he desires. And in buying factors of production, the money producer competes with the producers of chairs, theater performances, telephones, carpets, cars and so on. In a word, in a free society the production of money is constrained within fairly narrow limits, limits that are determined by the willingness of other members of society to cooperate with our money producers rather than with someone else.
– Jorg Guido Hulsmann, DEFLATION AND LIBERTY Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2008, pp. 29-30.