American Civics Research Library

Return to Library                             Fort Fairfield Journal                 Home                            Contact Us

The U.C.C.:  To Be or not To Be?

Fort Fairfield Journal, October 11, 2006, p. 3

The Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.) is that portion of contract law that deals with negotiable instruments, buying and selling and contracts for sales and receivables. As such, it is also used by government, banks and lawyers to collect money from, deceive and otherwise rob unwitting Americans. Because it is such a necessary tool for business and such a wicked tool for government it does daily affect the lives of every single American. For that reason alone, it should be taught to our youth before they graduate and begin interacting with government. However, the government controls the schools and sees to it that teachers not only remain unaware of its existence, but also unaware of how it is used against society for the financial gain of a few key players.

Some people have advocated that the U.C.C. is horrible and should be done away with. I disagree.

I maintain from an anthropological perspective, if businesses in general are going to; 1.) extend credit, 2.) issue bills of lading/packing slips, 3.) generate invoices, and 4.) expect to be paid at some time in the future, there needs to be some form of 'rule book' to go by so everyone is “on the same page,” so-to-speak. The electronics industry did it with XLR and 1/4” male and female microphone connectors; the plumbing industry has done it with toilet flanges, faucet hole spacing, pipe sizes, etc.; the television industry has done it with scan lines and sync tones.

If we traded tangible products and services for tangible products and services at the point of sale, and didn't have to rely on a third party to ship or distribute for us, then we wouldn't need the U.C.C. - or any other standardized rule list for trading; when the trade is completed, it's complete - nothing else to keep track of or trace and no expectation of payment in the future - it's already paid.

Since our society has decided to extend credit (the current mechanics of our money system aside, this argument works with gold-based currency as well) for their products and services, there has to be a formalized standard method of keeping track of packing lists, invoices, statements, and payments as well as an ability to enforce the expectation of being paid. I have read and studied the U.C.C.. As the U.C.C. sits, it is a benign list of rules that allows us all to conduct our business with some degree of confidence and familiarity.

With that said, I do agree that bad actors have taken portions of the U.C.C. and utilized them for their own financial profit via the vehicle of debt-money. Now, debt-money - as a ‘negotiable instrument’ - only works because an unwitting society has never been taught the ills of such; that blame I lay directly at the doorstep of our public schools (government indoctrination centers). A signed packing slip is a ‘negotiable instrument.’ There is nothing evil about a signed packing slip, it is merely a piece of paper which guarantees payment within a certain period of time - in terms dictated by the agreement on the invoice (i.e.: Net 30, Net 10, etc.)

Now, those aforementioned ‘bad actors’ merely adopted those rules on negotiable instruments for their own gain. They trick people into signing promissory notes which are then treated “as money” and traded accordingly. People do not sign promissory notes against their will...they do so voluntarily, and as such are contracts. However, most people enter into promissory notes believing they are borrowing something tangible that needs to be replaced with something tangible plus interest (a workman is worthy of his hire, so a rented tangible must therefore net the owner a degree of return.) The fact is that in our current monetary system no tangible exists and the money creators are operating under the art of deception. The U.C.C. does address contracts entered into under deception and a whole body of contract law has been developed that says essentially those contracts are unenforceable.

Governments, court systems, etc. have adopted the Uniform Commercial Code in their billing systems, as well. While crafty lawyers work the Code to their (government's) advantage, it would still function the same irregardless of the type of money used - (tangible vs. intangible) - the only difference between the two forms of money would be, of course a check on the ability to easily expand the amount in circulation.

The U.C.C. itself is not the evil, the evil people who manipulate it to their financial benefit are evil. If we eliminated the U.C.C. tomorrow, there would; 1.) still be evil people trying to con the unsuspecting masses; and 2.) be no way for normal, legitimate businesses to integrate with each other with the credit/debit relationship they have with each other now - thus a new standard would then be formed out of necessity and the manipulators would use that one to benefit themselves.

Contract law (the U.C.C. is a form of contract law) is not evil in and of itself. It simply lays the ground rules for two actors who wish to deal with each other. Bad people do use the U.C.C. to their advantage against an unsuspecting populace. However, that populace can just as easily use the U.C.C. to their advantage as well. For example, one may discharge his debts by tendering payment with a certified promissory note. According to the U.C.C., if the payment is refused, the debt is discharged at the face value of the tender. "What," you may ask, "would the person signing the certified promissory note do when it is presented for payment?" - Answer: Issue another certified promissory note to discharge it - that, after all, is what we are doing every day when we use Federal Reserve Notes or FRN-backed checks to discharge our debts...using other people's promissory notes to discharge our promissory notes/debt obligations. I personally believe that to be a horrible way to construct a monetary system from a socio-economic point of view, but it is 'easy money' and that's what the people want - 'easy money.' So, the government is giving the masses what they want. Here's the problem: the government wants to allow banks to trade with certified promissory notes, but will choke when we attempt to use them (i.e.: discharging your court fines or tax obligations with a Certified Promissory Note) - it's perfectly legal, but doesn't benefit them or their malevolent co-conspirators, so a government-appointed judge would have to arbitrarily decide when to enforce the rule and when not to. He can do that because the public doesn't know or understand the way the U.C.C. is used to scam them with debt money, so he will likely get away with it. Again, I lay all that blame at the doorstep of government schools.

It is true, debt money could not function without the U.C.C., but neither could businesses - irregardless of the type or form of money used for reasons illustrated above. If people used the U.C.C. to protect themselves from government and banks, a judge would have to rule according to the same rules used to steal from them - the U.C.C. - or arbitrarily decide in whose case he'll apply the U.C.C. and whose he won't. The reasons judges will issue one-sided rulings for the government and banks are: 1.) they can get away with it in the public's eyes (the public is “blind”) and 2.) they have the loyalty of the enforcers and the keys to the jails.

In summary, the U.C.C. is a tool, just like a gun. Some people use guns destructively against their neighbor; others use them for defense and to provide food. It's not the gun or the U.C.C. that does the harm, it's the people who use it with evil intents. The cure is to read it, know it, understand it and use it to defend, and counter evil people's actions.