Always on the lookout for a few extra bucks, I answered an ad looking for secret shoppers. you know, the people big companies hire to test out their customer service operations anonymously, to see if employees are following procedures and giving good service.

Not that I'm naive. I know most of these things are scams of one sort or another. RebaServ purports to be a company based in Seattle. My preliminary research showed they are advertising nationwide.

I grew more suspicious when they could not answer simple questions like "is this W2 work, or 1099 work?" The odd grammar and diction also set off a bell or two.

Sure enough, the package arrived. Supposedly a contract, all that was in the UPS envelope were two money orders, issued supposedly by "Albertsons" Guess the scammers did not realize that Albertsons is no longer DBA "Albertsons" 

Yep, RebaServ is nothing more than a front for the old money order scam. You deposit their money orders in your bank. your assignment is to evaluate the services of two Western Union agencies near you by wiring money from your bank to a designated recipient, then filing a report. You keep as your commission the difference between what you deposit and what you wire out.

Not that SpokeUp is necessarily an appropriate venue for reporting this latest scam (and a fairly sophisticated one it is) but I figured that the search engines would best pick up this information if I posted on a couple big blog sites I know. 

It is said that those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it. Well.... Government Motors is not the first time that a democrat president has attempted to seize private property in the form of a major industry. The particulars of Truman's attempt to form Government Steel are different from Obama's seizure of GM, but the general principal is the same.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_&_Tube_Co._v._Sawyer

http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/events/04_08

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/04/08/commentary/op-eds/doc49dc344f69809429178840.txt

Note - being a tiny tot when this occured I was not aware until I watched a video on the constitution and the history of separation of powers and ran across this one as an example.

Based on a discussion begun here:

http://spokeup.com/pg/blog/MrArbitrage1/read/8939/the-dubious-timing-of-marktomarket-changes-obamas-sudden-new-perspective-on-gm-bankruptcy

Assuming anyone out there ever reads my response (given that this is now a "back burnered" blog post due to the nature of SpokeUp) let me toss a couple of things out.

Why NOT have an Amero? For that matter, why NOT have a universal currency? After all, if there were one currency, wouldnt that make it easier for the marketplace to accurately evaluate the value of goods and services worldwide?

Never mind the knee jerk nationalists. After all, if we wanted to be nasty about things, we in California, the eighth largest economy in the world, are currently being dragged down by the economies of lesser places like Mississippi, Wyoming, and D.C. to name a few.  Maybe we in California should have our own fricking currency, traded on the free market. Aint nothing in the Constitution says we can't..... Oh wait.... maybe there is.. so maybe we ought to seceed, leaving the rest of you out of the loop...

Back to the topic, what rational argument can be made AGAINST a univesral currency? All those I have seen are nationalistic in nature, and not market in nature.

Recall that "money" is nothing other than a medium of echange, something that makes it more convenient for all of us to do business. Who among you wants to drag a herd of cattle or a flock of sheep around when you are shopping, after all?  More than that, "money" is nothing other than a measure of the value of the goods and services produced by those whom that currency represents.

Looking forward to any intelligent response. Jingoistic and conspiracy theory posts will be ignored.

Jack owes Joe a dollar. Joe owes Scott a dollar. Scott owes Vince a dollar. Vince owes Sebastian a dollar. 

Jack is bankrupt and cannot pay Joe, who is now bankrupt and cannot pay Scott, who is now bankrupt and cannot pay Vince who is now bankrupt and cannot pay Sebastian who is now bankrupt. 

The administration gives a dollar each to Joe, Scott, Vince and Sebastian. 

Congress grouses about Sebastian getting that dollar and passes laws to force Sebastian to give it back. In the meantime Congress also votes to give Joe, Scott, and Vince another two dollars each. Total amount given away: $10, with the potential of getting one dollar back from Sebastian. 

Jack is still bankrupt, but no one cares. After all, he’s the reason that Congress and the Administration have had to give all this money away in the first place. 

Now suppose at the outset, the Administration had given Jack a dollar. Jack could then pay Joe who could then pay Scott who could then pay Vince who could then pay Sebastian. Problem solved. Total cost to The Government? ONE DOLLAR, or 10% of what they have given away under their plan. 

Get it?