Thanks for the explanation. I'll be sure to read the link you've provided and get back to you if I have questions.

Now it is clear to me why anti-bank progressive fell for the "elastic currency" bollocks.

But the notes they issue and the credit they extend was never suppose to be equivalent in value to the reserves they had. Is this the simplest understanding of this scheme. They dish out their bank notes in the hundreds of millions; simultaneously lie about the amount of tangibles, whether Gold or Silver, they have in reserve, and once the notes are fully issued and being used they demonetize gold and silver and make their notes non-transferable for the equivalent amount of silver or gold they lied about holding?

Both United States Notes and Federal Reserve Notes have been legal tender since the gold recall of 1933. So, originally the US note was a fiat currency in that the government had never guaranteed to redeem them foe precious metals such as silver. This note was thus a bill of credit and was inserted free of interest into circulation. And Federal reserve notes are slightly different in that a commercial bank can call upon these notes whenever but must pay back the 12 FED banks.

So, all of these notes are basically unallocated, unlike an allocated silver or gold certificate that can be redeemed for the tangible precious metal at the equivalent value.