Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: expat_panama
When I talk about morality I prefer to give consistency a higher priority than convenience. Your views appear to be convenient and not consistent. I'm sure that you consider yourself to be very moral. Your posts seem to infer that you consider your views more moral than mine. I must be missing something --please let me know what it is.

I'm afraid that I don't understand your question. Earlier I stated that under your deposit and loan scenario, no new money was created. $100 was deposited and $100 was borrowed. Thre was no creation of money happening in what you described.

I then proceeded to describe what actually happens today. Thru the magic of fraction reserve banking, the multiplier effect allows the banks to lend out money that they do not have on account. It is this practice that I believe to be immoral and fraudulent. Banks today have the ability to extend loans in excess of 10 times (or more) their on hand deposits. They basically have a license to steal. This is what caused the banking runs during the 1800's.

212 posted on 12/12/2005 6:01:02 PM PST by getsoutalive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]


To: getsoutalive
"no new money was created. $100 was deposited and $100 was borrowed....  ...Banks today have the ability to extend loans in excess of 10 times (or more) their on hand deposits. They basically have a license to steal."

These are two different points-- they're both important but maybe we should just talk money supply first and then get to bank regs after. 

Sometimes it takes effort to get a handle on money supply-- I got an "F" on my first exam in Econ 101 although I got better later. If you're willing to give it another chance, I think I can explain how money is created, so long as we can first agree on just what money is.   We need to talk about money and wealth as two different things --after all, someone can borrow $100, thus getting money, even though he also gets a debt in the process.  Wealth is the assets that are left over when all the debts are paid off -- but right now let's focus on just money.  Let's say that money is that stuff that can buy something --say, five $20 bills that I can use to buy a new stereo.

OK, suppose I'm the only guy in town that's got money, and I go put all my money ($100) in the bank.  The banker will hurry up and loan it out to some guy on the next block because that's what bankers do.  Now, if you have some religious convictions that prohibit loaning or borrowing money then we can stop here.  If you don't, then let's agree that the banker is an OK guy because we're not getting into fractional reserves yet.  Let's say maybe the borrower is mortgaging a house with equity up the yingyang. 

That guy on the next block now has $100 (in five $20 bills) that he can use to buy a stereo, but maybe you still want to buy a stereo too.  You can go to the bank and borrow $100 if you want.  You can use your account as collateral.  If you do, then you'll have five $20 bills that you can take to Circuit City.   The town now has $200, even though it began the day with just $100.

If you're worried about who printed up those $20 bills then we can talk about the Bureau of Engraving-- but bear in mind that currency is a tiny fraction of the total money supply.  If you're worried that the newly created money will cause inflation then we can talk about how the fed tends to make borrowing difficult whenever prices need to go back to normal.  

So are we together on how money is created?

215 posted on 12/13/2005 3:01:28 PM PST by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson