So essentially you're a person who hates investment and all the benefits associated with it? Banks have existed in one form or another in almost every advanced society. Why? Well it makes sense that if someone needs to save $100 and someone needs to borrow $100 that these people work together and do so (in actuality only 90% is lent out, reserve requirement ratio provides base level of cash on hand, to avoid run on the bank type situations). If 100% of your money sat in a bank vault and was unused, no one would benefit. You wouldn't receive interest, you'd probably have to pay the bank additional fees to guard your money, since by simply guarding it, they make no money, and it would be much harder for individuals to get loans. How could you possibly propose such an inefficient system, do you not realize what it actually is you propose, or do you just choose to ignore all the consequences I've stated?
Spreading misinformation, or misleading people is irresponsible in my mind, I'd love to hear your response.
If you really feel the government is ripping you off that badly with inflation, have you considered TIPS (treasury inflation-protected securities)?
Andrew S.
· 1 year ago
Ryan, you really have no idea how fractional reserve banking works. I suggest you head over to Google Video and watch "Money Masters", made over ten years ago. It is the DEFINITIVE film that exposes the scam played by the banks in each of these "advanced societies". The fractional reserve banks of the world have funded both sides of every major war since Napoleon's time. They are responsible for supplying the capital to continue wars that would otherwise have ended much sooner. Is this the kind of "benefit" that results from this system?
Please do not insult people on this site by suggesting that somehow we are against investment. Inflation kills investments and so does holding the inflation rate artificially low. Think about it, if Bernanke sets the rate at 2% in the US but the free market interest rate in Freemarketland is 7.5%, where would you invest your money? Artificially low investment rates have been driving investors away from our economy for years. Also, the real inflation rate in this country has been MUCH higher than the government numbers for years, wiping out any "gains" made over the official amounts. Check out shadowstats.com
Common Sense
· 1 year ago
If you believe anyone can set an inflation rate, I will show you a god.
No one sets an inflation rate. No one.
Sean Liebel
· 1 year ago
Central banks are ripping me off man and NOT THE GOVERNMENT. Understand that!
Common Sense
· 1 year ago
Stop using central banks. I suggest hiding it in your mattress. Also, next time you use a credit card, don't. Instead, carry large bundles of cash with you at all times.
Andrew S.
· 1 year ago
Actually, that's exactly the problem with central banking. I CAN'T store my money under my mattress, unless I want it continuously devalued. Do you even know what a central bank is? You can't 'use' a central bank in the same way that you use the bank on main street. The building where you have a checking account is NOT a central bank.
Sean Liebel
· 1 year ago
Ryan maybe you refuse to understand that our government DOES NOT control our money supply AT ALL. Get that understood.
Sean Liebel
· 1 year ago
Also Ryan whose to say that money would not be used? Maybe I do not want it to be used just to create more debt. Maybe I want more discretion over its usages to be made into VALUE and not debt.
Common Sense
· 1 year ago
I hope none of you ever need a loan...
... to buy a house, a car, finance an education...
Without fractional reserve banking, not only would loans be impossible (except via individual brokers), the amount of money used to create enough money for transactions would be horrendous.
Andrew S.
· 1 year ago
Yes, fractional reserve banking has allowed us all to live beyond our means. When it all comes crashing down I guess we'll get to evaluate whether it was worth it.
Roonie
· 10 months ago
@Ryan and Common Sense
Read the bill again, specifically section 12. Though the bill does prohibit fractional reserve banking, it does not prohibit lending and credit. It merely affirms that it is the DEPOSITOR'S money, and therefore it is the DEPOSITOR'S decision to lend it out. The DEPOSITOR is the one that takes on the risk (and receives the reward) for lending his/her money out.
Yes, there would be less credit available, but there would still be a healthy amount. You would still be able to give an entrepreneur a good chunk of start-up capital, but people would live entirely in debt.
All Comments
Spreading misinformation, or misleading people is irresponsible in my mind, I'd love to hear your response.
If you really feel the government is ripping you off that badly with inflation, have you considered TIPS (treasury inflation-protected securities)?
If you don't have time for Money Masters, perhaps you should watch Money as Debt instead here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-905047....
Please do not insult people on this site by suggesting that somehow we are against investment. Inflation kills investments and so does holding the inflation rate artificially low. Think about it, if Bernanke sets the rate at 2% in the US but the free market interest rate in Freemarketland is 7.5%, where would you invest your money? Artificially low investment rates have been driving investors away from our economy for years. Also, the real inflation rate in this country has been MUCH higher than the government numbers for years, wiping out any "gains" made over the official amounts. Check out shadowstats.com
No one sets an inflation rate. No one.
... to buy a house, a car, finance an education...
Without fractional reserve banking, not only would loans be impossible (except via individual brokers), the amount of money used to create enough money for transactions would be horrendous.
Read the bill again, specifically section 12. Though the bill does prohibit fractional reserve banking, it does not prohibit lending and credit. It merely affirms that it is the DEPOSITOR'S money, and therefore it is the DEPOSITOR'S decision to lend it out. The DEPOSITOR is the one that takes on the risk (and receives the reward) for lending his/her money out.
Yes, there would be less credit available, but there would still be a healthy amount. You would still be able to give an entrepreneur a good chunk of start-up capital, but people would live entirely in debt.
It's the perfect solution, really.