100% reserve banking
- This topic has 346 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 3 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
http://dissidentvoice.org/2016/09/central-bank-digital-currencies-a-revolution-in-banking/Ellen Brown has a long history of being a critic of the banking industry and presenting money creating myths and currency crankism as when she repeats a B of E report fro a few years back. She is an advocate of the greenbanks
Quote:Banks are not intermediaries taking in deposits and lending them out. When a bank issues a loan for a mortgage, it simply writes the sum into the borrower’s account. The borrower writes a check to his seller, which is deposited in the seller’s bank, where it is called a “new” deposit and added to that bank’s “excess reserves.” The issuing bank then borrows this money back from the banking system overnight if necessary to balance its books, returning the funds the next morning. The wholerigmarole is repeated the next night, and the next and the next.But the article also adds stuff about a new development stemming from Bitcoin – The Public Blockchain. And the supposed end of fractional reserve banking. I'm finding it hard to get my head around what it's all about and what implications it is supposed to have.Can somebody break it down into digestible chunks for me?
Looks like it's bunkum: I can't see why using a public block chain would necessarily circumvent banks or put frational lending out of business, they could still register your loan/savings on an account, and only issue such block-chain coins as they can get their hands on. I can write an IOU on the back of a fag packet, they creates circulating money (as long as people are willing to accept the fag packet). Doesn't matter about block chains or paper money…
Thought this might be of interest https://www.facebook.com/WeAreChange.org/videos/10154586609088690/
lindanesocialist wrote:Thought this might be of interest https://www.facebook.com/WeAreChange.org/videos/10154586609088690/ That guy is a UKIP MEP, a currency crank and probable anti-semite too. These people are not our friends!
DJP wrote:lindanesocialist wrote:Thought this might be of interest https://www.facebook.com/WeAreChange.org/videos/10154586609088690/ That guy is a UKIP MEP, a currency crank and probable anti-semite too. These people are not our friends!
Three personal insults does not really counter his argument, tho, does it? This is the way our own position is criticised. Is it not more constructive to deal with the substantive content of what he is saying rather than simply sticking labels on him?
lindanesocialist wrote:Three personal insults does not really counter his argument, tho, does it? This is the way our own position is criticised. Is it not more constructive to deal with the substantive content of what he is saying rather than simply sticking labels on him?I doubt he would take two of those as an insult.If you want to know why what he says is crankism, I suggest you read this thread from the beginning or search the site for "fractional reserve"
Have to agree with DJP that the speaker, whoever he is, is talking a load of bollox, especially when he claims that banks can lend what they haven't got. To record and expose such nonsense is the reason for this thread.
Young Master Smeet wrote:Looks like it's bunkum: I can't see why using a public block chain would necessarily circumvent banks or put frational lending out of business, they could still register your loan/savings on an account, and only issue such block-chain coins as they can get their hands on. I can write an IOU on the back of a fag packet, they creates circulating money (as long as people are willing to accept the fag packet). Doesn't matter about block chains or paper money…your IOU fag packet isn't limited supply though and doesn't have $1bn market cap. Not saying I agree with them but this would be their response.
Got to go along with the others. He isn't even very sophisticated in his argument. A populist making soundbites, not an argumentBut it is a continuous combat to debunk those who see the bankers as the cause of our woes. Didn't detect any anti-semitism in the speech but saw one in the comments. A rule of thumb is if the Rothschilds are mentioned…we have believer in the Illuminati or an anti-semite, probably both I just engaged in a discussion on banking here in the commentshttp://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/38150-the-life-and-times-of-the-1
jondwhite wrote:your IOU fag packet isn't limited supply though and doesn't have $1bn market cap. Not saying I agree with them but this would be their response.Well, it is, since ultimately it's linked to my phsyical cash reserves which I may be called upon to use to redeem my IOUs: my IOU only holds value so long as my credit is good.
ALB wrote:Have to agree with DJP that the speaker, whoever he is, is talking a load of bollox, especially when he claims that banks can lend what they haven't got. To record and expose such nonsense is the reason for this thread.'load of bollox' lol. Well that blows his argument out of the water. Your comments are usually a little more sophisticated But you must think his comments are interesting or relevant otherwise you would not have a full thread on the subject.Personally I think the whole thread is a load of bollox, there are better issues we could be discussiing. I regret posting it now
DJP wrote:I suggest you read this thread from the beginning or search the site for "fractional reserve"No Thanks
You seem to believe that this was some sort of abstract theoretical debate. You couldn't be more wrong. The thread was contemporary with the Occupy movement, and here at St Pauls and across in the US at Wall St. there were many on the gound propagating monetary and banking reform,obtaining a receptive audience, and they had to be refuted and their policies rebutted. Somehow, I don't think you went to the link and read what i replied concerning once again the idea that the all problems of capitalism can be laid at the feet of the banks and the financial crisis'I will repeat the crucial argument here for you now and it may save you re-reading the whole thread which provides ample proof of our case.
Quote:If banks could create money/credit with the stroke of a pen, that would mean in effect they could create wealth, and consequently the Marxist Theory of Value would be shown to be wrong. For some people rather than challenge the capitalist system per se, they seek to divert attention to what they consider to be only failings of just parts of capitalism which can be remedied by government policy and legislation. There is always a falling-out-among-thieves from the different capital sectors seeking advantage for themselves by fixing capitalism’s problem on others. In the past it was the industrial trusts and the monopolies. Today, it is the financial sphere that has become focus for reform. The problem before society to-day is not a financial problem. It is a property problem.The banks belong to the superstructure of capitalism. Private property is the foundation. So banking is intimately connected to 'the real economy', but it isn't productive but instead provides the necessary liquidity and fluidity for the production and circulation of commodities. The financial crises, consumption crises, credit crises and the like are nothing more than the reflections of the fundamental economic crisis arising from the anarchy of production. If you abolished the Fed and the Big Banks and even brought in a different monetary system this would still leave corporations owning and controlling productive resources and using them to generate a profit rather than to directly satisfy people's needs.My real concern is that a broad informal alliance of credit/money creationists are diverting attention away from abolishing capitalism and towards their various and often conflicting alternative banking models. These views dominate the banking debate on the progressive /left-wing websites and are steering political action into futile reform of banks.As you see, the problem of erroneous analysis on banks is not some minor one that can be ignored
Just occurred to me. DJP has identified the person spouting currency crank ideas as a UKIP MEP. If we get his name we can challenge him to debate and publically expose the bollox he's talking.
ALB wrote:If we get his name we can challenge him to debate and publically expose the bollox he's talking.Good idea, Perhaps we could also have a debate publicly exposing the bollox about 'free sex in socialism' : No pun intended. And if they are successful, we could move on to a public debate with LBird exposing the bollox about 'science for communists'.Should get the working class queuing up at the door. Only joking by the way, no offence meant. Just saying.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.