/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.54046707]

Fractional reserves should be illegal

[Anonymous No.54046716]

>>54046707
Stop being so antisemitic, OP.

[Anonymous No.54046778]

>>54046707
mods, remove this anti-semite

[Anonymous No.54046986]

>>54046716
>>54046778
How many thinks have broken because of lending? It all comes down to usury, every single economic crisis

[Anonymous No.54047206]

>>54046986
based and shariapilled

[Anonymous No.54047279]

>>54046707

We don't have fractional reserves.

RETARD!!!!

[Anonymous No.54047305]

>>54046707
THIS
A real free market has no fractional reserves because it's a form of FRAUD.

[Anonymous No.54047339]

OY GEVALT HOW CAN YOU SAY SUCH THINGS GOY

[Anonymous No.54047361]

reporting this thread to the ADL right now

[Anonymous No.54047379]

>>54046707
this guy is right >>54047279
we’ve been reserveless since 2020
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm

[Anonymous No.54047382]

>>54046986
>It all comes down to usury,
You're actually brain dead.

>YOU SHOULDN'T MAKE MONEY BY LENDING TO OTHERS

[Anonymous No.54047393]

>>54047382
t.

[Anonymous No.54047423]

>>54047382
>OY VEY YOU GAVE ME THAT MONEY
>I OWE YOU NOTHING
>YOU’LL BE HEARING FROM MY LAWYER ABOUT THOSE SERVICE FEES YOU OWE ME FOR

[Anonymous No.54047484]

>>54047393
>muh jeewsss
you have no argument lmfao
you people advocate for a completely stagnant economy

>>54047423
Imagine unironically thinking people who lend money shouldn't be compensated for their risk and opportunity cost whatsoever.
How damaged does your brain have to be to think this way?

[Anonymous No.54047886]

>>54047484
>you people advocate for a completely stagnant economy
Give me twelve reasons why a steady state economy rather than a perpetual growth economy would be bad.

[Anonymous No.54047985]

>>54047886
Because your living standards would never grow?
In fact they would likely decline.
Do you enjoy wageslaving?

[Anonymous No.54048432]

Define 'Fractional Reserve' because the definition keeps shifting with the years
- Do you mean having $100 of deposits and loaning out $80 of that?
- Or do you mean having $100 of deposits and loaning out $500 of 'totally legit iou paper'?
- Or do you mean, "huh? wha? Reserve? We nixxed those requirements back in covid. We just invent money whenever we want and loan it out to get free interest paid back on it. Savings accounts? A what? Yes I know I'm a bank, what's your point?"
>Denounce the Talmud
>Verification not required

[Anonymous No.54048717]

>>54046707
Cool it with the anti semitism

[Anonymous No.54050905]

>>54048432
All of the above

[Anonymous No.54050960]

>>54047484
what risk? the gov shoulders your debt risk and the tax payer bails you in & out if you ever go insolvent due to mismanaging other peoples assets. financial institutions manage zero risk these days.

[Anonymous No.54050987]

>>54047985
>the only way to improve living standards is by creating an ever-growing pile of fiat

[Anonymous No.54051036]

any scheme that causes there to be more total debt than money to pay it back should be illegal, which of course includes fractional reserve banking. every social studies and history course in primary and secondary school should include lessons about fractional reserve banking and the widespread suffering it has caused humanity across the globe.

[Anonymous No.54051103]

>>54050987
I'm against fiat currency.
Usury has nothing to do with this though.
Usury is simply the practice of charging interest on loans.

[Anonymous No.54051115]

>>54046707
Have you considered using Binance? Oh wait you're waiting for popular sentiment to change on Binance, nah keep losing your money in popular banks then.

[Anonymous No.54051127]

If it was good enough for Jesus to bash some kikes over, it's good enough for me
fuck usury

[Anonymous No.54051179]

>>54051103
That is usury

[Anonymous No.54051212]

It has a net benefit to society as you can lend out more money. Restricting it would just lock out people from developing the economy.

[Anonymous No.54051229]

>>54047382
Money creation should not be outsourced to private banks, fuckstain.

[Anonymous No.54051241]

>>54047484
>people who lend money shouldn't be compensated for their risk and opportunity cost
No such risk is involved in bank lending. They create the money out of thin air.

[Anonymous No.54051255]

>>54051103
Imagine being this clueless.

[Anonymous No.54051368]

>>54046707
Whats the option though? Have a full reserve so lending becomes this cumbersome shit where banks can only lend if you agree NOT to take your money during a established period (so forget if there is an emergency and you need it), and you need to pay them to keep it locked in case you dont want to lend it?

It would destroy most of the economy since the money lended would go down a hill.

[Anonymous No.54051410]

>>54047886
There is the risk of deflation if you stop inflation. There is also the risk of going back to mercantilism if you try a gold standard or some similar mechanism

[Anonymous No.54051452]

>>54051212
Good, constant growth is unsustainable

[Anonymous No.54051706]

>>54051179
No it isn't retard. It's a completely different concept.

>>54051229
>Money creation should not be outsourced to private banks, fuckstain.
When did I say banks should print money, retard?
I support full reserve free banking.
>>54051241
>No such risk is involved in bank lending.
lmao HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
So every business every created has succeeded and profited and paid back their loans? Are you retarded?
Also, what about opportunity cost? Why would someone lend their money out for months or years for no benefit when they could have done something better with it themselves?
Absolute fucking retard.

>They create the money out of thin air.
I'm not talking about that. I'm against money printing. It's fraud.

>>54051255
Read a book.

>>54051410
>There is the risk of deflation if you stop inflation.
OH NO HOW HORRIBLE PRICES ARE FALLING AAAAAHHHHH MY LIVING STANDARDS ARE RISING AAAAAHHHH

[Anonymous No.54051718]

>>54051452
>Good, constant growth is unsustainable
Right, so we should just stagnate and die.
We should never reduce our working hours. We should constantly wageslave and never achieve anything higher living standards.

[Anonymous No.54051733]

>>54051706
Where does the money to make the interest payments come from anon?

[Anonymous No.54051760]

>>54051733
mined out of the ground

[Anonymous No.54051831]

>>54051733
>Where does the money to make the interest payments come from anon?
Profits the debtor generated while having the debt?
Why does new money need to be created for this to work? It literally doesn't.

[Anonymous No.54051852]

>Reserveless Banking

I need to buy more crypto

[Anonymous No.54051890]

>>54051831
It does. The money supply has to grow and keep growing. That's why usury has been outlawed before and why it leads to debasement of the currency and financial crises when it's legal.

[Anonymous No.54051938]

>>54051706
>So every business every created has succeeded and profited and paid back their loans?
The money is created out of thin air, dumbass. There is no risk to the bank.

>I'm not talking about that.
You have to be talking about that. It's how the banking system works.

You clearly have no clue what banking is and how money is created via bank lending. Educate yourself.

[Anonymous No.54051946]

>>54051890
>The money supply has to grow and keep growing
Says who?
America had a massive industrial revolution for many decades after the civil war until 1913 under a free banking gold standard.
We had far more growth than then we had now.
We don't need money printing.

> That's why usury has been outlawed before
People outlawed usury before because they're economically illiterate retards.
Notice how places that banned usury ended up stagnate shitholes. I bet you think the muslim world was prosperous lol.

[Anonymous No.54051956]

>>54051706
>OH NO HOW HORRIBLE PRICES ARE FALLING AAAAAHHHHH MY LIVING STANDARDS ARE RISING AAAAAHHHH

The problem with deflation is it can destroy an economy. First, many people would get fuck as deflation would just mean their debt increases in value making them default over it. Secondly, people might refrain from buying goods as they figure out that by waiting a bit their money can purchase even more goods. Companies would sell less (either because people go bankrupt due to crushing debt or because people are buying less), meaning they need to kick people out of the companies to keep them viable as their products are going down in prices (and hence they receive less revenue back) and workers might be reluctant to accept less wages.

This will mean unemploye people cannot buy stuff, further increasing the problem.

[Anonymous No.54051967]

>>54051946
>We don't need money printing.
Banking = money printing. You can't have one without the other.

[Anonymous No.54051981]

>>54051938
>The money is created out of thin air, dumbass
Why are you changing the subject? I am against money printing.
We were debating usury, not money printing.
You don't need to print money to have usury.
Usury is just charging interest on loans.
If I lend you 1000 dollars at 5% interest. You pay me back 1050 in one year.
Why does money printing have to happen in this scenario. It literally doesn't.

>It's how the banking system works.
Yes, the current one. But I am against this system.
You don't seem to know what usury is.

[Anonymous No.54052002]

>>54047382
loans were expected to never be this high, with massive debt slavery, on the backs of millions and then some kike. peoples loans used to be forgiven out of their altruism, something you forgot

[Anonymous No.54052006]

>>54051946
>free banking gold standard.

There is no such stupid delusion. All free banks ever have used fractional reserve banking, even if it is a fractional gold standard banking. Full reserve banks are only products of states because they are fucking retarded. Instead of being paid dividends to keep the money you need to pay the bank for it safeguarding it, or being forced to not be able to get your money back for a set amount of time if the bank wants to lend it.

[Anonymous No.54052018]

>>54051956
>The problem with deflation is it can destroy an economy.
Why wasnt the economy of the late 1800s destroyed?

>First, many people would get fuck as deflation would just mean their debt increases in value making them default over it.
First off, they wouldn't be taking on as much debt because you would make a lot more money by saving. Secondly, loan contracts would have clauses adjusting for deflation. This is how it worked in the past in deflationary economies.

>Secondly, people might refrain from buying goods as they figure out that by waiting a bit their money can purchase even more goods.
Deflationary spiral is a myth. People will consume at some point even if the prices are cheaper later. People won't refrain from buying stuff forever, especially things like food.
Also look at consumer electronics coming down in price, people constantly bought these things even though prices would come down the next year.

>>54051967
>Banking = money printing.
lmao dude you don't even know what full reserve banking is

[Anonymous No.54052024]

>>54051981
What you aren't understanding is that $50 to make the interest payment has to come from somewhere anon. It has to be created.

[Anonymous No.54052027]

>>54051103
you may not realize it but those pretty much go hand in hand

[Anonymous No.54052036]

>>54051981
>Why are you changing the subject? I am against money printing.
>We were debating usury, not money printing.
Wow, you really have no clue what banking is do you?

>Usury is just charging interest on loans.
Usury is profiting from money creation. Banking has no relationship to lending among individuals or nonbanking institutions. If person A lends person B $10, no money is created. The purchasing power is simply transferred from A's pocket to B's pocket. Bank lending expands the money supply with each loan.

[Anonymous No.54052074]

>>54052002
>loans were expected to never be this high, with massive debt slavery
Due to central banking, yes. Central banking and government intervention is the problem.

>>54052006
>There is no such stupid delusion.
But it literally existed in the past and was successful. Why are you coping over reality?

>>54052024
>What you aren't understanding is that $50 to make the interest payment has to come from somewhere anon.
It comes from the debtor working for it. Why is this so difficult to understand dude?

>>54052027
in a way, but they don't necessarily have to

>>54052036
>Wow, you really have no clue what banking is do you?
You don't have an argument here dude.
There are many different forms of banking. All modern banking is fraudulent.

>>54052036
>Usury is profiting from money creation.
No it isn't. That's not what the fucking definition is.

>Bank lending expands the money supply with each loan.
Fractional reserve banking does that.
Full reserve banking does not. In a full reserve system, the only money that would be lent out would be money people invested in credit funds or whatever.

[Anonymous No.54052077]

>>54052002
Think of the shareholders!

[Anonymous No.54052106]

>>54052074
>Full reserve banking
Is an oxymoron. Banking isn't asset custody. It never has been in its history.

[Anonymous No.54052114]

>>54052074
>It comes from the debtor working for it
Oh wow, I didn't realize individuals could just print money into existence. You've opened my eyes today.

[Anonymous No.54052115]

>>54052106
>Is an oxymoron.
How?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-reserve_banking

>Banking isn't asset custody. It never has been in its history.
It literally historically was.

[Anonymous No.54052150]

>>54052018
>Why wasnt the economy of the late 1800s destroyed?
It was, many times actually. The Long Depression is such an example (a worldwide recession from 1873 to 1896).

>First off, they wouldn't be taking on as much debt because you would make a lot more money by saving
It's the other way around Anon. In a fully reserve system, the bank would have only two options: either YOU pay them to keep the money safe (since they can't lend it), or you agree to lend it, but you are unable to withdraw money for that set amount of time. Of course if the business that loaned the money crashed, it's bye bye your money since the bank cannot give you the money from someone else, in order to keep a fully reserve.

>Secondly, loan contracts would have clauses adjusting for deflation
why would a bank do such a thing?

>This is how it worked in the past in deflationary economies.
All free banking system have been fractional reserve, even in your magical scenarios, there was printing of money.

>Deflationary spiral is a myth.
What the fuck do you mean it's a myth? if fucking happened during the Great Recession of the 30s. There was no printing at that point yet recession still happened despite deflation.

>. People will consume at some point even if the prices are cheaper later. People won't refrain from buying stuff forever, especially things like food.
Also look at consumer electronics coming down in price, people constantly bought these things even though prices would come down the next year.
At some point they might want or try, but the issue is not that at some point they will, it's that by that point it might be too late. We saw that happen in real time, in 1929. Shit is not the way it is becuase of some stupid conspiracy and the jews, it's because we took hard pills during the process.

[Anonymous No.54052152]

>>54052114
>I didn't realize individuals could just print money into existence.
They don't. They work fucking jobs to generate that money lmao.
Dude, what the fuck?

>durrr then how does their employer get the money
By selling products and services?


Essentially what is happening here is the debtor is giving the lender $50.
Why does new money need to be created for this trade to take place?

[Anonymous No.54052172]

>>54052074
>But it literally existed in the past and was successful. Why are you coping over reality?
Name me a single full reserve bank that was not created by a goverment. You can't, such a stupid idea cannot beat fractional reserve banking in a free banking system, because it's the worst type of banking.

[Anonymous No.54052188]

>>54052152
>They work fucking jobs to generate that money lmao.
Jobs don't print money, jackass. The money has to be created by a bank first.

[Anonymous No.54052213]

>>54052152
>Essentially what is happening here is the debtor is giving the lender $50
The debtor is giving the lender $1050 when only $1000 existed in our hypothetical economy before. Where does the $50 come from?

[Anonymous No.54052256]

>>54052150
>Long Depression
Literally a myth. Real wages grew rapidly throughout this period.
https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Long_Depression

So no, this economy wasn't destroyed, it thrived. We had double digit growth rates for decades.

>either YOU pay them to keep the money safe
Their storage fees pales in comparison to the profit you will make by saving the money as prices fell. You still profit.

>Of course if the business that loaned the money crashed, it's bye bye your money since the bank cannot give you the money from someone else, in order to keep a fully reserve.
Then don't agree to lend it? Of course lending is a risk.

>why would a bank do such a thing?
To get people to invest with them?

>All free banking system have been fractional reserve, even in your magical scenarios, there was printing of money.
The late 1800s was a gold standard with no money printing.

>What the fuck do you mean it's a myth?
It was created by keynesians and literally never happened.

>if fucking happened during the Great Recession of the 30s.
This was simply a correction due to the massive money printing prior. The main culprit was the INFLATION not deflation.
>There was no printing at that point
The fed massively print money in the 20s.

>t's that by that point it might be too late.
Wrong, you have no evidence of this.


>We saw that happen in real time, in 1929.
1929 was the fault of government intervention, not "deflation".

[Anonymous No.54052289]

>>54052172
>Name me a single full reserve bank that was not created by a goverment.
Almost every bank during the gilded age?
>because it's the worst type of banking.
Then why did we have double digit growth during that period?

>>54052188
>Jobs don't print money, jackass.
I never said they did.

>The money has to be created by a bank first.
Wrong. Historically people used gold and gold certificates as money.

>>54052213
>The debtor is giving the lender $1050 when only $1000 existed in our hypothetical economy before.
That's not how this works lmfao
It's like you're saying if someone performs labor for you for $50, they are generating that 50 from thin air.
The lender is providing a service to the debtor and the debtor gives the lender $50 for that service. It's no different from dry cleaning your shirts. I mean wtf anon it's not that hard to figure out.

[Anonymous No.54052294]

Abolish the fed

[Anonymous No.54052298]

>>54046707
Without fractional reserves you would be making 25 cents per hour.

[Anonymous No.54052313]

>>54052298
>Without fractional reserves you would be making 25 cents per hour.
and prices for everything would cost 0.00001 cents
based

[Anonymous No.54052411]

>>54052289
Anon, for the last time, try to focus your peanut brain.
Think of an economy with only two people. One guy borrows $1000 and has to pay it back plus interest. Where does the interest come from?
Now take that basic baby example and apply it to the economy of a country and you'll understand why usury requires growth of the money supply.

[Anonymous No.54052475]

>>54052256
>Literally a myth. Real wages grew rapidly throughout this period.
Yeah your source if garbage. The entire first paragraph only has a single quote of a book, with no mention of the page it was extracted. They mention a 3% annual growth, yet they ignore that before the Long Recession the annual growth was over 6.2%. They also mention "an extraordinarily large expansion of industry, of railroads, of physical output..." yet they are too sleazy to mention the fall of the price of many other products, like grain in 1894 being a third of the real price of 1867, or the price of cotton falling nearly 50% in just five years, fucking the entire agricultural sector.

>So no, this economy wasn't destroyed, it thrived. We had double digit growth rates for decades.
It fucking tanked, just because it was the growth rate was 3% doesn't mean it didn't fucking went down the drain from a 6.2%.

>Their storage fees pales in comparison to the profit you will make by saving the money as prices fell. You still profit.
Two problems: the first is that this sort of mentality just stagnates economies, since everyone would just hoard money instead of using it to produce and invest in shit. And second, your scenario of you profiting are only true if a deflation spiral doesn't ensues, which is not a certainty.

>Then don't agree to lend it? Of course lending is a risk.
What a fucking nice economy, everyone just hoarding money, no one spending or leaving other take it as a loan, it will surely produce a lot of works and investments.

>To get people to invest with them?
they can just win money by asking you to pay them to hoard it, which according to you would be the ideal strategy here. A completely still economy where no one invests because why when you can just keep the money in a lock?

>The late 1800s was a gold standard with no money printing.
Complete fucking bullshit. There was fractional reserve all the way through. Provide a single source for this stupid claim.

[Anonymous No.54052499]

>>54052289
>Almost every bank during the gilded age?
All worked with a fucking fractional reserve system. There is not a single source you can pull out your ass saying the contrary because it's pure fantasy. Not even austrian would deny such a thing. Full reserve systems are retarded and garbage, that's why they are never produced in free banking systems.

[Anonymous No.54052529]

>>54052256
>This was simply a correction due to the massive money printing prior. The main culprit was the INFLATION not deflation.
What inflation nigger? the great recession had prices going down, not up. There was no fucking correction.

>The fed massively print money in the 20s.
And where was your massive inflation that never happened? the great depresion had lower prices, no higher.

[Anonymous No.54052554]

>>54052313
And half the population would be fucking unemployed because why the fuck would you even buy shit if you can just wait a little longer for the price to go even lower?

[Anonymous No.54052561]

have you guys actually read the talmud? it holds many secrets

[Anonymous No.54052611]

>>54052411
>Where does the interest come from?
From the other person working a job to generate that income.

How is this any different from someone dry cleaning someone's shirt for $50?
Where does THAT money come from?
Think about it.
What exactly is the problem here you don't understand?
If we ignored the whole loan thing and focused on what is actually happening, it's simply a transfer of $50 from one person to another.

>>54052475
>Yeah your source if garbage.
Clearly you didn't read it.
>The entire first paragraph only has a single quote of a book, with no mention of the page it was extracted.
It's just a summary of many books anon.
>They mention a 3% annual growth, yet they ignore that before the Long Recession the annual growth was over 6.2%.
Soooo it was a "recession" with positive year over year growth? 3% growth nowadays would be considered an economic miracle.
I thought you said deflation "destroyed" the economy?
Also, the reason this economic turmoil even happened was government intervention, which wouldn't exist in a free market.

>It fucking tanked, just because it was the growth rate was 3% doesn't mean it didn't fucking went down the drain from a 6.2%.
What kind of cope is this? I would much rather have 3% growth for a few years than the negative growth rates we get today with inflationary economy.

>the first is that this sort of mentality just stagnates economies,
3-6% growth is stagnation?
>since everyone would just hoard money
Good, this would push down prices for capital goods meaning capital projects are cheaper.

>no one spending or leaving other take it as a loan
People will do this all of the time to get a better return than simply saving. But if they're pussies they would simply save. Most money would be lent out to capital projects. What's the problem?

[Anonymous No.54052655]

>>54052499
>Full reserve systems are retarded and garbage, that's why they are never produced in free banking systems.
They aren't used because governments are evil and don't want them to be used.
You know it's the truth.

>>54052529
>What inflation nigger?
The inflation of the 1920s. The fed print a bunch of money during that time creating a bubble.

>And where was your massive inflation that never happened?
Inflation is printing of money and yes prices rose as well.

>the great depresion had lower prices, no higher.
No shit, you missed my point. Prices rose in the 20s and then when the bubble popped, prices fell

[Anonymous No.54052681]

>>54052611
>From the other person working a job to generate that income.
what job? There’s only two people in this economy, and the only money in existence is the $1000 one loaned to the other. Think really hard about this, and try to not pilpul us with your answer for where the interest payment comes from

[Anonymous No.54052682]

>>54052554
>And half the population would be fucking unemployed
Then why was there such a low unemployment rate during the gilded age?

>why the fuck would you even buy shit if you can just wait a little longer for the price to go even lower?
Because you don't give a fuck if prices will be a bit lower in a year because you want the product now?
Why didn't your retarded hypothetical happen to the consumer electronics industry?

[Anonymous No.54052695]

>>54052561
>have you guys actually read the talmud? it holds many secrets

[Anonymous No.54052717]

>>54052681
>There’s only two people in this economy
Oh. In that case there is zero need for money, and everything is barter. Why even speak of such an economy and not a real one where there is lots of people and thus money?

>Think really hard about this
You think hard about this. You got btfo and you aren't making any fucking sense.

>pilpul
Jews will torture and murder your family and they will be ethically correct. :)

[Anonymous No.54052803]

>>54052717
I’m not the other anon you fucking retard. Learn to read ids
>Why even speak of such an economy and not a real one where there is lots of people and thus money?
Because it’s the simplest model which illustrates the point me and the other guy are trying to make. Here, I’ll phrase it another way: if all money is loaned into existence by banks, where precisely do the interest payments for those loans come from?

[Anonymous No.54052811]

>>54052611
>Clearly you didn't read it.
Explain how, in detail.

>It's just a summary of many books anon.
Complete fucking bullshit. The entire paragraph only has a single source, this one: "Friedman, Schwartz. A Monetary History of the United States: 1867-1960." What, "many books" are you talking about, nigger?

>Soooo it was a "recession" with positive year over year growth? 3% growth nowadays would be considered an economic miracle.
It was a recession because the growth went down. A 3% would be a miracle in a developed economy, but in the 1800s, during the first major expansion of a countries economy that's fucking garbage.

>I thought you said deflation "destroyed" the economy?
Never said such thing, nigger. You asked why wasn't there any fuckery with the economy in the late 1800s when we literally had a Long Depression. But yes, there was a fucking deflation. For example, while your bullshit source claims there was an increase in the production of iron, it's price halved, as most products did. Ironically, this was caused by the Bank Panic of 1873 due to deflation. You tell me how was there a Bank Panic in your alledged "fully reserve" system.

>Also, the reason this economic turmoil even happened was government intervention, which wouldn't exist in a free market.
You are aware there was a bank panic triggering the whole event? in a free banking period.

>What kind of cope is this? I would much rather have 3% growth for a few years than the negative growth rates we get today with inflationary economy.
There is no fucking way you are getting a 3% growth in a fully developed economy like the US, stop making fantasies in your head.

>3-6% growth is stagnation?
For an economy going through his first phases of expansion? yes. You expect at least 5-6% growth per year until the economy is fully developed at which point the growth goes down.

[Anonymous No.54052831]

>>54052611
>Good, this would push down prices for capital goods meaning capital projects are cheaper.
Yeah, and who the fuck is going to have the money to make this capital projects? you either need to suck the dick of some aristocrat for the money or just day dream because the banks are not lending, everyone is just hoarding money.

>People will do this all of the time to get a better return than simply saving. But if they're pussies they would simply save. Most money would be lent out to capital projects. What's the problem?
The problem is that if you are lending you cannot touch that money. So if you lend, you are basically losing the rights over that money for extended periods of time. No one would agree to such a stupid thing, or few would, meaning an entire contraction of the economy as there is less money to lend.

[Anonymous No.54052834]

>>54052803
He's just baiting now, anon.

[Anonymous No.54052907]

>>54052655
>They aren't used because governments are evil and don't want them to be used.
What law has ever in the history of the entire banking system forbid anyone from creating such a bank? there is no such law, never was. No one does it because they are not braindead. The whole idea is fucking stupid.

>The inflation of the 1920s. The fed print a bunch of money during that time creating a bubble.
Yeah, you are full of shit. What "inflation of the 1920s"? inflation peaked in 1920, and then it went down, the it rose until 1924 (almost 6 years before the Great Depression) stayed more or less stable all through the 20s.

>Inflation is printing of money and yes prices rose as well.
Pure fucking lies.

>No shit, you missed my point. Prices rose in the 20s and then when the bubble popped, prices fell
You are just making shit up.

[Anonymous No.54052930]

>>54052682
>Then why was there such a low unemployment rate during the gilded age?
Because contrary to your delusion, printing has been a staple of all modern banking systems. Free banking had fractional reserve.

>Because you don't give a fuck if prices will be a bit lower in a year because you want the product now?
why would you wait a year? just wait a couple weeks.

>Why didn't your retarded hypothetical happen to the consumer electronics industry?
Because we live in a world where inflation is kept steady at 2% annual.

[Anonymous No.54052972]

>>54052803
>Because it’s the simplest model
But it doesn't apply to our debate. Money is irrelevant in a barter economy. Who is he going to trade that 50 bucks he got from the other guy with? The trees?

You're simply wrong and jumping through mental gymnastics.

>if all money is loaned into existence by banks, where precisely do the interest payments for those loans come from?
It comes from the printed money the banks printed.
Way to completely change the subject again. We were talking about usury, not fractional reserve banking.

>>54052811
>The entire paragraph only has a single source
The article links to 4 books all with many sources.

>It was a recession because the growth went down
Kind of pathetic to call 3% growth a recession. Why does my system have higher growth than yours on average?
Also, I'm not denying there wasn't economic downturns during this period. Every single one of them can be explained by government intervention.
https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Panics

>but in the 1800s, during the first major expansion of a countries economy that's fucking garbage.
LMFAO America was the fastest growing economy in the world. It was the most prosperous economy in the world.

>this was caused by the Bank Panic of 1873 due to deflation.
No, idiot. This was caused by massive increases in production of these goods, not due to a downturn.

>You are aware there was a bank panic triggering the whole event?
Yes?
Due to intervention. See the link.

>There is no fucking way you are getting a 3% growth in a fully developed economy like the US
This is just a cope honestly.
A deflationary economy is simply superior to an inflationary one.

>>54052831
>who the fuck is going to have the money to make this capital projects?
People who are "hoarding" all of this money you are so scared of. The savings rate would be much larger.
>you either need to suck the dick of some aristocrat
The general population would have a lot more savings, there would be less concentration of wealth.

[Anonymous No.54053039]

>>54052907
>What law has ever in the history of the entire banking system forbid anyone from creating such a bank?
When did I say that? That wasn't the issue. The issue is that they were letting other banks fraudulently do fractional reserve banking, or the state itself was printing money through central banks.
>What "inflation of the 1920s"?
The federal reserve literally print a bunch of money in the 1920s.
Inflation is the expansion of the money supply. Prices fell despite the money printing. If there was no money printing, prices would have been even lower.
Also a lot of this money ended up in the stock market, fueling the bubble.

>printing has been a staple of all modern banking systems.
The amount of printing during the gilded age had to be backed up by gold.

>why would you wait a year?
You wouldn't. You would want the product now. You value having the product now over the 30 bucks you would save if you bought the product a year from now. Idiot.

>Because we live in a world where inflation is kept steady at 2% annual.
Yet consumer electronics experienced MASSIVE deflation, yet there was no deflationary spiral causing this industry to collapse.
Deflationary spiral is a myth.

[Anonymous No.54053172]

>>54046707
>Fractional reserves should be illegal
don't worry, the fed eliminated them in 2020, setting requirements to zero

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm

[Anonymous No.54053255]

>>54052972
>The article links to 4 books all with many sources.
Yeah four sources my ass. The first source is just the entire fucking book, no pages given so it's impossible to check it out. The second source is from a journal ( https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700109994 ) which is talking about fucking England yet your bullshit link talks about the conditions of the US (by mentioning the Civil War), which is mixing two completely different countries. The other two sources are equally garbage.

>Kind of pathetic to call 3% growth a recession. Why does my system have higher growth than yours on average?
What is "your" system? a full reserve system? that was never a thing nigger, so I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

>Also, I'm not denying there wasn't economic downturns during this period. Every single one of them can be explained by government intervention.
But your system is a delusion, there has never been a free banking system with a complete gold standard. You are talking about a complete made up myth of yours.

>https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Panics
How was the banking crisis of 1873 caused by state intervention, exactly?

>LMFAO America was the fastest growing economy in the world. It was the most prosperous economy in the world.
Who denied that, nigger? read my words.

>No, idiot. This was caused by massive increases in production of these goods, not due to a downturn.
But there was a downturn, how do you explain it exactly?

>A deflationary economy is simply superior to an inflationary one
Oh yes, like in the Great Depression. Such nice times.

[Anonymous No.54053277]

>>54052972
>People who are "hoarding" all of this money you are so scared of. The savings rate would be much larger.
If everyone is hoarding the money then no one is loaning it, meaning no one has the money to create or expand industries so you cant buy shit with the money you are hoarding.

>The general population would have a lot more savings, there would be less concentration of wealth.
Savings to do what? no one is loaning money, thus, no one is producing shit. Prices will fall of course, problem is, no one will be producing much of anything.

[Anonymous No.54053278]

>>54046707
if i owned a bank i would make infinite loans for the lulz.

[Anonymous No.54053391]

>>54053039
>When did I say that? That wasn't the issue. The issue is that they were letting other banks fraudulently do fractional reserve banking, or the state itself was printing money through central banks.
Why was there never a full reserve bank not created by the state during the free banking period of any state then? if its such a fucking good thing, then why didn't the free markets created it?

>Inflation is the expansion of the money supply. Prices fell despite the money printing. If there was no money printing, prices would have been even lower.
Inflation is the general rise in prices tho. Your idea that prices would've been even lower is just pure delusion, with zero evidence. The fact is, the production was going in tandem with the printing, meaning there was more money, but there were more industries and work, hence why there was no inflation despite the printing.

>Also a lot of this money ended up in the stock market, fueling the bubble.
in contrast with what? this magical world where there is both free banking and full reserve? a complete made up shit that has never existed in the history of any free banking period.

>The amount of printing during the gilded age had to be backed up by gold.
Just fractionally backed up by gold. There has never been a fully reserve bank that is not state sponsored. Ever.

[Anonymous No.54053412]

>>54053039
>You wouldn't. You would want the product now. You value having the product now over the 30 bucks you would save if you bought the product a year from now. Idiot.
That might work for certain products, but for non-essential items it wouldn't. Issue is, once the non-essentual items companies go to shit and kick people, this unemployed people will just consume less of the essential products, meaning those companies would go down eventually too. No one said it would start with the food industries, but it would eventually get there if nothing is done. It fucking happened in the 30s, thats why we know it can happen.

>Yet consumer electronics experienced MASSIVE deflation, yet there was no deflationary spiral causing this industry to collapse.
Why it fucking would? there was no reduction in the money supply. A deflationary spiral can only happen where is a reduction in the money flowing through the entire economy. You don't need a single industry to fall, but many, at the same time.

[Anonymous No.54053483]

Withdraw your money from bank.

Turn it into gold.

When you deposit money into the bank, they do all sorts of gambling, stocks, leverage trading, interests rate (enslaving humans)

Put an end to their organized financial crimes by stop using their serivces.

[Anonymous No.54053493]

>>54046707
>As announced on March 15, 2020, the Board reduced reserve requirement ratios to zero percent effective March 26, 2020. This action eliminated reserve requirements for all depository institutions.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm
What fractional reserve?

[Anonymous No.54053567]

>>54053483
Precious metals are going to have the biggest bull market in their history if the contagion spreads to other banks next week.

All of the crypto faggots who called gold a "boomer investment" are going to get BTFO'd by the techies and tech companies forced to liquidate their crypto on exchanges because it's not held in their custody. You idiots really think what happened to SVB can't happen to crypto exchanges?

[Anonymous No.54053601]

Actual question - apart from fees for transaction, currency exchanges, quick liquidity, etc., how would any banks make money without fractional reserve banking if every deposit has to stay in their accounts?

[Anonymous No.54053610]

>>54053567

Crypto is good, as long as it is proof-of-work

[Anonymous No.54053649]

>>54046707
stop fucking complaining. Banks should have 1annual bail out joker in case they make bad choice or are not lucky.

[Anonymous No.54053675]

>>54053610
BTC still doesn't fucking work

[Anonymous No.54053735]

>>54053601
There would be two ways:
1) they would charge you a fee: Basically, you pay them so they can secure your money in a vault.
2) they ask for your money: say the bank knows of this certain guy who has a good idea for a company, that will only be profitable in 3 years. They go to you and ask you for permision to take your money and give it to this guy in exchange for part of the profit. During the 3 year period, you cannot ask for that money to the bank since it's loaned, and after the three years you can get it back.

Of course, paying to the bank or locking away your money for years is something few will be able to agree to, if there is the chance of going to a bank that pays you and tells you you can withdraw your money at any moment. That's why, in a free economy, a fraction reserve system would always win, because it's far more attractive to the customer.

[Anonymous No.54053813]

>>54053735
>2) they ask for your money: say the bank knows of this certain guy who has a good idea for a company, that will only be profitable in 3 years. They go to you and ask you for permision to take your money and give it to this guy in exchange for part of the profit. During the 3 year period, you cannot ask for that money to the bank since it's loaned, and after the three years you can get it back.
Banks don't loan out customer deposits to other customers, they conjure the money from thin air.
Why is this myth so common place, /biz/ should know better?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521914001070
https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/10/31/how-bank-lending-really-creates-money-and-why-the-magic-money-tree-is-not-cost-free/

[Anonymous No.54053927]

>>54053813
I know that. I was talking about a hypothetical scenario where there is full reserve banking, which was the question asked. In a full reserve banking, you cannot make up money via credit, you need to loan someone else money in full.

[Anonymous No.54053970]

>>54053927
My bad anon

[Anonymous No.54053983]

>>54053813
That other anon is making a hypothetical guess of how a non-franctional-reserve system would work. Not stating how the current system works.

[Anonymous No.54053986]

>>54046707
based

[Anonymous No.54054096]

>>54046707
>>54046986
Based and antisemitic

[Anonymous No.54054214]

>>54054096
I still like bagels though, am I a true antisemite?

[Anonymous No.54056184]

>>54047379
Seriously, the retort to this has been, "don't worry bro, got muh capital controls."
anybody know?
AFAIK, it means they still have a lot of short term securities that are next to cash.

[Anonymous No.54057819]

>>54048432
Kinda want

[Anonymous No.54058726]

>>54057819
but the banks just use computers, so $1000 in equals $9000 out. you don't need all the extra steps

[Anonymous No.54059034]

let's not be anti-semitic now

[Anonymous No.54059100]

>>54046707
>Fractional reserves should be illegal
imagine if they did.
90% of world capital would instantly vanish, since it's all derivatives.
>t. jew

[Anonymous No.54059584]

>>54046707
>>54046716
>>54046778

[Anonymous No.54059644]

I mean. Nothing is stopping people from setting up a full reserve bank. Seems like they would get a lot of customers. Ofc they would have to charge you for depositing.