You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Banks Are Crooks, Inventing Money as Loans to Profit on Interest Payments

in #banking6 years ago

This is the society we live in. An institution can loan you money they don't have by creating it out of thin air as a negative book entry with your promise to pay it back to balance out the book entry. And meanwhile, they make a profit from you paying them interest on the money they didn't even take from anywhere. It's not even their money. They just have this magical power to do what we can't and invent money that isn't taken from anywhere.

In fact, if they take that money from somewhere, do you want to know where? they take it from their bank account, from mine, and from the money they have under the mattress, basically, the credit is a money transfer, they take a fraction from each of us and they give it to the person who receives the credit, how? by means of inflation, when giving money to someone emitting new money, what they really do is to remove all of us purchasing power silently. This is the way bankers run the economy.

Suppose there are 100 people, and each of them has 1 dollar, then the Banker comes and gives a loan of 20 dollars to an entrepreneur (which in this case is going to represent the corporatocracy), and he injects those dollars into the economy, which generates inflation, assuming that he spends the money in a distributed way, all prices will rise 20%, that is, the dollar would have depreciated 20%, it is as if it were really worth 0.80 cents of the original dollar. But then, since inflation would be very high, that is to say 20%, what the State does is raise taxes, suppose that it raises taxes to 0.17 cents per person, thus raising 17 dollars, which the State will then pay to bank of course. In this way inflation is only 3%, because 17 dollars were withdrawn from the economy, and it ends up generating enormous inequality, since the entrepreneur who gave him the loan ends up taking a substantial wealth.

In fact, I wrote about it in a recent publication: The hand of the invisible men: How the social hierarchy works.

Here I also leave a video that talks about the credit process that caused the crisis of 2008 and is very good, and well explained.

Sort:  

Yes, I was going to add a bit about the larger inflation issue and how that devalues the currency and makes money less valuable, a hidden tax. But it was long enough ;) Thanks for adding this info.

In Steem, there is a 9.5% annual inflation. That newly minted STEEM and SBD is given out as rewards for content creators. What do you think about that?

I think that in the case of Steem and SBD we can not talk about inflation, since there are no goods and services assessed in Steem and in SBD. In the case of these cryptocurrencies we can speak of appreciation and depreciation of their value, and this depends on the supply and demand of Steem and SBD that exists in the Exchange.

Inflation simply refers to the growth of the money supply. You could argue that STEEM is not sound money because new STEEM coins are minted out of nowhere as rewards for content creators and curators. Exactly the same way, in fractional reserve banking new money is created every time a loan is issued to be used in creating something of real-world value someone is willing to pay money for to go towards paying the loan back. Inflation of the money supply is not the problem of the fractional reserve banking.

The problem is that the banks have too much power over everyone else. and they have been shown to abuse it many cases. But with stable money supply and price deflation, it is not easy to create an expanding economy. Price stability is impossible if the supply of new money is not made to match the supply of new value.

The amount of money can remain exactly the same, but if the demand for money decreases, an inflation scenario can arise, that is, a general increase in prices in relation to a given currency. What does this mean? Although the main cause of inflation is the issue of money, this is not an absolute condition in itself, because it needs to be compared with the demand for money.

Actually, it does not matter only the new units of SBD that are issued, what matters is the amount of Steem and SBD that is bought and sold in the Exchange, of course, the higher the amount of Steem and SDB issued, the more it is likely to increase. volume in the Exchange and consequently the price is affected.

But the price of the Steem and the SBD does not necessarily have to be lowered by the fact that it is issuing new units, in fact, it has not done so, but it has increased its value despite having a growing mass.

When the SBD reached $ 14, it was the result of a boom in cryptocurrencies, which caused the demand of the altcoins to increase, among them the SBD, which caused the price to rise a lot. The decrease in the price that the SBD had later, was not due to the issuance of new units of SBD, but was due to the excess supply and the decrease in SBD demand in the Exchange.

I already noted the difference between supply and price inflation.

The argument still stands that supply inflation may be called theft for the same reasons as price inflation - even moreso because it is 100% under the control of the issuer.

Now, the headline on this thread is not effective criticism of the banking system because money supply inflation is desirable. Allowing banks to keep interest as income is also fine in principle because banks are businesses that have operating costs: staff, IT infrastucture and office space etc. It is also normal and acceptable that they keep some of that as profit for shareholders.

The most potent argument against the banking system is, in my opinion that they've become too large to fail. This creates a moral hazard. Because they know that the government is forced to bail them out, they will take larger risks they would otherwise take.

Well, yes, that way you're right.

The problem with the bank is not that they charge interest, the problem is that the money they lend has not been saved. In a healthy economy, a free market economy, people must save money, part of that money people are willing to invest, so they deposit it in an interest-bearing account, in this way, the bank can lend that money to a greater interest, and that's how they earn their share. Now, none of that happens, what they do is totally immoral and is a theft to all of us.

But the important thing is to understand that they do not do it to obtain money, they do it because it is their way of governing us. The socialist economies run the State and the Market with legislations and controls that are easy to see for people who are attentive, but this system, this credit system, is really very intelligent, since it allows them to direct the economy just as they do these other interventionist governments, but in a silent way, no one notices, not even the employees who work in their financial institutions do, the points are very difficult to connect because they are not on the table but below it, so they do not occur account that those who issue the credit are part of the same group that receives them.

In the free market, consumers are the ones who decide how the economy is conducted, but they have created this illusion, the illusion that we live in capitalism, but no, they take the power of consumers and give it to themselves.

The problem with the bank is not that they charge interest, the problem is that the money they lend has not been saved. In a healthy economy, a free market economy, people must save money, part of that money people are willing to invest, so they deposit it in an interest-bearing account, in this way, the bank can lend that money to a greater interest, and that's how they earn their share. Now, none of that happens, what they do is totally immoral and is a theft to all of us.

Under that system, no new money gets created. If there is economic growth, there can't be price stability, or vice versa.

I think I did not understand?