Bitcoin Forum

This thread is my pursuit to summarize how does the current monetary system work (in USA) and explain some terms such as fractional reserve lending. The system is purposely difficult to understand, so I'll try to break it down as much as I can.

Everything begins when the government starts creating bonds. These bonds are essentially meant to be sold with an interest. It's like saying “Hey, give me some trillions of dollars and I'll pay you back in a decade plus an interest”. These bonds are our national debt, because we're the ones who're going to pay them in the future.

The bond is then auctioned and the world's largest banks buy it to receive the sweet interests. The banks then swap those IOUs with the Federal Reserve's checks which brings money into existence. It looks like this:


So what's actually happening is that the FED and the treasury swap IOUs (checks & bonds) with banks as middlemen. This process continues repeatedly enriching the banks and indebting the public by increasing the national debt.

---

---

Fractional Reserve Lending

When you're depositing money in a bank, you shouldn't imagine that they're keeping those money in a safe closet. Instead, they loan it to other people, so you should consider that you're actually loaning them your money.

Now what's fractional reserve lending... It's exactly what it says. The banks are allowed to reserve only a fraction of your deposit and do whatever they want with the rest of it. According to Modern Money Mechanics the reserve ratio is 10%, so let's use this simple percentage in our example.

Let's assume you deposit $1000. The bank can now take $900 of those and lend them to someone. It is reasonable to think that these $900 come out from your $1000. However, that's not the case. What really happens is that these $900 are created out of thin air on top of the $1000. This is how the money supply is extended. Bare with me.

The bank creates a check (a liability) saying that you own $1000 even though, they have only kept $100 of your deposited dollars. The other $900 have been lent. Once the borrower deposits their $900 hard cash in their bank, the bank will give them a liability of $900, but will also keep only 10% of it. The bank can also lend those $810 and keep only the $90.

NOTE: The liability is an IOU. It's nothing more than that, but it is considered currency since it's used as medium of exchange instead of cash.

If we continue this further we can notice that there's always some liability which is 10 times greater the assets you deposited and your bank is keeping.

Seriously, the cash remains the same. It's $1000. But, they liability constantly rises; it's $1000 + $900 + $810 + + + ... = $10000.

As a conclusion, the currency supply expands. Specifically, around 92-96% of all the currency supply is created from this very procedure and not from the government.

---

---

So, in this fractional reserve system there're two folks who decide about the nation's faith. The government and the banks (AKA - Fed). The interests of each bond increase the debt you and your descendants are doomed to repay. In this monetary system as long as there's demand for loans and reserve for them, the currency will be inflated.

Outside this system, only currency minting is considered the cause of inflation. You may have seen Bitcoin been brought as a solution to this fraudulent and built-to-be-corrupted system; the reason is simple: If there isn't a FED which controls the economy and increases the nation's debt, which is what pulls you to poverty and enriches the banks, this exploitation will cease to exist.

Reserved. (I may continue this depending on how much recognition it'll gain)

Interesting post. I already knew basically what you explain but many people don't know it. Another thing I would mention, is that with this system the Cantillon effect occurs, with which those who are closer to the artificially created money take advantage of the system to enrich themselves. You have pointed it out, but you have not mentioned the effect as such.

Another thing. Are you sure the fractional reserve is still 10%? I have been looking for information, because I heard that in Europe it was lower, and I find this:

"Overnight Deposit, Deposit,Debt Securities, Money Market Paper was set as 1.0 % in Apr 2021." (In the EU)

Source: European Union Reserve Requirement Ratio (https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/european-union/reserve-requirement-ratio)

In this article there is a table comparing the reserve ratio between the countries of the world. In the case of the USA, I see that it is 0%.

So, I have looked for some external source to CEIC, and I see in Investopedia (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/requiredreserves.asp):

"In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Federal Reserve reduced the reserve requirement ratio to zero across all deposit tiers, effective March 26, 2020.6 The aim of this reduction was to jump-start the economy by allowing banks to use additional liquidity to lend to individuals and businesses."

Which makes me think that we are in a total financial casino economy and also now the FED has no more room to go lower if another crisis comes. What is it going to do? Lower the reserve ratio to negative and allow banks to lend even if no one deposits?

Yes. That is true as of 2020. Since keeping only the 10% makes the supply 10 times greater, imagine what happens when they keep no reserves. This is when the “∞/21M” meme/joke became famous. The infinity symbol indicates the current money supply.

Indeed, since there's no limit in the currency inflation, you ought to be protected from a safe haven asset, otherwise you'll be pulled to poverty one way or another. Whether that asset is gold, Bitcoin, stocks etc. Although, I think that based on what's waiting us, Bitcoin is the best choice.

Correct. You can see the Fed's press release here: https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm. The reserve requirements have remained at 0% to the present day.

This already happens, and indeed, is how that majority of new money printing happens. Whenever someone approaches a bank to take out a loan, the bank creates a matching credit and debit at the same time. They give you $1000 of credit (for example), and simultaneously create a matching $1000 of debt in your name. The bottom line of their balance sheet doesn't change, but now you have $1000 you didn't have 2 minutes ago. This is brand new money with no additional reserve. The bank does not have to wait for someone to make a matching deposit before they can hand out a loan.

What I wonder is what comes next? They have convinced the whole world to use monopoly money which they can create whenever they want, but they should know such model is not sustainable and sooner or later will collapse, so what is the next step they have planned after the collapse of the current system comes? Or do they really believe that a system that exploits the vast majority of the population of the world can continue uninterrupted?

When considering the US national debt, then there are only two possibilities for the long term: It increases or it decreases.

The last time the US government turned a surplus and the debt decreased was in 2001. We were in a relatively small deficit until causing a constant small increase in the debt until the financial crash of 2008, when the deficit hit record levels. The deficit decreased from ~$1.5 trillion to ~$0.5 trillion between 2008 and 2016, before increasing every year under Trump up to $1 trillion again. Then COVID hit and the deficit surged to over $3 trillion. The fall out from COVID and associated spending, as well as the legacy of Trump's 2017 tax cuts, means that the deficit is projected to come back down to $1.5 trillion and slowly increase to $2.5 trillion over the next 10 years. But then all we need is another financial crisis or other major event and the deficit will be even higher.

Knowing all this, I can't see how the debt is going to be brought under control any time soon. To even just eliminate the deficit and break even, the US government would have to decrease spending massively on everything from education to healthcare to infrastructure to salaries to pensions to social security to the military... you name it, probably associated with increase taxes. Every sector would take a massive hit, and with lower disposable incomes and widespread job losses the economy take yet another hit. And that would just be to stop the debt growing. To actually start reducing the debt would be another thing altogether.

And so the only real outcome is the debt continues to increase. As a percentage of GDP, out debt is over 130%. During the Greek financial crisis back in 2010, their debt-to-GDP ratio was 150%. It will only be a couple of years before we surpass those levels. The question is how long will the rest of the world continue to have faith in a currency which, as you say, is turning in to monopoly money.

That definitely doesn't look good, and seen from the other side of the big pond people who understand what's going on there are pretty worried, it's no secret that sooner or later everything bad will spill over from the US to the rest of the world. It's even harder for me to watch the US president in that story, because given all the recent weird statements, is it just confusion or is it dementia? Man loses his balance, but as it seems, the ability to judge is not something we can trust.

When you ask a question of confidence in the US dollar, I think that US foreign policy is putting (as always) a lot of pressure on the rest of the world - and few can afford to say no, given that we know how aggressive that policy can be. If we go further, the spearhead of that policy is, to my understanding, an incredible military presence around the world. The latest figures show that the US has 750 military bases in at least 80 different countries around the world (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/10/infographic-us-military-presence-around-the-world-interactive), and about 173 000 troops deployed in as many as 159 countries, which does not include covert operations and covert bases.

It seems to me that this is more than enough for anyone to start doubting the US dollar, no matter how deep it really fell into the abyss.

     As someone being on a third world country, I am pretty curious on how the monetary systems work in other countries specially in the US. Upon reading, I realized that there are some similarities with the monetary systems if not the same,  despite the difference in economical statuses. The thing that I like the most about this post though is the quote from Henry Ford which applies not only to the US citizens but also to other country's citizens be it in a flourishing country or not.

     I can't help but wonder though, if crypto really does get legalized fully will it really have drastic effects on the current monetary systems? Will the effects be good and will make it easier for the people to adopt or will it be detrimental to the economy and the country as a whole? Hmm...

It is no secret that we spend a ridiculous amount of money on our military. We spent around $800 billion this year, more than the next 11 countries combined. If we had instead spent the same as the next biggest spender, which is China at $250 billion, then not only would the debt have grown at $550 billion less a year, we would actually have turned a surplus during the last years of the Obama presidency. But despite all this, Senators are still trying to  secure another $50 billion for the military in the current spending bills going through Congress.

No country or government is going to come out and say "The US dollar is trash!", because their currency is unlikely to be faring much better right now. Instead what will happen is that there will be less foreign investment and fewer foreign business buying, holding, and using USD. No amount of military presence will change that.

Well, the obvious huge difference is that the government can't create or borrow money which didn't exist a second ago in order to continue to pay off its debts and keep functioning. When it runs out of money, then it runs out of money. It could be a great lesson in fiscal responsibility, but more likely what would happen is that they would come up with some new fractional reserve system between various governments and central banks which would allow them to spend 100 BTC for everyone 1 they actually hold.

I don't know too much of the story, but in the past, US dollar was the king in oil trades; for some time Euro is catching up.
Again, I am not 100% sure that this information is correct, but if it's so, it can be seen as a "declaration" against US Dollar.
Of course, Euro is not really better. I hope to see the day Bitcoin takes over.

But, why would they legalize and enforce Bitcoin usage if they continued using a fractional reserve system? Correct me if I'm wrong, but such system works only if there's demanding for new loans AND available reserve from the clients' deposits.

For instance, I may not want to move around with $10,000 neither to store them in a closet, so I'll deposit it in a bank and feel safe. But, with Bitcoin there's no need to worry for such scenario. It can be hidden much easier than with cash. You also don't need to move around with it, as you can send most of your coins to a cold storage.

In the current monetary system, your bank is useful. You use it to transact with. When it comes to withdraw your funds, they give you an IOU which can be used as currency.

I may have messed up some things again, but it seems to me that the easiness Bitcoin provides replaces some functions of the bank. Currently I need the bank to transact online, so I'm forced to increase their liquidity. With Bitcoin, I won't have to.

You could drop the deficit by sooo much if you could tax the rich properly. And I do not mean like do not give them tax cuts or anything, which nobody should do anyway but also tax them higher in federal ways as well.

Amazon paid zero federal taxes so many years, or so that is what I have been told at least, which means there must be so much tax that is gone just because they do not pay federal taxes, not just amazon but god knows how many companies. Plus when your stock portfolio goes up and you do not sell your stocks, you do not pay much tax I believe, or that is what I believe is the case in USA, I am not from there so these are all from what I read.

All these combined plus a LOT LESS military spending would mean that you would both get a shit ton of taxes coming, no breaks for the rich, and a lot less military spending equals ton of surplus let alone any deficit. It is actually "easy" for USA to not only have a tax surplus but also pay all their debt and have money left over. But why? Why would they do that if the deficit works as intended for them? They want rich to get richer and poor to get poorer, and it is working.

I wasn't thinking so much of a government legalizing and enforcing bitcoin, as opposed to being forced to adopt it because their own money has become worthless and all their citizens are already using it. When counties like Zimbabwe or Argentina experience hyperinflation, they start using the US dollar. When the US dollar starts experiencing hyperinflation, where do they turn instead?

Kind of, but banks do not need deposits or a set amount of deposits before they hand out loans. Bank loans create new money out of thin air.

Not only did they pay $0 in federal taxes, but they actually took advantage of a number of tax incentives, credits, and deductions, which ended up with them receiving over $100 million in refunds from the government in more than one year.

I sometimes feel so lucky that I don't live in the USA.

But, then how will they (the banks) benefit themselves? Until today, they have been controlling the currency along on top of this fractional reserve abuse. Isn't bitcoin's usage suppose to discourage them due to this control loss?

At this point everyone can create money out of thin air as long as there's trust to this person. So, the root of the problem is the banks' policy. This 0% reserve requirement is disgrace. How's the things there in USA about this? Is there concern from the citizens?

---

<off-topic> I've no idea what's the proper way to spell it. Bitcoin or bitcoin? Capitalizing the first letter seems more like a licensed product rather than a scarce commodity. On the other hand, bitcoin is the unit we've agreed on and it may bring confusion. </off-topic>

I agree that the current monetary and fiscal policies in US tend to pass the problems to the next decade and looks like will implode either abruptly or just by slow decadence over a period of massive uncertainty. Good for bitcoin and another argument for Bitconia as a country.

I am very surprised by the fact that US banks do not have a requirement for a factionary reserve, it is like "below zero interest rates", something that seem contrary to how the system is conceived.


I have read somewhere bitcoin for the currency and Bitcoin for the ecosystem / network?

I think people should have the right to reject debts that are owed or collected without their consent.
Or maybe people should be individually sent list of what the debt will be used for so that they can choose which project they want their debt money to go to.
As far as the debt is taken without my consent and I did not use any of the project which the debt is meant for, I could safely say that those accepting debts on my behalf and without my consent are actually owing me

It should, but if (and it's obviously a huge "if") the US government ever did adopt bitcoin, I am certain they would set up various agencies with the goal of attempting to rig the system in their favor or exert some sort of control over bitcoin. Whether or not it all worked would probably depend on whether or not people allowed them to do so. We already know some centralized exchanges run fractional reserve systems with their customers' deposited bitcoin and do not hold everything they should be holding. No reason the US government wouldn't do the same.

There is no concern because hardly anyone knows about it, and the people who do know about it don't understand it. As I said above - banks have always been able to print more money at will by creating new loans. Whether the fractional reserve rate is 10% or 0%, this doesn't change. Reserve requirements are (or were, before we moved to an "ample reserves" model) a way for the Fed to influence interest rates and liquidity by requiring banks to loan money from them at end of day to meet the stated requirements; they were never a method for the Feds to regulate banks' activities or dictate how much they were "allowed" to lend.

What does it mean when they say raising the debt ceiling? I have heard it on the news that Biden administration is planing to do.

The whole monetary system is base on debt as what you have explained here as bonds are just complete shit. Did this debt system started when Nixon take out gold in the equation or its already been there since the bank started?

The debt ceiling is a limit the US government has placed on itself which limits how much debt they are allowed to rack up. Since the US government has been in an annual deficit for the last 20 years (it brings in less money via tax, fines, remittances, etc., than it spends), then government spending has to be financed by taking out loans and accruing debt. If the government hits the debt ceiling, then they can not borrow any more money to pay their bills and fund government expenditure. The government then defaults on their debt. This would result in everything the government funds being subjected to huge spending cuts - things like education, healthcare, the military, social security, transportation, pensions, unemployment benefits, food stamps, veteran's benefits, the list is endless. There would be millions of job losses, trillions in lost revenue, and a massive financial crisis.

So every time the government approaches the debt ceiling, they simply vote to raise it. This happens frequently, and the debt ceiling has been raised over 90 times in the last 100 years. But sometimes one party will decide to delay the process to try to use it score political points over their opponents. But the outcome is always the same: Raise the ceiling and accumulate more debt.

The debt ceiling was created in 1917 to help fund the war effort. The government still had debt before that, but the difference was that Congress had to vote on each individual loan request prior to the debt ceiling being created.

I know that's B stands for the network and b for the unit, but you'd never refer to an asset with a capital letter. Why would you on bitcoin?

Useful for both politicians and the mass. It'd be wise to get some in case the whole world catches it on.

Then, there's this thing missing from the equation of bitcoin. The federal reserve system doesn't rely that much on the existence of a currency which is easily abused by the government, which also needs the banks. Indeed, the inflation can make things worse, but the whole fractional reserve lending has to stop. The USA has to stop borrowing money with interest. Bitcoin adoption won't lead to a less stressful and happier life; there are other drastic measures needed to be taken.

Bitcoin is just the beginning of the differentiation between the government and the money. It won't lead to a better life judging by the current political behavior. Agreed?

Bitcoin is not a magic bullet which will instantly fix all the corruption and ridiculous monetary policy present in Washington. Theoretically, it would prevent the government (and banks) from lending money they don't have, but that's only if people hold their own bitcoin and don't rely on third parties. If I want to take out a loan and hold the bitcoin in my own wallet, then obviously the bank has to send me real bitcoin which they own. If I take out a loan and am happy to hold my bitcoin in a bank wallet or accept some fake wrapped bitcoin or pegged token, then there is nothing stopping them from continuing with the fractional reserve system.

If this bonds are created by the government and issued out on sale to banks with the mind of getting interest in the future how come many countries still remain indebt? Or does this mean each country has their own form of creating this bonds that keeps them indebted?

This national debt been increased does it mean each citizen has a share to pay for the IOUs generated during the swap and if so does this include the charges that get deducted from bank accounts on different occasions?

If this be the case then we should get some interei from the banks for generating resources the lend out to their clients other than charging their customers for various bank maintainance excercise the carry out in which most of them are over charged bills

The most logical part is that, blockchain is a ledger that everyone could see. This way we could ask the governments to show what they are spending the money on one by one and each of them. Right now it is behind a bunch of paperwork, but with blockchain it would be easier to see what they are spending money on.

Plus, we get to see their wallets as well and how rich they are getting from stuff, if they hide it then it is illegal, and if they have other wallets then we put them in jail or take all their money, they need to release every wallet they own, and add "politicians can't own stocks and get paid by the companies" then we would be doing so much more better with proof as well. That's how it should be, blockchain+illegal bribing would make things basically just perfect, after that we will only have people who wants to help, and all the ones that wants to get rich will get out because they can't.

It is not difficult to obfuscate your bitcoin and transaction from all but the most determined of attackers. If the US government were to start using bitcoin, they would have no problem doing so. Take a look at Coinbase, for example. They used to have all the cold storage on a small handful of address, but they have now split their cold storage across thousands of addresses, so much so that no one except Coinbase themselves really know how much they are holding in their reserves. The US government would absolutely do the same kind of thing.

They get to make the rules. If they want to be able to hide bitcoin without it being illegal, then they would simply make it not illegal for the government to hide bitcoin, while still making it illegal for everyone else to hide bitcoin.

And how exactly do you propose seizing someone's bitcoin if it is held in their own wallet?

Bump.

Seriously, I do not think this is complex at all. You have monopoly money that can be printed and a system to get it back when it suits you. Usually, that means nearly never gets called back.

Interest rates... what's difficult? It is the price of borrowing money, not that complex to understand right? An on regards to fractional lending, it means that the bank can lend more money than it really has - Is there anything I am missing.

You what is difficult for me? That after knowing all this facts, there is still people that argue that "bitcoin is not as good a money"

It's not considered easy for an average person to acknowledge how money works in the current monetary system.

For instance, the phrase “money creates money”, requires you to understand that money can be beyond the physical bank notes in circulation. Analyzing it and you'll notice that beyond a printer, there's the trust between the citizens and the banks that creates that money. (And that the latter is mostly responsible)

No, this is what interest rates mean, but there's more to say. Behind this simplified and broad definition, there's this fact: With interest rates, the national debt increases, which means you ought to work more for enjoying less. Abruptly, there's more money created without your permission and you continue working for the same salary while others enjoy the goods you've given to them, due to your ignorance.

Again, it's intentionally difficult to understand for the average person.

Not everyone has the same level of understanding of the monetary system today, but it's true it's a bit late if people don't understand it on this forum.  Ok skip, actually what I think is that the current monetary system has plunged many people into not understanding that their assets are not doing well.  How can people believe in saving with billions of funds when the funds are processed by the bank and distributed to parties who want to owe for various things.  Currently, the monetary system is controlled by the media, so gossip in many countries due to the COVID-19 condition does not seem to pose any risk.  Even though the crypto system has not been tested to replace the current system, we are still optimistic in the future that BTC will still be able to answer various problems caused by fiat.  .

There are a lot of basic misunderstandings which are widely held. Such as when you say printing money - most people believe the government or the Fed are responsible for the majority of new money being printed, when actually upwards of 90% is created by banks handing out loans. These loans are only indirectly controlled by the Fed, by them setting interest rates, reserve requirements, etc.

You also mention fractional lending. Most people believe that banks can only lend out x times the amount of money they have, depending on the reserve requirements set by the Fed. Not only are these reserve requirements 0% (and not 10%, as most people still think), but reserve requirements were never a restriction on how much banks can lend.

People talk about 1 or 2% pay rises, when really they should be talking about pay cuts, because they don't understand inflation. People don't understand the deficit, or the debt, or the debt ceiling.

The bottom line is easy to understand - your fiat is steadily worth less and less, your wages are steadily going down, your purchasing power is steadily eroding, all while bankers and politicians become richer. But the convoluted route that it takes to arrive at that conclusion is anything but simple.

Due to the high lack of control of the FED, and of the government as such, then what management can it give to that organism if it allows politicians and banks to do that economic bleeding, because practically that is to steal with a license, where are the laws that protect people and their protection based on the most basic rights? The US economy is clearly down for a long time and that is what many skeptics had predicted since 2018, what about the government's actions? I understand that one of the most incorruptible countries was the USA, but apparently they have problems as big as those of third world countries, with the exception that the USA can still cover those gaps, but there will come a time when they will not be able to do so, and there it is. where a decline will come, which from what I see is very evident.