Fractional Reserve Lending IS NOT bad - its unavoidable

[solarion]

Why bother. Meme's, petty insults, and generalities is all lambchop has. He won't engage on specific issues because he doesn't know anything about the topic.

We can all do our part to keep the thread clear of trolls by not engaging them.

[NotLambchop]

How specific would you like me to get?

...US economic history is one of bankruptcies, defaults, fascist bailouts, and outright theft. If the banking system works then what happened in 2008?

Ridiculous.  *World* history is one of bankruptcies, defaults etc., etc.  US banking system sux?  Compared to what?  This Libber paradise?  Where *every bank to date,* from Pirateat40 to TradeFortress to Ukyo to NeoBee Danny -- turns out to be a straight-up scam?

"Fascist bailouts"?  WTF does that even mean?  But hey, as bailouts go, this forum was all over Danny Brewster's D when he claimed to be bailing out Jon.  Now that he ran away, the sentiment has somewhat soured.

...Just because the vast majority of the peasants in the world don't understand the complex method ...

The vast majority could be wrong and you right, but more likely it's the other way around.  Climb off that soap box, bro, your particular brand of crazy stopped being amusing in the early naughts, don't milk it.

[solarion]

How specific would you like me to get?

Well, you could start by addressing the portion of that post that you keep *NOT* quoting.

Also, by all means drop the silly comparisons to a few frauds committed by scammers in bitcoin securities. There's no force of government behind those fraudulent enterprises. People voluntarily and unwisely trusted someone not trustworthy with their coins...end of story. It sucks, but it doesn't come close to comparing to the frauds committed by banksters and their government stooges.

If you seriously don't know what the word "Fascist" means then brush up on it and come back so we can discuss it intelligently.

[NotLambchop]

How specific would you like me to get?

Well, you could start by addressing the portion of that post that you keep *NOT* quoting.

Since your posts are random assemblages of unsubstantiated generalities, slurs, and invective, I try to force you into some semblance of coherence by narrowing the topic down.  If there is a specific slur or invective you'd like me to address, I'd be happy to do so.

Also, by all means drop the silly comparisons to a few frauds committed by scammers in bitcoin securities.

No.  Not "a few frauds."  I'm referring to the sum total of Bitcoin money services.  Each one ended in lolz, tears, and fail.  If that's what you are offering to replace the current financial institutions, no thanks.

There's no force of government behind those fraudulent enterprises. People voluntarily and unwisely trusted someone not trustworthy with their coins...end of story. It sucks, but it doesn't come close to comparing to the frauds committed by banksters and their government stooges.

Well yeah -- they trusted, they got pawnt, they cried, end of story.  All the money trusted vanished is somewhere on the blockchain (ther'ya go, Ozziecoin).  Not sure how to respond with specifics to "frauds committed by banksters and their government stooges."  My bankster never ran away with all of my monyz, my broker never texted me with "sry got hax0rd bro ur monyz gone."

If you seriously don't know what the word "Fascist" means then brush up on it and come back so we can discuss it intelligently.

I would seriously like you to explain WTF what specifically you meant by "fascist bailout."  Sounds interesting, but doesn't quite parse.

^
Is this specific and detailed enough for you?

[Razick]

I don't think that the creation of money is just a side effect: is an intended effect that directly support the profit of banks.
Anyway, being the main effect or a side effect is not the point: the point is that it's a soverign function that should be entrusted to a public independent entity, not the Government, but the central bank (well, in the USA the FED isn't exactly a public entity, but its status in one of those absurd things of the USA). And not conceded to private corporations. We all have to pay more taxes to support that aspect of the "free market".

Even if you believe that, which I feel has little to do with rational thinking and more to do with principle (I don't mean that personally), no one has proposed a reasonable solution. Destroying the economy based on principle is pretty foolish. FRB is how things work, you actually have to intervene in the economy to prohibit it. Why do you feel that a government continually fails at almost everything it does is better suited to money creation and than a free economy? You might not like FRB but the reality is it works, and massive piles of red tape will only make things worse for everyone.

I've got to say this is one of the most tortured pieces of logic I've come across. Almost hurt my eyes reading it. 

1. Money creation is not rocket science.  Create it, people use it.

2. Govt's NEED NOT BE INVOLVED in money creation at all. There is this thing called the Blockchain.  I don't care which we use but hopefully we stick to a few key ones and hopefully it's got privacy built in.

3. The problem is that the banking sector is creating more money out of thin air, to the detriment of everybody except the 1%.  JUST END THIS BIT!!!

Man, this should not be this hard.

You are making the argument on principle without providing *one good reason* to end a practice that many, including myself, would argue is beneficial. Other than "it's not fair," I've yet to see one reason that FRB should be banned, nor has anyone provided any evidence that doing so would not be immensely harmful.

You might not like the "big bad banks" but the reality is that all they are doing (in this case) is investing borrowed money. This works better for everyone since borrowing is cheaper, and savers earn interest instead of having to pay a fee. Yes, banks do make a profit, as they should, but the kind of money creation done by banks is different than just printing as much money as you want and spending it.

I agree that government need not be involved in money creation, but do you think that merely because Bitcoin is a non-fiat currency it is not affected? It is. Bitcoin is subject to FRB just as other currencies, and that is a good thing.

How do you propose we "just end this bit?" More importantly, why?

[Razick]

I just want to ask... those of you who are against FRB seem to see it as Bitcoin vs Fractional Reserve Banking, but you do realize that the two are not mutually exclusive, right?

[solarion]

I just want to ask... those of you who are against FRB seem to see it as Bitcoin vs Fractional Reserve Banking, but you do realize that the two are not mutually exclusive, right?

Sure...off blockchain counterfeiting(FRB) is certainly possible.

More importantly, why?

Because there's no capitalism without capital and there's no capital without savings(capital formation). The current system will end whether you love it or hate it. It's doomed to failure because debt greater than previous debt is unsustainable. It will eventually collapse on itself. Savers are being brutally punished under the current system, and while FRB is only part of the problem, not the whole problem, it's the subject of this particular thread.

[solarion]

Is this specific and detailed enough for you?

No...it is not.

Goldman sachs is a privately owned company...yes or no? Why are US taxpayers on the hook for their failed gambling ventures? Banksters needn't "run away" with your funds to rob you, they'll have their army of politicians relieve you of your savings in due course. Who do you think is putting these guys in office?

Do you prefer the term "crony capitalist"? How about "national socialist"?

[Razick]

I just want to ask... those of you who are against FRB seem to see it as Bitcoin vs Fractional Reserve Banking, but you do realize that the two are not mutually exclusive, right?

Sure...off blockchain counterfeiting(FRB) is certainly possible.

More importantly, why?

Because there's no capitalism without capital and there's no capital without savings(capital formation). The current system will end whether you love it or hate it. It's doomed to failure because debt greater than previous debt is unsustainable. It will eventually collapse on itself. Savers are being brutally punished under the current system, and while FRB is only part of the problem, not the whole problem, it's the subject of this particular thread.

Yeah, making a loan is now counterfeiting  .

I'd say those problems are mostly the result of government programs. Savers are being brutally punished by low interest rates, which are also causing the debt growth you are talking about. FRB has existed for thousands of years and been very prolific for the past few hundred and we've yet to see a massive collapse that can traced to FRB.

[NotLambchop]

Dear solarion,
I have taken the time too eek out the meaning from your incoherent (and frankly insulting) post, and addressed every point you have raised.
In return, you failed to coherently answer any of the concerns I have raised, choosing to lob at me a new salvo of asinine idiocy questions.
Way to manners
Re. your abortive attempt to define "fascist bailout":  I ask you again, what did you mean, and how does the word "fascism" (national socialism) modify "bailout"?  

How specific would you like me to get?

Well, you could start by addressing the portion of that post that you keep *NOT* quoting.

Since your posts are random assemblages of unsubstantiated generalities, slurs, and invective, I try to force you into some semblance of coherence by narrowing the topic down.  If there is a specific slur or invective you'd like me to address, I'd be happy to do so.

Also, by all means drop the silly comparisons to a few frauds committed by scammers in bitcoin securities.

No.  Not "a few frauds."  I'm referring to the sum total of Bitcoin money services.  Each one ended in lolz, tears, and fail.  If that's what you are offering to replace the current financial institutions, no thanks.

There's no force of government behind those fraudulent enterprises. People voluntarily and unwisely trusted someone not trustworthy with their coins...end of story. It sucks, but it doesn't come close to comparing to the frauds committed by banksters and their government stooges.

Well yeah -- they trusted, they got pawnt, they cried, end of story.  All the money trusted vanished is somewhere on the blockchain (ther'ya go, Ozziecoin).  Not sure how to respond with specifics to "frauds committed by banksters and their government stooges."  My bankster never ran away with all of my monyz, my broker never texted me with "sry got hax0rd bro ur monyz gone."

If you seriously don't know what the word "Fascist" means then brush up on it and come back so we can discuss it intelligently.

I would seriously like you to explain WTF what specifically you meant by "fascist bailout."  Sounds interesting, but doesn't quite parse.

^
Is this specific and detailed enough for you?

[solarion]

Yeah, making a loan is now counterfeiting  

Loaning "money" you do not have is counterfeiting. If I do the same it is not called "loaning" it's called "fraud".

I'd say those problems are mostly the result of government programs. Savers are being brutally punished by low interest rates, which are also causing the debt growth you are talking about.

The problem with this argument is that the fed is not part of government, it's privately owned and it is the fed that sets interest rates. If it were free market economics determining that 0% interest rates were appropriate and that saving should be a losing proposition that'd be one thing, but that's not the case.

[NotLambchop]

Yeah, making a loan is now counterfeiting  

Loaning "money" you do not have is counterfeiting.

Where are you from, solarion?  If this is a language difficulty, here is the definition of the word:
:  made in imitation of something else with intent to deceive
:  forged <counterfeit money>

If I do the same it is not called "loaning" it's called "fraud".

Because when you do it it *is* fraud (though not counterfeiting).  When I get such a loan from you, I get nothing.  When I get it through a bank, I can ...you know, spend it.

<another rant about Federal Reserve not being a branch of the government>

Yeah, we get it.



Re. Goldman Sachs:  Money is already paid back.  Relax

[solarion]

Yeah, making a loan is now counterfeiting  

Loaning "money" you do not have is counterfeiting.

Where are you from, solarion?  If this is a language difficulty, here is the definition of the word:
:  made in imitation of something else with intent to deceive
:  forged <counterfeit money>

 If I do the same it is not called "loaning" it's called "fraud".

Because when you do it it *is* fraud (though not counterfeiting).  When I get such a loan from you, I get nothing.  When I get it through a bank, I can ...you know, spend it.

<another rant about Federal Reserve not being a branch of the government>

Yeah, we get it.

Re. Goldman Sachs:  Money is already paid back.  Relax

LOL I'm relaxed ty.

Shame bear sterns didn't pay their "dues" or they'd still be around today too eh? It's clearly not capitalism...so it must be something else right?

Congress is charged with creating the nation's currency...yes? Who has the authority to charge them with that incredible power? Is it...We the People perhaps? If so, how can *I* grant Congress the power to divest the authority to coin the nation's currency into the hands of unknown opaque private banking institutions? Further, how can *I* grant Congress the power to grant bankers the power to whip up currency from thin air, if *I* don't have that power to grant?

Have you EVER seen a definition of the word "dollar"? Can you define the word? Can you tell me why it keeps changing over time?

<another rant about Federal Reserve not being a branch of the government>
Yeah, we get it.

Does that mean that you concur? ...or you simply don't care? If you don't care that's fine, but your unfunny memes are not a position and don't encourage me to take you seriously. It's a rather significant point, so if you'd prefer to be taken seriously then don't just ignore important topics, like this one and my comments about Bretton Woods.

I can appreciate that you're a thoroughly indoctrinated true believer...willing to fight for the dysfunctional status quo, but that doesn't make these salient points just disappear.

[NotLambchop]

...
Re. Goldman Sachs:  Money is already paid back.  Relax

LOL I'm relaxed ty.

Shame bear sterns didn't pay their "dues" or they'd still be around today too eh? It's clearly not capitalism...so it must be something else right?

I assume what you were trying to say is "I was pwnt.  Now ahmagonna bring up moar random shit and hope you take the bait."
Sorry, fail.

Congress is charged with creating the nation's currency...yes? Who has the authority to charge them with that incredible power? Is it...We the People perhaps? If so, how can *I* grant Congress the power to divest the authority to coin the nation's currency into the hands of unknown opaque private banking institutions? Further, how can *I* grant Congress the power to grant bankers the power to whip up currency from thin air, if *I* don't have that power to grant?

Waaaa?

Have you EVER seen a definition of the word "dollar"? Can you define the word?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar

Can you tell me why it keeps changing over time?

It's a temporal reality.  Time implies flux.  TL;DR:  Shit changes.

<another rant about Federal Reserve not being a branch of the government>
Yeah, we get it.

Does that mean that you concur? ...or you simply don't care? It's rather significant, so if you'd like to be taken seriously then don't just ignore important topics, like this one and my comments about Bretton Woods.

I can try to explain to you that the world isn't binary, that Federal Reserve is a complex entity
"... composed of the presidentially appointed Board of Governors (or Federal Reserve Board), the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks located in major cities throughout the nation, numerous privately owned U.S. member banks and various advisory councils..." ~wikip
...but i understand your craving for simple answers to complex questions.  Unfortunately, reality doesn't work that way.
Complicated things are complicated

I can appreciate that you're a thoroughly indoctrinated true believer...willing to fight for the dysfunctional status quo, but that doesn't make these salient points just disappear.

Your points aren't salient, they're the same tired idiocy I have replied to time and time again.  I'm not trying to convince you of this for the same reason I don't try to convince a rock that it is a rock, for the same reason I don't try to persuade a mad man that he's not "a little tea pot, short and stout" -- it's a fool's errand.  But you are fun

[solarion]

...and this is why I had have you on ignore. You're in a discussion thread, but you don't wish to discuss.

I don't want to change you buddy, you're the perfect lambchop...just the way you are! The last thing I want is for you to have to focus on one topic for more than 5 seconds, when I know that deep down, you'd rather be out tracking down more senseless Internet memes.

"Complicated things are complicated" is no basis for a monetary system.

I release you from having to try to focus on complicated issues.  

[NotLambchop]

Quite the contrary.  I can not convince you of your errors, for above-mentioned reasons.  But your ignorance, combined with your humorless faith in the absurdities you believe, are excellent fodder for this edifying thread.  I can open this page in a browser and instruct the precious tot under my tutelage:  "Study your civics, pumpkin, or you'll grow up to be just as silly as solarion."  There may be tears, but the initial shock and dismay will guide my charge to a full, productive life.

And yes, solarion, complicated things are complicated, and so is our monetary system.  Though the egalitarian in me wishes that everything was accessible to everyone, the cruel reality does not agree.  There are things that the likes of you will not understand, such is this brutish life.
But don't let this get you down -- God don't make no junk!  If it wasn't for your ilk, who would dig our ditches and wash our dishes?  

[Razick]

Yeah, making a loan is now counterfeiting  

Loaning "money" you do not have is counterfeiting. If I do the same it is not called "loaning" it's called "fraud".

It's not money they don't have, it's money they do have! You can't physically have money that you loaned out, that's the definition of it being loaned out. Any bank that doesn't have fractional reserves, yet loans out money, would be counterfeiting, not the other way around. When you deposit money in a bank, you are letting them hold your money and loan it out, they even pay you (barely anything thanks to the Fed). If they loaned it out and kept it too, you'd be right, but they don't, which is the whole point of FRB. The only alternative is for deposits to sit around in a vault, doing nothing and for banks to loan out only their own money (does 35% APR on a mortgage sound nice?). It would be a waste, and for no reason other than principle.

EDIT: Also, I should point out that it is not fraud for you to do the same thing. Try it at home: Ask a friend if you can borrow $100 as long as you pay back $110 at the end of the year. Now invest $90 (simulating a 10% reserve requirement) on BTC Jam or in a bond. At the end of the year, pay them back. You've just engaged in FRB.

The problem with this argument is that the fed is not part of government, it's privately owned and it is the fed that sets interest rates. If it were free market economics determining that 0% interest rates were appropriate and that saving should be a losing proposition that'd be one thing, but that's not the case.

Now, as for the Fed: It's created by fiat and authorized to be the sole issuer of the nation's sole legal tender. It's chairman is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Membership is mandatory for all national banks. It creates regulations that are binding for all member institutions (all national banks). Maybe it's technically not a government agency, but the reality is quite different.

Now other than whether or not it's part of the government, you seem to be agreeing with me that interest rates are manipulated by the Fed and that that is part of the problems we're seeing which was my point, so I'm not sure what you mean here.

[r34tr783tr78]

I don't share all those suspicions about government and I don't agree with the conclusion on their failures.
The "free market" without central regulation usually ends with a monopoly, like standard oil or Carnegie steel: with no free market or accountability, only to serve the interests of the owner of the monopoly.

[Razick]

I don't share all those suspicions about government and I don't agree with the conclusion on their failures.
The "free market" without central regulation usually ends with a monopoly, like standard oil or Carnegie steel: with no free market or accountability, only to serve the interests of the owner of the monopoly.

Natural monopolies only occur in rare cases and in some cases can be a good thing. Most monopolies are created by government. Very few people would argue for no regulation, but the reality is that right now we have so much that it is smothering economic growth. According to the government's own estimates, (in 2008 I think) the average small business spent over $10,000 per employee, per year on federal regulations alone (according to the U.S. SBA). In addition to taxes.

Do you really think regulations provide enough protection to justify that? If a regulation protects "the economy" from $10,000,000 in loss but costs $20,000,000 to comply with, then it does more harm than good. The problem is politicians seem to ignore the costs of regulations and only look at the benefits.

[r34tr783tr78]

I think you are talking about regulations on social security, health insurance, consumer safety, worker rights and safety. Would you end all of them? A return to the glorious laissez faire times?
Free market rule: 14 hours working time, kids working in mines, corporations selling non-tested drugs, etc.
Do you really believe a monopoly can be good (governmental or "natural")?