Evidently you don't understand that the multiplier is achieved by deposits, on which interest is paid.
I will reply to your post, but its a reply to both of you . I am not picking on you.
So a bank gets a deposit of $1,000 and pays .01% interest on it. The banks then borrow that money 10 times over and receive interest payments on approx $10,000 dollars at a rate around 4%.
What is so hard to understand about this process that you think the banks do not somehow come out ahead???
You still have the belief that the money in your checking/savings account belongs to you don't you? It doesn't, the money in the bank actually belongs to the bank, and they can do whatever they want with it. If they lose it, you will be the last of the creditors that gets paid. This is the legality of banking that few people realize.
Again, you don't actually understand what the multiplier is. Before you offer your criticism, you really do need to understand that.
I am not really sure you do either.
Don't take payments in checks if you expect to pay a transaction fee, then. Simple enough.
I find it odd that the bank would not honor a check from their customer. The person cashing the check has nothing to do with whether or not the bank will charge a fee. The person who wrote the check is the cutomer and he has directed the bank to give funds to some entity. The fact that the entity does not have an account is immaterial to the transaction, he is NOT the customer, the person who wrote the check is and they clearly have an account. Next time this happens, call the person who wrote the check and tell them that their bank will not honor it and has committed contract fraud. The check writer opens a checking account with the bank with a contract that basically says the bank will disperse funds to whomever the check writer wants. That is the contract with a checking account. Have the person who wrote the check tell the bank that if they don't cash that check that he will sue them for failure to complete the contract.
This always works, I have never been charged a fee by BofA when explaining it to them like that. They want to keep their customers and not piss them off.
"They" is the US taxpayer. So you're complaining that the US taxpayer profits before any of the banks?
So a $16 trillion deficit is GOOD for the USA???
Where did you go to school?
Most banks didn't need to be bailed out. TARP was engineered in an effort to cast public confidence on the entire banking sector, not out of necessity. Indeed, this should be apparent from the fact that most banks paid their TARP loans back very quickly--they never needed or wanted the money but were forced to take it by Hank Paulson.
Its easy to be solvent when the FASB tells you that you can mark to fantasy all of your under performing assets. Got a house only worth $100,000? You can mark that house to a value of $500,000. Now your books are good to go!!!
If population isn't fixed and the supply of gold and silver is fixed, how can you claim that the prices of those commodities are stable? You cannot.
Gold is worth more with 7 billion people than it is with 1 billion people. Everyone else in this forum, arguing for and against me right now, will agree with that, and yet your statement does not.
The supply of gold and silver is fixed?
No it isn't.
2,500 metric tons of gold mined each year
27,500 Metric tons of silver mined each year.
You never did answer my question about the practicability of the gold standard, did you? Tell me, with 7 billion people and $80 trillion of economic activity, how can the same amount of gold be used versus having 2 billion people and $5 trillion of economic activity?
Didn't Lenin say and then demonstrate that the best way to overturn the existing social order and to bring about communism was by printing paper money?? Pretty sure that was the fella.
Every paper money scheme ever tried has ended in disaster, with the aftermath and vacuum always taken up by gold and silver. 5000 years of history shows this to be true.
By having a gold redeemable currency freedom is guaranteed for us all. If government begins to spend wildly we can redeem our currency for the gold and take away that reckless power. Gold lets people save without the risk of going flat broke if markets do not continue to always go up and never down. Paper money gives mankind no freedom of movement as it has no redemptive value in any place other than the country in which it was issued. Gold and Silver do not have this problem, they are universally accepted as money in every part of the world.
Foreign wars and remorseless regimentation is the domain of paper money schemes that are ending.
Honest money can only be intrinsically valued, paper money has no value and therefore cannot be honest money.
The gold standard acted as an ever watchful sentry to prevent unlimited public expenditures.
cn
