the issue is that fraudsters want to misrepresent their inflationary and fraudulent system
Is the misrepresentation just not calling it fraud but getting the rest of the details right? I don’t see free banking advocates misrepresenting the effects of FRB. Or are you venting against central banking and just like saying “fraud”?
Really ? Are you reading this thread ? Did you read Max’s posts ? Is he admitting that his system magically creates money-like tickets and is inflationary ?
Oh, wait. Why do you bother to comment about something you didn’t even read… ?
You caught me. Guess you don’t have to respond to my arguments now. Keep repeating “fraud” and you’ll do fine.
arguments ? what arguments ?
OK, I should have said respond to my “posts.” I posed some questions that you dodged.
If someone is fully informed about what a FRB bank is doing, then why is it not acceptable for both parties to agree and anyone who accepts the note? Is it an externality argument then?
But if under free banking people can choose to accept only warehouse receipts, then what is the problem? What is the point of arguing that FRB is fraud?
Is your only issue a single poster somewhere who is misrepresenting what FRB is? If that’s the case, then my ignorance of the rest of the thread would be problematic, but there’s no longer any issue that matters.
Or maybe I already answered the same questions, but since you didn’t read this thread you don’t know. But I must answer them again because you can’t be bothered to read a thread before posting…?
And what is it that fractional reserve banks do ?
What’s the point of your question ? Is there any law that forbids discussing FRB ? Does the discussion offend your sensibilities ? Or what ?
Again, why should I answer your questions given that your questions are due to your refusal to read the thread ?
OK, never mind. Those issues were still be discussed when I jumped in.
"I must admit that I’ve never understood the clain that two individuals claim the same property under fractional-reserve banking. "
Maxliberty:
Gold, as we understand physics now, can not be in two places at once.
Nor can more than one person have exclusive title to the gold. But THAT is what FRB gives. Since such is not logically possible, FRB is rendered fraudulent.
well…i can have an ounce of gold in my hand and you can have an ounce of gold in your hand.
if i give you a note saying you own two ounces of gold in my hand and and you decide to ‘cash-in’ on the note, well…you can cash-in on 1 ounce…i will take the note…you wil have my 1 ounce of gold, your 1 ounce of gold and i will have to merely come up with another ounce of gold to make the note true or backed i guess.
so unless i have 2 ounces the note is fraudulent.
as for the ‘same’ property claim…i dont know if ‘austrians’ say the ‘same’ property but mean an ‘equivalent amount’ property?
maybe you never understood it because no austrian actually claimed that.
Well in the spirit of making the example fit the argument
Bank reserve < Bob’s Notes
And they do not, so now what???
This is not an option open to a fractional reserve bank…
If you ask me, fractional reserve banking is nothing more that fraud, as you are claiming to loan out money you simply do not have, because it does not exist.
this is random, but I’m a total n00b here, how do you guys have the quotes inserted at the end of all your texts? or do you guys put those there manually?
Community >> Edit Profile >> Site Options >> signature.
You can lend out more than you have.
“you cant lend out more than you have” right
unless you start calling the ‘you have’ stuff something else altogether.
you cant lend out dollars you dont have but you can create a dollar-credit - (a written belief of future dollar flows, what have you) which is something different.
i cant lend a credit-chair. try sitting in it.
Okay, it seems Max never managed to coherently explain how his system would work, yet judging by what he said so far, it is evident that his system is inflationary and misrepresents the nature of bank notes.
This intent to deceive is clearly fraudulent…and of course such misrepresentation is the only way to ‘sell’ frb.
No people in their right mind would choose inflationary money. The only way to get people to use inflationary money is through fraud and force, i.e. government.
It should be noted that the only monies that came into existence through purely voluntarily means are commodity monies, whereas paper money always relied on “a little help” from the judiciary mafia, aka government.
I know I’m responding pretty far back, but I’m still reading the entire thread. Anyways, No one ever puts cash in a bank expecting their money to just sit there in a vault, so that when they come back for it they will get back the exact piece of paper with the exact serial number. So, obviously neither the depositor nor the bank has agreed to just hold the money till the depositor gets back. But, the bank is contractually obligated to fulfill, on demand, the claim the depositor has ‘purchased’ and now ‘holds’ - not the exact same pieces of paper he brought in.
Another question is the personal use of “on demand” loans between individual parties. These loan contracts enable the lender to reclaim his loan at any time of his choosing, like a demand deposit. So, in this case, if the debtor spends any of this money he is engaging in none other than fractional reserve banking and can not pay back the exact pieces of paper he was lent to begin with - but may well be able to pay the loan off with other cash he has. The question is then, is this fraud?
But, FRB does not give you the exclusive right to a single, identifiable, real piece of gold. Instead you have a legal, contractual claim between yourself and the bank - giving you the right to demand a certain quantity of some object specified in the contract upon demand, and only if they can not produce upon demand have they broken the contract.