Fractional Reserve and Property Rights

[Maxliberty]

@nirgrahamUK

you seem to ignore the fact that you suppose a purely whimsical arrangement. a mere unenforceable promise that the bank will do the correct thing and gather the necessary gold it needs in time to make good. even though its never obligated to possess the right amount of gold to hand over to the person with note.

You are the only one claiming it is not enforceable. i am not sure how old you are but your comments show a surprising lack of understanding about how ordinary business functions. People make business deals all the time based on series of factors that they may not have complete control over. The idea that all business transactions are required to be risk free (which is not even possible) is nonsense. You are fixated on the idea that a bank is required to do certain things when there is no such requirement.

@nirgrahamUK

you also artfully ignored discussion of possible text for the note. perhaps you should photoshop up for us a suggestion. until you do i must assume it would be worded as i posited.

You asked for a contract which i provided and now you don’t like the way it’s worded so you want to change it. No surprise, you are unable to refute the contract so trying to change it is your only option.

[Maxliberty]

@Knight_of_BAAWA

@Maxliberty

Will this scenario be allowed by the anti-freedom group like yourself

I love your lies.

@Maxliberty

…You give me two ounces of gold and I give you a piece of paper that says you can comeback and reddem the paper for 2 ounces of gold…is that ok? Knowing no other information is that ok?

Why wouldn’t it be? And no–your lies will not count. You must show–not state–that your position is true. Yet I know that you cannot do that. So go ahead and lie–that’s all you have.

Great, we agree it should be allowed. Glad to finally see you onboard with logic and reason.

[Maxliberty]

@JonBostwick

@ivanfoofoo

We’re still missing the point. We should discuss if it should be legally enforceable the action of emitting fiduciary media without having its backing commodity according to the “standard”. Should it be outlawed? I prefer a pure gold standard, but I think the free market will tell which one is better. Anyway, any free banking system is much better than a central banking monopoly.

Not so.

No one argues that the bank can’t issue whatever they want. The question is, when the bank fails, are the depositors entitled to get their money back? If its a bailment, they are. If its a loan, they are not.

Or you could ask, is it an unavoidable business error or is it criminal malpractice? Its obviously avoidable, so that only leaves one other option.

Why is it unavoidable? Is the bank not allowed to loan money?

[nirgrahamUK]

Max please demonstrate you understand the difference between enforcable contracts and unenforceable promises.

perhaps an example of the latter for contrast sake?

kthanxby

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

@JackSkylark

FRB is the same as an on demand loan - you do not have property rights over the actual money you have just given to the bank/debtor, instead you now have a legal claim/right to redeem upon demand a certain amount of a certain good as stated in the contract.

It is fraud because the central bank issues unbacked notes, not actual money. It is fiduciary media.

[Maxliberty]

@Knight_of_BAAWA

@Maxliberty

As for your assertion that no one would bank there, this is the type of bank you use right now and you have lots of other options

By lots you mean “pretty close to none”. It’s strange how you have no concept of counting.

Remember: frac-reserve is legally mandated in pretty much every country, as is the monopoly granted to the central banks. So please: no more lies from you.

Yes, Baawa I agree you are the perfect victim. Yes, for you there is no option because you are the willing servant of the state unable to even keep money in your pocket you are forced to use a bank. My sympathies.

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

@Maxliberty

Great, we agree it should be allowed.

Where did I ever say it wouldn’t be? Now your task is prove that it is logically identical with frac-reserve. Go to it. You’ll never be able to do it, though, since it isn’t.

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

@Maxliberty

Yes, Baawa

Oh yes, all hail Max, the only person who ever does anything to advance the cause of liberty. Puh-leaze. It really must suck to be you, y’know. Having to carry such a burden, especially the burden of not grasping what a monopoly is. How sad that you don’t understand.

[Maxliberty]

@Harry Felker

What the bank is saying in giving out “on Demand” notes is that they have the gold in reserve to cover them, but if they give out notes for 100% of the gold they receive, and all these notes are called in on one day (regardless of likelihood) the bank has a situation where two claims on the same property is applicable, therefore there is a fraud…

This is why the bank gives itself a window of time to meet redemptions. The bank has to liquidate other assets, buy gold, then meet redemptions. You keep wanting to change what we are saying to make it something it’s not.

[Maxliberty]

@Harry Felker

@scineram

@Harry Felker

And they do not, so now what???

Now Bob can sue for breach.

Bob is not redeeming them, Bob has Jim’s Products, Jim is holding notes that he cannot use and wants his gold, are you claiming that Jim, without a written contract with the bank of Scineram has the right to sue the bank, or should he sue Bob, or how about both???

Meanwhile his store goes out of business…

Or, people would be wise to the fraud that is FRB…

And any bank that practices such might do it less fraudulently…

The note is a bearer contract with the bank. If you hold the note you have a contract with the bank.

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

@Maxliberty

This is why the bank gives itself a window of time to meet redemptions. The bank has to liquidate other assets, buy gold, then meet redemptions. You keep wanting to change what we are saying to make it something it’s not.

Irony-o-meter status: pegged.

[Maxliberty]

@nirgrahamUK

Max please demonstrate you understand the difference between enforcable contracts and unenforceable promises.

perhaps an example of the latter for contrast sake?

kthanxby

I have already explained my position on this matter. Trying to confuse things again I see. Typical anti-freedom tactics.

[Maxliberty]

@Knight_of_BAAWA

@Maxliberty

Yes, Baawa

Oh yes, all hail Max, the only person who ever does anything to advance the cause of liberty. Puh-leaze. It really must suck to be you, y’know. Having to carry such a burden, especially the burden of not grasping what a monopoly is. How sad that you don’t understand.

Yes, its sad, I am free and you are a lifetime slave by your choice.

[DanielMuffinburg]

Please direct me to the post where you prove that your proposed system is actually FRB.

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

@Maxliberty

Yes, its sad

That you’re a slave to your arrogant ignorance, I know.

Everyone knows that only Max ever does anything to advance the cause of liberty, right? You have such a burden. Tell you what: why don’t you stop screwing up and start actually trying to help, k?

[nirgrahamUK]

@Maxliberty

@nirgrahamUK

Max please demonstrate you understand the difference between enforcable contracts and unenforceable promises.

perhaps an example of the latter for contrast sake?

kthanxby

I have already explained my position on this matter. Trying to confuse things again I see. Typical anti-freedom tactics.

ha ha ha! im anti-freedom! nice o1ne.

heres the thing I was giving you an opportunity to do what you have explicitly failed to do.

just to check my head to make sure i hadnt missed a post in which you explain you do understand contracts, and can distinguish them from mere promises. I did a mises search on the terms :“promise contract”. under your name 4 posts, only one relevant in which you drop the ignorant bombshell that

All contracts are promises to do things.<< no they arent, they are transferrs of property titles !

you can not tell promises from contracts… this line of thinking gets you to all engagements must end in marriage…

and it being enforceable to make people eat their hats if they have said that they would.

[JackSkylark]

@nirgrahamUK

no they arent, they are transferrs of property titles !

This is definitely not true. What is a arbitration agreement, or a labor agreement, or warranty and liability agreements? They are all contracts - legal and enforcable, there needs be no transfer of property titles for there to be a binding contract.

[Harry_Felker]

@scineram

The note is the contract. Between the holder and the bank. Notes are underwritten by managers and directors. Courts recognized this.

Still does not solve the issue of Bob needing to maintain his store…

Still does not solve the issue that if there is a case about it, there is a fraudulent action…

Asserts that if such a court case came about, the Bank of Scineram would more than likely go out of business (I would not put my commodity in a bank that cannot produce the value for me, I am going to believe that others think like me)

[Harry_Felker]

@Maxliberty

This is why the bank gives itself a window of time to meet redemptions. The bank has to liquidate other assets, buy gold, then meet redemptions. You keep wanting to change what we are saying to make it something it’s not.

So it is not “ON DEMAND” it is on demand when we get it for you, in some time after you demand it…

[scineram]

@nirgrahamUK

does the bearer of your note have any property right at all? what does he have property right over?

The note? It entitles him to the specified amount of specie upon request.