'Climate Change' and the coming 'Climate Lockdown'

Reader mode
Yinko

Yinko

Well-known member
Morphic Tide said:
No, they are required to hold onto very specific classes of liquid assets up to a certain fraction of the deposits made, almost all need to hold onto some amount of hard cash for withdraws, and "truly" negative accounts are technically illegal. The regulations are designed to make it fully illegal for banks to increase the money supply. What fractional reserve banking does is increase liquidity by refusing to allow money people put into savings accounts to actually remain in them, creating the incredible spectacle of debt-based economics we live in today.
Click to expand...
You bring up fractional reserve as an argument for why there cannot be more debt than assets, but fractional reserve is the entire reason you can do have more. Fraction reserve means that the bank can leverage 10% assets for 90% debt, so even on the first level you end up with more debt than the account holds. But then, you can actually leverage it again, and get a 20:1 ratio of assets to debt.
bintananth said:
Due to the nature of double entry bookeeping assets and liabilities always match. Some other liability - in this case "owner equity" - was invisibly reduced by an equal amount.
Click to expand...
When I was studying double-entry bookeeping (never was an accountant but I did study accounting) the answer for how to keep the solution zero if you couldn't think of which category to use was to just make something up. It is a lot less a means of stopping people from hiding their own transactions and more a means of ensuring that people can remember all the transactions they did, because missing stuff is blatant at the end of the fiscal period. In this case, they would probably have gotten the missing funds covered by their insurance or something.
 
Bigking321

Bigking321

Well-known member
Note sure how accurate it is but this is what I got when I Googled it.

"The Federal Reserve Board reduced banking reserve requirements to zero in March 2020. Since that time, banks in the United States have not been required to actually hold any depositor money in the bank"
 
Yinko

Yinko

Well-known member
Bigking321 said:
Note sure how accurate it is but this is what I got when I Googled it.

"The Federal Reserve Board reduced banking reserve requirements to zero in March 2020. Since that time, banks in the United States have not been required to actually hold any depositor money in the bank"
Click to expand...
Still in effect.

Federal Reserve Board - Reserve Requirements

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington DC.
www.federalreserve.gov
 
Blasterbot

Blasterbot

Well-known member
yup banks have been backed by nothing for 3 years now. not surprising that some have overleveraged and gone under. prolly going to see a fair bit more of that.
 
Scottty

Scottty

Well-known member
Founder
Now how about the question of the relationship between US dollars and the Federal Reserve?
Does the USGov actually just create money, or do they "borrow" it from the Fedbank?
 
LordsFire

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Bacle said:
It's not about 'why' it is 'supposed' to work, it's just the reality that it does work that way now, and this is the monetary system we've been in since the dropping of the gold standard.

The only reason people in the GOP think otherwise is because no one will win a GOP primary if they admit this in public and tell the GOP base they've been living, and the GOP has been grifting them by pretending to support, a monetary illusion for a few decades.
Click to expand...

As best I can tell you have no idea how it works, you're just going to make strident claims about it.
 
Blasterbot

Blasterbot

Well-known member
LordsFire said:
As best I can tell you have no idea how it works, you're just going to make strident claims about it.
Click to expand...
it "works" because we forced it to and people have confidence in it. it will stop working if we stop enforcing it or people stop using our currency as a trade medium for oil. which is part of why we made so many foreign policy decisions like we did. if we lose our status as the world currency either through the formation of a parallel system like BRICS actually somehow working or a digital currency becoming useful enough to supplant us as a preferred international trade medium we will be boned.
 
Bassoe

Bassoe

Well-known member
Or to simplify, our current currency is technically worthless, save for being backed by the fact our goverment will invade you if your country stops using it or tries to make a credible competitor. But now that nuclear-armed rival nations which we can't invade without Mutually Destroying ourselves are making competitor currencies, we're all fucked, either due to economy-destroying hyperinflation or atomic apocalypse.
 
Bacle

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Bassoe said:
Or to simplify, our current currency is technically worthless, save for being backed by the fact our goverment will invade you if your country stops using it or tries to make a credible competitor. But now that nuclear-armed rival nations which we can't invade without Mutually Destroying ourselves are making competitor currencies, we're all fucked, either due to economy-destroying hyperinflation or atomic apocalypse.
Click to expand...
When you start think of the modern day as the pre-War Fallout or Ghost in the Shell timeline, and the US as a banana republic with nukes and Hollywood, instead of hanging onto the illusions of the past, it makes things a lot easier to deal with.
 
C

Cherico

Well-known member
Bacle said:
When you start think of the modern day as the pre-War Fallout or Ghost in the Shell timeline, and the US as a banana republic with nukes and Hollywood, instead of hanging onto the illusions of the past, it makes things a lot easier to deal with.
Click to expand...

pretty much every one is some flavor of fucked, it was just structurally built into the cake for this decade to suck and was done so decades ago.
 
Simonbob

Simonbob

Well-known member
ThatZenoGuy said:
Well, it said they were being de-iced. Not that the diesel generators were literally spinning them.
Click to expand...
Well, there was that story I heard a decade ago, or so.

The subsidies were/are so good in the EU, there were farmers setting up wind farms with actual fans in front of them, because it was profitable to do so.

Literal coal powered wind farms. That made money.
 
mrttao

mrttao

Well-known member
ThatZenoGuy said:
Ahh yes the polluted and emissions rampant country of.

*Checks cards*
China? No...India? No...Nigeria? No...Pakistan? No...Indonesia? No...

Ahhh yes, Sweden, source of most of our problems in regards to climate!
Click to expand...
Remember that to these crazies, humans breathing is literally pollution.
sweden has 10.5 million people living in it.
each emitting "pollution" with every breath
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top