money explained

[brass neck]

Very interesting lecture about the great money con, how It's fundamentally flawed and what the solution could be. It's amazing how many people can't comprehend or don't believe when I tell them banks don't loan you THEIR own money when you get a loan or a mortgage, they produce it from thin air. I've been telling people for ages, now here is a genuinely intelligent person saying it in a much clearer way.

<a class="postlink" href="https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NZBRJU6YLtY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NZBRJU6YLtY</a>

 

[dazdon]

It's very much the same with gold isn't it?

When people invest in lots of gold it isn't actual physical gold that they are investing in.

 

[roaminblue]

But this makes sense, no?

With millions of customers depositing amounts withdrawing amounts, the banks liabilities are subject to high degrees of volatility. When creating assets, I.e. loans, it's better to have an overall view of liability levels rather than ear Mark a specific depositers money to a specific asset.

Plus with Vickers ring fence and 100% rwas being held against retail deposits, I wouldn't worry a great deal about your money being used for much at all.

 

[nelsons willie]

This thread is useless without graphs. Where's SWP when you need him.

 

[DelToro]

John Lanchester's book "Whoops Apocalypse" is a fantastic read for non financial types.

Beautifully explains how very clever people with enormous amounts of money did some incredibly stupid things resulting in the 2008 crash

 

[aguero93:20]

But this makes sense, no?

With millions of customers depositing amounts withdrawing amounts, the banks liabilities are subject to high degrees of volatility. When creating assets, I.e. loans, it's better to have an overall view of liability levels rather than ear Mark a specific depositers money to a specific asset.

Plus with Vickers ring fence and 100% rwas being held against retail deposits, I wouldn't worry a great deal about your money being used for much at all.

That's not really the point. What caused the financial crisis was banks with total assets(deposits, cash, buildings etc) of say £10bn having total loans out of £100bn and upwards, mostly in currency and property speculation. They do this by conjuring unsecured money into existence for the capital/initial amount of the loan and then upon repayment erasing the capital from existence and keeping the interest as revenue. But when they overexposed themselves to certain sectors and those sectors and consequently the loans went bad.....

 

[remember arthur mann]

John Lanchester's book "Whoops Apocalypse" is a fantastic read for non financial types.

Beautifully explains how very clever people with enormous amounts of money did some incredibly stupid things resulting in the 2008 crash

WHAT ! It wasn't the lazy working classes, people on benefits or New Labour that caused the crash ?

 

[remember arthur mann]

.

 

[DelToro]

But this makes sense, no?

With millions of customers depositing amounts withdrawing amounts, the banks liabilities are subject to high degrees of volatility. When creating assets, I.e. loans, it's better to have an overall view of liability levels rather than ear Mark a specific depositers money to a specific asset.

Plus with Vickers ring fence and 100% rwas being held against retail deposits, I wouldn't worry a great deal about your money being used for much at all.

That's not really the point. What caused the financial crisis was banks with total assets(deposits, cash, buildings etc) of say £10bn having total loans out of £100bn and upwards, mostly in currency and property speculation. They do this by conjuring unsecured money into existence for the capital/initial amount of the loan and then upon repayment erasing the capital from existence and keeping the interest as revenue. But when they overexposed themselves to certain sectors and those sectors and consequently the loans went bad.....

Yes.

In effect the banks loaned money they didn't have to people who could not afford to pay it back.

 

[ColinBellsjockstrap]

In effect the banks loaned money they didn't have to people who could not afford to pay it back.