I must admit that I've never understood the clain that two individuals claim the same property under fractional-reserve banking. Will someone explain this to me? One is the debtor, right?
Kibbutz Ein-Dor
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Maxliberty:Maybe you should actually look at the contracts that you sign. You will find that your scenario is a fiction. The bank doesn't tell you that your money is available on demand under all circumstances. If the bank agrees that your money will never be used for any other purpose than to sit in a vault then they are obligated to do so....if they contract doesn't say that then they are not.
But if the contract say there is no penalty for withdrawal or closing the account, and there is an old fashioned bank run, a bank that operates through fractional reserve will not have trhe money to meet the withdrawal demands....
And yes, the bank I deal with says "Your money is available under all circumstances"
It sounds like the ocean, smells like fresh mountain air, and tastes like the union of peanut butter and chocolate. ~Liberty Student
scineram: Harry Felker: scineram: When was the last time your money was inaccessible? Tell me about it! This is not a look what happened to me statement, this was a question, would you answer it? If I deposit money into a bank, in a savings accout, that gains average interest, with the stipulation that I may remove my money at any time, have I agreed to make my money inaccessible? (the italicised is key, since that is a savings account, not another vehicle with penalties for early withdrawal) Of course if they refuse to pay when you have legal right to be paid it is breach of contract. You should sue.
Harry Felker: scineram: When was the last time your money was inaccessible? Tell me about it! This is not a look what happened to me statement, this was a question, would you answer it? If I deposit money into a bank, in a savings accout, that gains average interest, with the stipulation that I may remove my money at any time, have I agreed to make my money inaccessible? (the italicised is key, since that is a savings account, not another vehicle with penalties for early withdrawal)
scineram: When was the last time your money was inaccessible? Tell me about it!
When was the last time your money was inaccessible? Tell me about it!
This is not a look what happened to me statement, this was a question, would you answer it?
If I deposit money into a bank, in a savings accout, that gains average interest, with the stipulation that I may remove my money at any time, have I agreed to make my money inaccessible?
(the italicised is key, since that is a savings account, not another vehicle with penalties for early withdrawal)
Of course if they refuse to pay when you have legal right to be paid it is breach of contract. You should sue.
Apparently when you are faced with a contradiction on your part you get stuck on "when did this happen to you"
Can you not remove your money at any time?
i knew you had to be a jew nirgraham
scineram:Can you not remove your money at any time?
If it is not there....
Go to the bank tomorrow, and see if it is there by trying to withdraw!
poor boy, confused about what your own argument is.
lets assume that there will be funds for me to withdraw tomorrow. ergo, those funds were not out on loan. ergo the bank my deposits were in were not FRB banking with them. so this strengthens your pro-FRB argument? hardly.
tacoface:i knew you had to be a jew nirgraham
you've seen my schmeckel?!?!?
nirgrahamUK: poor boy, confused about what your own argument is. lets assume that there will be funds for me to withdraw tomorrow. ergo, those funds were not out on loan. ergo the bank my deposits were in were not FRB banking with them. so this strengthens your pro-FRB argument? hardly.
But only 10% of all deposits, outstanding liabilities are in the vault. You are paid from that 10%. Frb means this.
yes you are paid from that 10% or you arent. you arent if others have been before you. gamblebank. im glad you agree.
Knight_of_BAAWA: Max, is there some reason that you are unable to discuss this topic rationally? Seriously.
Max, is there some reason that you are unable to discuss this topic rationally? Seriously.
I just address what is actually happening and the agreements people make between each other. What the Austrians want is for the banks to say that your money is being warehoused while they are actually loaning it out. The truth is they don't say that. What they say is we are loaning your money out and if everything works out you will get your money back but if it doesn't you might lose your money.
If the Austrians would simply deal with what is actually being contracted as opposed to some fantasy then we can move forward.
Maxliberty: Knight_of_BAAWA: Max, is there some reason that you are unable to discuss this topic rationally? Seriously. I just address what is actually happening and the agreements people make between each other. What the Austrians want is for the banks to say that your money is being warehoused while they are actually loaning it out. The truth is they don't say that. What they say is we are loaning your money out and if everything works out you will get your money back but if it doesn't you might lose your money. If the Austrians would simply deal with what is actually being contracted as opposed to some fantasy then we can move forward.
Hasty generalization a bit? Anyway, Rothbard addressed this issue in his The Case Against the Fed.
My favorite online shop: www.cafepress.com/libertyphile
Daniel: 1) Why would it be better if I could out the "facts" in FRB?2) Assumption do exists when discussing FRB (especially on this forum).3) What is an Austrian fantasy and why is it a fantasy?
1) Why would it be better if I could out the "facts" in FRB?2) Assumption do exists when discussing FRB (especially on this forum).3) What is an Austrian fantasy and why is it a fantasy?
Doesn't it make sense to actually discuss what is happening rather than a fiction?
The Austrian fantasy is describing FRB and the contracts related to banking that just don't exist. Look at the contract in this thread, it refutes the notion that the bank claims to have your money and there is no risk. The bank explicitly states that the customer is at risk of the bank going broke and losing the customers money.
Harry Felker: Maxliberty:Maybe you should actually look at the contracts that you sign. You will find that your scenario is a fiction. The bank doesn't tell you that your money is available on demand under all circumstances. If the bank agrees that your money will never be used for any other purpose than to sit in a vault then they are obligated to do so....if they contract doesn't say that then they are not. But if the contract say there is no penalty for withdrawal or closing the account, and there is an old fashioned bank run, a bank that operates through fractional reserve will not have trhe money to meet the withdrawal demands.... And yes, the bank I deal with says "Your money is available under all circumstances"
Please show us the contract where it says there is no way the bank can ever default. If that were true why would they be paying deposit insurance?
If you loan money to someone, don't you take on some risk of default? If you loan money to the bank....which is what your deposit contract says you are doing...then you have some default risk. Since every country has their banks backed by a printing press (the government) even the claim that you are fully insured is accurate. So for those deposits under that threshold they can actually say your money is guaranteed to be availlable and still not be committing fraud under any normal sense of the word.
Lets just have a discussion about what is actually happening.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap