100%-Reserve Banking Is Available Now!

By -
I have sometimes heard 100%-reservists say that 100% reserve banking would be overwhelmingly chosen by customers if it were available.

Well, as Kurt Schuler notes, it is available, at almost every bank. It is called a safety deposit box.

How many of you people who think fractional reserve banking is fraudulent are keeping your money exclusively in the 100%-reserve system instead?

NOTE: By the way, I yanked the post previous to this one because I realized I didn't have the stomach for the follow-up s&*t storm right at the moment.

Comments

  1. skylien5:53 AM

    They obviously mean in a free market of competing currencies, not in a system like we have now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. skylien6:02 AM

    "NOTE: By the way, I yanked the post previous to this one because I realized I didn't have the stomach for the follow-up s&*t storm right at the moment."

    That is unfortunate. I really thought I managed to write a funny comment. :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unknown6:05 AM

    I'll bite. You can't write checks, get a debit card or do money transfers if your money is in a safety deposit box but you could if it were in a 100% reserve backed checking account. Or am I missing something?

    Senyor

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah8:12 AM

      Correct. There are many advantages to letting banks lend out your money: for instance, they give you all of these services!

      Of course, if there were any demand for it, they could give you those services for the money in your safety deposit box too: you'd just pay through the nose.

      That's why customers prefer fractional reserve banking!

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more