Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

abelenkpe

(9,933 posts)
Wed Mar 19, 2014, 11:58 PM Mar 2014

The truth is out: money is just an IOU, and the banks are rolling in it

The truth is out: money is just an IOU, and the banks are rolling in it

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/truth-money-iou-bank-of-england-austerity?commentpage=1


(snip)

Last week, something remarkable happened. The Bank of England let the cat out of the bag. In a paper called "Money Creation in the Modern Economy", co-authored by three economists from the Bank's Monetary Analysis Directorate, they stated outright that most common assumptions of how banking works are simply wrong, and that the kind of populist, heterodox positions more ordinarily associated with groups such as Occupy Wall Street are correct. In doing so, they have effectively thrown the entire theoretical basis for austerity out of the window.

To get a sense of how radical the Bank's new position is, consider the conventional view, which continues to be the basis of all respectable debate on public policy. People put their money in banks. Banks then lend that money out at interest – either to consumers, or to entrepreneurs willing to invest it in some profitable enterprise. True, the fractional reserve system does allow banks to lend out considerably more than they hold in reserve, and true, if savings don't suffice, private banks can seek to borrow more from the central bank.

The central bank can print as much money as it wishes. But it is also careful not to print too much. In fact, we are often told this is why independent central banks exist in the first place. If governments could print money themselves, they would surely put out too much of it, and the resulting inflation would throw the economy into chaos. Institutions such as the Bank of England or US Federal Reserve were created to carefully regulate the money supply to prevent inflation. This is why they are forbidden to directly fund the government, say, by buying treasury bonds, but instead fund private economic activity that the government merely taxes.

It's this understanding that allows us to continue to talk about money as if it were a limited resource like bauxite or petroleum, to say "there's just not enough money" to fund social programmes, to speak of the immorality of government debt or of public spending "crowding out" the private sector. What the Bank of England admitted this week is that none of this is really true. To quote from its own initial summary: "Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits" … "In normal times, the central bank does not fix the amount of money in circulation, nor is central bank money 'multiplied up' into more loans and deposits."

In other words, everything we know is not just wrong – it's backwards. When banks make loans, they create money. This is because money is really just an IOU. The role of the central bank is to preside over a legal order that effectively grants banks the exclusive right to create IOUs of a certain kind, ones that the government will recognise as legal tender by its willingness to accept them in payment of taxes. There's really no limit on how much banks could create, provided they can find someone willing to borrow it. They will never get caught short, for the simple reason that borrowers do not, generally speaking, take the cash and put it under their mattresses; ultimately, any money a bank loans out will just end up back in some bank again. So for the banking system as a whole, every loan just becomes another deposit. What's more, insofar as banks do need to acquire funds from the central bank, they can borrow as much as they like; all the latter really does is set the rate of interest, the cost of money, not its quantity. Since the beginning of the recession, the US and British central banks have reduced that cost to almost nothing. In fact, with "quantitative easing" they've been effectively pumping as much money as they can into the banks, without producing any inflationary effects.

(more at link)

-----------------------------------

61 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The truth is out: money is just an IOU, and the banks are rolling in it (Original Post) abelenkpe Mar 2014 OP
kick nationalize the fed Mar 2014 #1
Posted to for later comment ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2014 #2
Money as Debt PowerToThePeople Mar 2014 #3
First thing I thought of, as well. nt Electric Monk Mar 2014 #14
Yep. Loans create money. I had a post on fractional reserve banking a while back Recursion Mar 2014 #4
No reason for austerity abelenkpe Mar 2014 #6
Well, inflation does actually exist, though you wouldn't think it Recursion Mar 2014 #7
How are you defining inflation? fleabiscuit Mar 2014 #15
That is why I have not borrowed since '97 alittlelark Mar 2014 #5
This is only "news" to low information internet cranks. mathematic Mar 2014 #8
No kidding. OilemFirchen Mar 2014 #12
k&r thanks for posting. nm rhett o rick Mar 2014 #9
With "austerity" inflation is controlled by clamping down on the working class... hunter Mar 2014 #10
, blkmusclmachine Mar 2014 #11
Rolling in it ... 1000words Mar 2014 #13
buy gold yargle bargle blargle belch! Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #16
It's David Graeber starroute Mar 2014 #19
Sure. Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #22
He doesn't charge anything hfojvt Mar 2014 #27
Damnit, how in the hell AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #21
Good lord. Warren DeMontague Mar 2014 #23
I'm not even wearing socks right now. :D AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #32
k&r. nt adirondacker Mar 2014 #17
"they have effectively thrown the entire theoretical basis for austerity out of the window" Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2014 #18
You're right! We aren't broke abelenkpe Mar 2014 #60
EVERY policy of the Right goes back to catering to HATE for the poor. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2014 #61
BUY GOLD RON PAUL ARGLE BARGLE AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #20
I'm not at all sure that's the argument being made.... Adrahil Mar 2014 #57
As we dig further...... DeSwiss Mar 2014 #24
simple IS certainly the right word for that hfojvt Mar 2014 #29
Well I kept it simple...... DeSwiss Mar 2014 #30
you made that video? hfojvt Mar 2014 #31
Yeeeeah, that's pretty far from the truth the longer you watch it. AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #33
Fiat currency Aerows Mar 2014 #25
But infinitely better than gold Recursion Mar 2014 #28
Exactly. I freak out a little every time somone says 'gold has intrinsic value'. AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #34
You did post this using a computer, right? Aerows Mar 2014 #37
Yes, in fact, I mentioned that. AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #42
I think you may be missing the difference between fiat Aerows Mar 2014 #36
No, gold and silver have value because people agree they have value Recursion Mar 2014 #38
Let me make sure I understand what you are saying here. Aerows Mar 2014 #40
Their industrial and ornamentation values are comparable to... wait for it... paper Recursion Mar 2014 #41
I really appreciate all of your contributions on this topic on DU. I couldn't agree more. Democracyinkind Mar 2014 #47
Fractional Reserve banking per se is not the big problem... Junkdrawer Mar 2014 #26
And insider stuff like the LIBOR scandal. AtheistCrusader Mar 2014 #35
It's rather unsurprising the members of Congress Aerows Mar 2014 #39
The LIBOR scandal came right in the middle of Obama's reelection..... Junkdrawer Mar 2014 #45
I disagree - it is a huge problem, in how it produces boom/bust cycles. reformist2 Mar 2014 #43
Long term, money-as-debt is, ahem, less then optimal.... Junkdrawer Mar 2014 #44
Yeah agreed abelenkpe Mar 2014 #59
In Switzerland, we are currently trying to get together an initiative to take that privilege from.. Democracyinkind Mar 2014 #46
Thanks. This is what I was trying to come to above... Junkdrawer Mar 2014 #48
Some of us surely are. Although I am not pure-bred, which makes me suspect to some ;) nt Democracyinkind Mar 2014 #49
Adoptees often see the benefits of the Family clearer than native sons... Junkdrawer Mar 2014 #50
That's true, and it has given me a unique perspective... Democracyinkind Mar 2014 #55
Good luck with that, but a Switzerland without the banks in charge? May as well ban Swiss cheese! reformist2 Mar 2014 #51
An analogy: Junkdrawer Mar 2014 #52
Very true. I'll be watching - if you guys win, that would be huge! reformist2 Mar 2014 #53
That's what I like about this initiative: It would constitute a political revolution... Democracyinkind Mar 2014 #54
I love this "national, unconditional guaranteed income provided by the state, not by corporations"! reformist2 Mar 2014 #56
K&R woo me with science Mar 2014 #58

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
4. Yep. Loans create money. I had a post on fractional reserve banking a while back
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 12:28 AM
Mar 2014

and got pilloried for it, but it's still true. A bank puts new money in circulation when it originates a loan.

abelenkpe

(9,933 posts)
6. No reason for austerity
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 01:01 AM
Mar 2014

According to the article. So why are governments being forced to cut back on programs for the most needy?

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
7. Well, inflation does actually exist, though you wouldn't think it
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 01:07 AM
Mar 2014

It would be possible to simply monetize all social spending, but since we don't have capital controls that would eventually hurt us. A big advantage of public debt is that it's a way to predictably increase the money supply.

Part of the problem is that we look at it like "taxes fund government". But it is impossible for the government to "need" dollar-denominated money ever; it can create as much of it as it wants at any time. It's more realistic to look at every dollar taken in by the government as ceasing to exist, and every dollar spent by the government as being created when it is spent. Taxes don't fund government; they are a way of controlling the money supply.

fleabiscuit

(4,542 posts)
15. How are you defining inflation?
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 01:49 AM
Mar 2014

What is the Real Definition of Inflation?
http://inflationdata.com/articles/2010/07/21/real-definition-inflation/

I believe our fractional system in another time would be called a pyramid scheme.(?)

mathematic

(1,434 posts)
8. This is only "news" to low information internet cranks.
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 01:19 AM
Mar 2014

It's all true!!! End the fed!!1!! Gold is real money!!

(It's also news to people that never cared enough about this to learn about it, which is perfectly reasonable).

Why do you think the Fed tracks credit creation? It's not because they just discovered last week that money is an IOU. The purpose of this Bank of England bulletin is educational, not confessional. Writing about this as if it's some sort of secret is irresponsible and stupid. The bulletin is not a refutation of the "common assumptions" of economists, bankers, or economic public policy makers but rather the assumptions of regular people. It does not describe populist (beyond the inherent populism of fiat money) or heterodox economics.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
12. No kidding.
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 01:31 AM
Mar 2014

I got into a "conversation" with some yutz here several weeks ago. He thought it "hilarious" and "naive" that I "believed" that currency is backed by debt. Specifically, that U.S. currency is backed by Treasury debt, payable in U.S. currency. Of course, he was a bitcoin pro, so there's that...

Here's hoping he finds his way here to further school me.

hunter

(38,304 posts)
10. With "austerity" inflation is controlled by clamping down on the working class...
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 01:24 AM
Mar 2014

... and starving the unemployed and unemployable.

The proper way to deal with inflation is to clamp down on the wealthy class by progressive taxation.


Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
16. buy gold yargle bargle blargle belch!
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 01:54 AM
Mar 2014

How far do we have to dig under this pile of.... paragraphs, before we find Ron Paul?

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
22. Sure.
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 02:12 AM
Mar 2014

Yes, money is an illusion, a valueless hoax played on the muddle-minded. A creepy magic mojo worked by spooky banksters.

Indeed, all true.

Yet you'll notice no one is in a hurry to put all theirs in a pile and burn it to exorcise the demon, are they?

So how much does he charge for that book?

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
32. I'm not even wearing socks right now. :D
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 03:19 AM
Mar 2014

Argle Bargle is literally the noise I translate the words coming from Ron Paul gold bugs into, whenever they start freaking out.

It makes more sense as incoherent noise, than what they are actually saying.

 

Spitfire of ATJ

(32,723 posts)
18. "they have effectively thrown the entire theoretical basis for austerity out of the window"
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 02:04 AM
Mar 2014

WRONG.

The wealthy NEED actual currency to be rare so their own private stockpile is worth MORE.

This is also why they want people to work their asses off for low pay.

If we suddenly started paying people to do public works projects it would expose the BIG LIE.

The BIG LIE is, "We're broke".

abelenkpe

(9,933 posts)
60. You're right! We aren't broke
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 01:42 PM
Mar 2014

So why are we are cutting social programs for the most needy? Because the wealthy need currency to be rare just as you mention. Really saw this as more of a pushback against austerity and the lie that we are broke, in imminent danger of default or hyperinflation ...y'know all the tired arguments put forth by the right over the years since 2008 that are really just excuses to further shred the social safety net.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
57. I'm not at all sure that's the argument being made....
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 07:33 AM
Mar 2014

... It think the argument is more about money is not the finite resource the austerity proponents claim it is, and that the inflationary fears are WAY overblown.

I think this argument is the exact opposite of Ron Paul.

 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
24. As we dig further......
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 02:14 AM
Mar 2014

...it will only get worse.

- But we WILL have the TRUTH.

K&R

Short and simple:

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
29. simple IS certainly the right word for that
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 02:33 AM
Mar 2014

like simple Simon.

But it is pretty funny in some ways.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
34. Exactly. I freak out a little every time somone says 'gold has intrinsic value'.
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 03:25 AM
Mar 2014

No it doesn't. Not if everyone stops thinking it does, or SpaceX figures out how to bring a ten million ton gold asteroid back down to earth for us to all share.

You can't eat gold. Well, you can, but it doesn't do much for you nutritionally. It has only as much value as people desire it. No more. It's a good conductor and corrosion plating, and not very reactive, so useful for teeth otherwise, and that's about it.

Gold is absolutely a fiat currency, and the US Dollar is built on precisely the same desire.

Want to see how 'little' value the US Dollar has? ask the 'it's just paper' naysayer to withdraw a thousand bucks from the bank and burn it, before you'll take him seriously.

Short version; you'll NEVER have to take him seriously.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
37. You did post this using a computer, right?
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 03:46 AM
Mar 2014

Precious metals have long been a commodity simply because they can be used for many purposes. I wouldn't like to live in a world without copper conduits, silver's extraordinary energy transfer abilities or silicon and germanium have the inherent property necessary for semi-conductors.

All of these things would never be possible without metallurgy. Please take it as food for thought.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
36. I think you may be missing the difference between fiat
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 03:42 AM
Mar 2014

and true currency. If I have goats, and you want one of them, you trade me something of value to purchase that goat.

If you cannot offer me anything in trade, but have gold, you can offer me some of it, or silver. Gold and silver have material values because they can be used for many things beyond ornamentation. Paper money doesn't.

Crops in the field, ultimately, are worth more than numbers printed on paper - they have direct value.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
38. No, gold and silver have value because people agree they have value
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 03:48 AM
Mar 2014

Just like fiat currency. They were somewhat useful as fiat currencies because the money supply could be controlled by the finite sources of the metals. But they aren't "actually" valuable.

Their industrial uses are quite limited, and essentially non-existent before the electronic age. A goat can be eaten. That's actual value.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
40. Let me make sure I understand what you are saying here.
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 03:55 AM
Mar 2014

You are saying the gold and silver have few practical industrial uses.

You are also saying the the ornamentation value is also worthless.

Did I get that right?

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
41. Their industrial and ornamentation values are comparable to... wait for it... paper
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 03:57 AM
Mar 2014

Their trade value vastly, vastly exceeds their intrinsic value. Just like paper money. In the past, when money was still gold-backed, they had no industrial uses to speak of at all.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
26. Fractional Reserve banking per se is not the big problem...
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 02:22 AM
Mar 2014

a bunch of too wealthy, too powerful types clinging to power by controlling (badly) the World's currency, backed by an aging military, IS the problem.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
35. And insider stuff like the LIBOR scandal.
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 03:27 AM
Mar 2014

But yes, fractional reserve lending has made our entire economy possible, really.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
39. It's rather unsurprising the members of Congress
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 03:50 AM
Mar 2014

get better returns on their investments than hedge fund managers. You can look that up, too. Why the electorate, myself included, isn't doing anything more than shaking their fist at the sky is beyond me.

I think I just have serious outrage fatigue.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
45. The LIBOR scandal came right in the middle of Obama's reelection.....
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 05:44 AM
Mar 2014

I had to take a DU break because on the one hand I wanted to explore the scandal, on the other I didn't want Romney.

Briefly, I think that, faced with a "come up with huge sums of money" problem, every thing was done - LIBOR allowed banks to 'earn' their way out at the expense of, largely the Hedge Fund guys. Some institutional investors, but largely the hedge fund guys.

reformist2

(9,841 posts)
43. I disagree - it is a huge problem, in how it produces boom/bust cycles.
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 05:28 AM
Mar 2014

First the banks lend out too much, the money supply soars and the economy booms. Then people can't pay back the loans, so the money supply and the economy contracts. And the government and the people spend their entire lives having to deal with this see-saw, nausea-inducing pattern their whole lives. It doesn't have to be this way.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
44. Long term, money-as-debt is, ahem, less then optimal....
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 05:35 AM
Mar 2014

but, short term, I think WHO can create money dwarfs HOW money is created.

abelenkpe

(9,933 posts)
59. Yeah agreed
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 01:25 PM
Mar 2014

Saw this article as a good push back against the argument for austerity. Strange that some see it as the opposite.

Democracyinkind

(4,015 posts)
46. In Switzerland, we are currently trying to get together an initiative to take that privilege from..
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 05:56 AM
Mar 2014

... our banksters.

We will start collecting signatures in May, 100'000 are needed, we already have 61'000 pledged!

While this initiative will never be accepted at the ballots (and even if it were, it would never be allowed to be implemented by the ruling elite) it is the most revolutionary thing that I have ever been involved in. I consider it a campaign in mass-education, as the general populace is absolutely ignorant about the subject and generally tends to agree with the initiative once informed.

More: http://www.vollgeld-initiative.ch/english.html

(I am involved with the initiative but have not contributed to the website in any shape or form)

Do not listen to the people yapping about gold and Rand Paul - while it is true that the libertarian rabble has similar arguments, they are actually coming from the opposite direction as far as political ideology is concerned. The majority of the foot soldiers of this initiative are only slightly to the right of Mao (this is a tongue-in-cheek comment, no need to point out that Mao was an evil bastard).

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
50. Adoptees often see the benefits of the Family clearer than native sons...
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 06:19 AM
Mar 2014

You can't choose your genes. You can choose your environment.

Democracyinkind

(4,015 posts)
55. That's true, and it has given me a unique perspective...
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 06:40 AM
Mar 2014

... not being one of those "real" americans, not being one of those "real" swiss folks, I have come to consider myself a citizen of the world, as pathetic and worn as that may sound to some.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
52. An analogy:
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 06:28 AM
Mar 2014

If you want to save the passengers of an out-of-control stage coach being driven by a madman, you have to FIRST get control of the reins, bring the coach to a slow stop and THEN get everyone aboard the new, shiny bus.

Democracyinkind

(4,015 posts)
54. That's what I like about this initiative: It would constitute a political revolution...
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 06:34 AM
Mar 2014

... a paradigm shift of historic proportions... Combine that with other initiatives currently under way, such as a national, unconditional guaranteed income provided by the state, not by corporations, and what you get is a a vision of a possible future in which much of the bullshit of our current system is simply left behind to rot in the dustbin of history.

And sticking it to the gnomes of Zurich... Has been a life-long dream of mine (or at least ever since I had the "privilege" of working for those fuckers). They have taken this nation hostage by offering the people a share in the spoils and that has always stricken me as a positively evil system. I do not enjoy or condone profiting from billions stolen from the people around the world. It's about time that the people change this, even if it is not in our material interest.

reformist2

(9,841 posts)
56. I love this "national, unconditional guaranteed income provided by the state, not by corporations"!
Thu Mar 20, 2014, 06:41 AM
Mar 2014

That is equally revolutionary.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The truth is out: money i...