• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

How the banks create money

Another proposal to end (private) fractional reserve banking in the UK:
Enact the bank of england (creation of currency) bill 2010

by gswanson - http://wp.me/p1lRZj-16z
- - - - -
The Bill establishes as its Universal Principle that: “Throughout the entire banking and deposit taking system … every credit to an account must be matched by an equal debit from a different account.” Only the Bank of England will be exempt from this requirement, thereby enjoying sole right to create all of the UK’s new money, both cash and non-cash.

Enactment of the Bill will complete the work of The Bank Charter Act of 1844, which made it as illegal for the commercial banks to print notes as it already was for them to mint coins. Under the Act it will also be illegal for them to create non-cash money in the form of "credit".
. . . . . .

Full details at http://www.govyou.co.uk/enact-the-bank-of-england-creation-of-currency-bill-2010/
 
The writer of that bill knows absolutely nothing about accounting. The "universal principle" of the bill already occurs, but I am certain it is not what the author intended.

Hey, if you don't want to edit wiki, how about this blunder in the Fed's Money Market Mechanics ...

From page 6 of MMM:

Of course, they do not really pay out loans from the money
they receive as deposits. If they did this, no additional
money would be created. What they do when they make
loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits
to the borrowers' transaction accounts.

It's wrong on 2 counts ...

1. Of course they do pay out loans from the money they receive as deposits (or money that they borrow).

2. They are able to 'create additional money' by the usual fractional reserve banking when high-powered money is deposited. If x dollars of high powered money is deposited, and the reserve ratio is 10%, the commercial banks can create an additional 9x dollars.

Hmmmm ... I am assuming that the above excerpt applies to commercial banks and not Fed banks. If that isn't right, we won't need to correct MMM.
 
Last edited:
The writer of that bill knows absolutely nothing about accounting. The "universal principle" of the bill already occurs, but I am certain it is not what the author intended.
Obviously the author is referring to real accounts and not the "nominal" accounts often used in bookkeeping.
 
From page 6 of MMM:

Of course, they do not really pay out loans from the money
they receive as deposits. If they did this, no additional
money would be created. What they do when they make
loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits
to the borrowers' transaction accounts.

It's wrong on 2 counts ... <snip> ...
The second half of the statement is absolutely correct. When you borrow from a bank, you don't get cash directly from the bank's vault, you get the money deposited straight into your bank account.

It is the first half of the statement that causes controversy. If the bank were to lend cash from its vault it would still be creating money because it is taking money that is not in circulation (the vault cash) and adding it to the money that is already in circulation.

An exception to this rule would occur if the cash lent was deducted from somebody's account or if the money in somebody's account was temporarily frozen (as in a term deposit for example). In the latter case, the bank would simply be replacing money that was "withdrawn" from circulation by the saver. Since the borrower and the saver don't have access to the same money at the same time, there is no fractionalism and money creation does not occur.
 
Hey, if you don't want to edit wiki, how about this blunder in the Fed's Money Market Mechanics ...

From page 6 of MMM:

Of course, they do not really pay out loans from the money
they receive as deposits. If they did this, no additional
money would be created. What they do when they make
loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits
to the borrowers' transaction accounts.

It's wrong on 2 counts ...

I wouldn't call it a blunder. At most, I would say that the statement causes unnecessary confusion.

1. Of course they do pay out loans from the money they receive as deposits (or money that they borrow).

It depends upon how the steps in the transaction are broken down. It could be said that when at the instance a loan is created, that the borrower's account is credited and the outstanding loan account is debited. At this instance, the borrower is a depositor. Then a check from the bank is issued to the borrower and then the borrower's account is debited and cash is credited. Even if that all happens while the person is sitting at the loan officer's desk, the statement from MMM is only referring to initial credit to the borrower's account and debit to outstanding loan account. The rest is another transaction entirely.

2. They are able to 'create additional money' by the usual fractional reserve banking when high-powered money is deposited. If x dollars of high powered money is deposited, and the reserve ratio is 10%, the commercial banks can create an additional 9x dollars.

Only if the money is never withdrawn. We know that it is often withdrawn, circulated for awhile, and then deposited in the same or different bank and often in smaller chunks.

Hmmmm ... I am assuming that the above excerpt applies to commercial banks and not Fed banks. If that isn't right, we won't need to correct MMM.

Central banks, like the Federal Reserve, do operate differently from commercial banks.
 
I wouldn't call it a blunder. At most, I would say that the statement causes unnecessary confusion.



It depends upon how the steps in the transaction are broken down. It could be said that when at the instance a loan is created, that the borrower's account is credited and the outstanding loan account is debited. At this instance, the borrower is a depositor. Then a check from the bank is issued to the borrower and then the borrower's account is debited and cash is credited. Even if that all happens while the person is sitting at the loan officer's desk, the statement from MMM is only referring to initial credit to the borrower's account and debit to outstanding loan account. The rest is another transaction entirely.



Only if the money is never withdrawn. We know that it is often withdrawn, circulated for awhile, and then deposited in the same or different bank and often in smaller chunks.



Central banks, like the Federal Reserve, do operate differently from commercial banks.

I'd say the steps go as follows ....

The loan account is credited simultaneously with the reserves or cash or hand account being debited.

If the borrower takes his money, either cash or as a deposit in another bank, the transaction is complete. In any case, the loan is complete.

If he deposits the money in the lending bank the reserves account is credited and the deposits account is debited. (Or vice-versa, one of the enduring mysteries of accounting).

You left out the debit to the reserves account (where the reserves account is the sum of the Fed reserve account plus cash on hand). This is the key step, money is not created out of nothing in a loan, it is debited from the reserves account.
 
You left out the debit to the reserves account (where the reserves account is the sum of the Fed reserve account plus cash on hand). This is the key step, money is not created out of nothing in a loan, it is debited from the reserves account.
Incorrect. The bank's "reserves account" is affected only when a cash withdrawal or inter-bank transfer is done.

In the usual scenario, the borrower's loan account is debited and his transaction account is credited with the amount of the loan and the bank's reserves play no part in the process. The loan account is a measure of the present value of the promissory note that the borrower signed to get the loan in the first place.

(A common but fallacious CT argument is that since it is the borrower who created the money when he signed the promissory note, he doesn't owe the bank anything).
 
I'd say the steps go as follows ....

The loan account is credited simultaneously with the reserves or cash or hand account being debited.

If the borrower takes his money, either cash or as a deposit in another bank, the transaction is complete. In any case, the loan is complete.

If he deposits the money in the lending bank the reserves account is credited and the deposits account is debited. (Or vice-versa, one of the enduring mysteries of accounting).

You left out the debit to the reserves account (where the reserves account is the sum of the Fed reserve account plus cash on hand). This is the key step, money is not created out of nothing in a loan, it is debited from the reserves account.


Umm, no. It appears to me that you are confusing some terms. Reserves, cash, and outstanding loans are all assets. Assets are increased in the books through a DEBIT and decreased through a CREDIT. OTOH, depositor's accounts are LIABILITIES for the bank. Liabilities are increased by a CREDIT and are decreased by a DEBIT. Also, cash and some other current assets ARE reserves. The only important distinction is what is required and what is excess.

Let's start at the beginning with a very simple bank and an initial deposit of $10,000. We'll assume the bank keeps a "required reserves" account, though it is not required. We'll also assume the bank's desired reserve is 10%. Person A walks into the bank and makes a $10,000 deposit. Cash is debited or increased by $9,000. Required Reserves are debited or increased by $1,000. Person A's checking account is credited $10,000. The books balance because there is $10,000 in debits and $10,000 in credits. Total reserves are $10,000 ($9,000 excess and $1,000 required).

Person B comes into the bank and applies for a $9,000 loan. At the time of the loan, a demand account is created for Person B. The Loans Outstanding Account is debited or increased by $9,000. Person B's demand account is credited $9,000. Required Reserves are debited or increased $900 and Cash is credited or decreased $900. This last part of the transaction with the "Required Reserves" account is not necessary since cash is normally considered a reserve. I use it for illustrative purposes. Also, the loan transaction is complete at this point. Withdrawal of the funds is NOT required in order for their to be a loan though it does often occur at the same time.

At this point, the bank has assets of $19,000. Cash account of $8,100 plus Required Reserves (which is also cash) of $1,900 plus a loan outstanding of $9,000. The bank also has liabilities of $19,000 with the two depositor's checking/demand accounts of $10,000 and $9,000. Total reserves are still $10,000. Cash of $8,100 plus Required Reserves of $1,900.

Now, you might think the bank still has $8,100 in excess reserves and could continue to make loans. However, banks will typically not do this because they know that existing loans might be withdrawn at anytime. Therefore, banks will typically not continue to loan out money if their excess reserves match or drop below the amount of loans that have not been withdrawn.

At the end of the loan transaction, the borrower will often either request the loan funds as a withdrawal or the loan documents will specify who will be paid the loan funds for something the borrower has purchased. This initiates a second transaction. In our example, because there is a separate Required Reserve account, it requires crediting both Cash and Required Reserves. The transaction will be a debit or decrease to Person B's demand account of $9,000. There will be a corresponding credit or decrease to Cash of $8,100 and there will be a credit or decrease to Required Reserves of $900. It is only at this point that total reserves have changed after the initial deposit. Remember, total reserves were $10,000 after the deposit and total reserves were still $10,000 after the initial loan transaction. Now, after the loan proceeds have been withdrawn, total reserves are $1,000.

At this point, the bank has $10,000 in assets. ($9,000 loan outstanding and $1,000 Required Reserve or cash.) $10,000 in liabilities in the form of Person A's checking account.

Now, let's assume Person B's loan proceeds went to Person C and Person C deposits the $9,000 in the same bank. Cash is debited $8,100 and Required Reserves is debited $900. Person C's checking account is credited $9,000. The bank now has $19,000 in assets and $19,000 in liabilities. Assets are: $8,100 in cash or excess reserves. $1,900 in Required Reserves, and $9,000 in loan outstanding. Liabilities are: $19,000 in depositor's accounts. At this point, the bank could loan the $8,100 since the $9,000 loan has already been distributed.

That is a simple banking example. Again, the required reserves account is NOT necessary. You might see a similar account on the books of some banks and you might not. Sometimes, a bank will have a reserves account in the Stockholder's Equity section of the balance sheet. This is because that particular bank has decided to utilize some profit or paid-in capital from previous years to meet their reserve requirements. If that is the case, the accounting is a little bit different from the simple example provided above.
 
The Loans Outstanding Account is debited or increased by $9,000. Person B's demand account is credited $9,000.
This caught my eye in an otherwise very good explanation of the bank loan process. Is this an individual "Loans Outstanding Account" or a central account?

This might be a moot point because with electronic bookkeeping, one can easily collect certain transactions together and generate any desired report. However, any credit card or mortgage statement that I have ever seen uses the word "account" in its description. It even has an "account name" (the borrower) and "account number" attached to the statement.
 
This caught my eye in an otherwise very good explanation of the bank loan process. Is this an individual "Loans Outstanding Account" or a central account?

This might be a moot point because with electronic bookkeeping, one can easily collect certain transactions together and generate any desired report. However, any credit card or mortgage statement that I have ever seen uses the word "account" in its description. It even has an "account name" (the borrower) and "account number" attached to the statement.

I was using it as just a centralized account since in the example there is only one depositor and one loan. I accept your point that the account name should have been "Loans Outstanding - Person B" or something similar. Of course, that is what sometimes happens when someone tries to provide a simplified example. :p
 
Umm, no. It appears to me that you are confusing some terms. Reserves, cash, and outstanding loans are all assets. Assets are increased in the books through a DEBIT and decreased through a CREDIT. OTOH, depositor's accounts are LIABILITIES for the bank. Liabilities are increased by a CREDIT and are decreased by a DEBIT. Also, cash and some other current assets ARE reserves. The only important distinction is what is required and what is excess.

Let's start at the beginning with a very simple bank and an initial deposit of $10,000. We'll assume the bank keeps a "required reserves" account, though it is not required. We'll also assume the bank's desired reserve is 10%. Person A walks into the bank and makes a $10,000 deposit. Cash is debited or increased by $9,000. Required Reserves are debited or increased by $1,000. Person A's checking account is credited $10,000. The books balance because there is $10,000 in debits and $10,000 in credits. Total reserves are $10,000 ($9,000 excess and $1,000 required).

Person B comes into the bank and applies for a $9,000 loan. At the time of the loan, a demand account is created for Person B. The Loans Outstanding Account is debited or increased by $9,000. Person B's demand account is credited $9,000. Required Reserves are debited or increased $900 and Cash is credited or decreased $900. This last part of the transaction with the "Required Reserves" account is not necessary since cash is normally considered a reserve. I use it for illustrative purposes. Also, the loan transaction is complete at this point. Withdrawal of the funds is NOT required in order for their to be a loan though it does often occur at the same time.

At this point, the bank has assets of $19,000. Cash account of $8,100 plus Required Reserves (which is also cash) of $1,900 plus a loan outstanding of $9,000. The bank also has liabilities of $19,000 with the two depositor's checking/demand accounts of $10,000 and $9,000. Total reserves are still $10,000. Cash of $8,100 plus Required Reserves of $1,900.

Now, you might think the bank still has $8,100 in excess reserves and could continue to make loans. However, banks will typically not do this because they know that existing loans might be withdrawn at anytime. Therefore, banks will typically not continue to loan out money if their excess reserves match or drop below the amount of loans that have not been withdrawn.

At the end of the loan transaction, the borrower will often either request the loan funds as a withdrawal or the loan documents will specify who will be paid the loan funds for something the borrower has purchased. This initiates a second transaction. In our example, because there is a separate Required Reserve account, it requires crediting both Cash and Required Reserves. The transaction will be a debit or decrease to Person B's demand account of $9,000. There will be a corresponding credit or decrease to Cash of $8,100 and there will be a credit or decrease to Required Reserves of $900. It is only at this point that total reserves have changed after the initial deposit. Remember, total reserves were $10,000 after the deposit and total reserves were still $10,000 after the initial loan transaction. Now, after the loan proceeds have been withdrawn, total reserves are $1,000.

At this point, the bank has $10,000 in assets. ($9,000 loan outstanding and $1,000 Required Reserve or cash.) $10,000 in liabilities in the form of Person A's checking account.

Now, let's assume Person B's loan proceeds went to Person C and Person C deposits the $9,000 in the same bank. Cash is debited $8,100 and Required Reserves is debited $900. Person C's checking account is credited $9,000. The bank now has $19,000 in assets and $19,000 in liabilities. Assets are: $8,100 in cash or excess reserves. $1,900 in Required Reserves, and $9,000 in loan outstanding. Liabilities are: $19,000 in depositor's accounts. At this point, the bank could loan the $8,100 since the $9,000 loan has already been distributed.

That is a simple banking example. Again, the required reserves account is NOT necessary. You might see a similar account on the books of some banks and you might not. Sometimes, a bank will have a reserves account in the Stockholder's Equity section of the balance sheet. This is because that particular bank has decided to utilize some profit or paid-in capital from previous years to meet their reserve requirements. If that is the case, the accounting is a little bit different from the simple example provided above.

Umm, no. It appears to me that you are confusing some terms. Reserves, cash, and outstanding loans are all assets. Assets are increased in the books through a DEBIT and decreased through a CREDIT. OTOH, depositor's accounts are LIABILITIES for the bank. Liabilities are increased by a CREDIT and are decreased by a DEBIT.

LOL ! Beautiful. Thanks. Like I said, one of the eternal mysteries. You explained it succinctly and well. I confess it seems backwards to me, but I got it, for the moment at least.

However, the loan transaction - "Person B comes into the bank" - I think you got this wrong ..... you write ...

Required Reserves are debited or increased $900 and Cash is credited or decreased $900. This last part of the transaction with the "Required Reserves" account is not necessary since cash is normally considered a reserve.

A couple of things are wrong with this - first, the loan amount is credited to the borrowers deposit account, no actual cash was involved, so the cash account is not involved.

Second, a loan transaction is not dependent on the borrower having a deposit account at the bank. The bookkeeping for the loan transaction, if paid out in cash, is -

The loan account is debited (by $9000) and the cash account is credited.

If the borrower does have a deposit account, the bookkeeping is -

The loan account is debited and the reserves account is credited.
The reserves account is debited and the borrowers deposit account is credited.

Although the amount credited to the reserves (when the loan is made) account equals the amount debited (when the money is deposited), the bookkeeping is important because if the money is not in the reserves account, it cannot be credited out and the loan cannot be made.
 
Last edited:
However, the loan transaction - "Person B comes into the bank" - I think you got this wrong ..... you write ...

Required Reserves are debited or increased $900 and Cash is credited or decreased $900. This last part of the transaction with the "Required Reserves" account is not necessary since cash is normally considered a reserve.

A couple of things are wrong with this - first, the loan amount is credited to the borrowers deposit account, no actual cash was involved, so the cash account is not involved.

No. When using a separate Required Reserves account, anytime the total deposit accounts increase, the Required Reserves account must increase. For $19,000 in deposits, there should be $1,900 in Required Reserves. It isn't really a withdrawal of cash, rather it is a transfer between two separate cash accounts: Cash or excess reserves and Required Reserves. What I wrote is correct if the bank is using a separate Required Reserves account.

Second, a loan transaction is not dependent on the borrower having a deposit account at the bank. The bookkeeping for the loan transaction, if paid out in cash, is -

The loan account is debited (by $9000) and the cash account is credited.

It is really irrelevant whether the borrower has an existing deposit account or not. The bank may instantly create one through the computer system or in the ledger. This may be transparent to the borrower but it can occur. I really only did it this way in the example to properly illustrate what is stated in the MMM. ETA: The statement that you had a problem with in the MMM refers to the loan transaction as separate from the payout of the loan. Therefore, as in my example, you have a loan transaction where a deposit or demand account is credited or increased and the "Loan Outstanding - Person B" is debited or increased.

If the borrower does have a deposit account, the bookkeeping is -

The loan account is debited and the reserves account is credited.
The reserves account is debited and the borrowers deposit account is credited.

Although the amount credited to the reserves (when the loan is made) account equals the amount debited (when the money is deposited), the bookkeeping is important because if the money is not in the reserves account, it cannot be credited out and the loan cannot be made.

Ok, I think that the misunderstanding comes from a varying use of the word "reserves". In the above, you are referring to reserves as TOTAL RESERVES (excess plus required). I had thought that you were using "reserves" earlier to mean REQUIRED RESERVES only.

As far as your example above, you must remember that the cash account is typically included as a part of total reserves. If a deposit is made there isn't both a debit cash AND total reserves and a single credit to deposit accounts. If there were, the accounts would not balance.
 
Last edited:
No. When using a separate Required Reserves account, anytime the total deposit accounts increase, the Required Reserves account must increase. For $19,000 in deposits, there should be $1,900 in Required Reserves. It isn't really a withdrawal of cash, rather it is a transfer between two separate cash accounts: Cash or excess reserves and Required Reserves. What I wrote is correct if the bank is using a separate Required Reserves account.



It is really irrelevant whether the borrower has an existing deposit account or not. The bank may instantly create one through the computer system or in the ledger. This may be transparent to the borrower but it can occur. I really only did it this way in the example to properly illustrate what is stated in the MMM. ETA: The statement that you had a problem with in the MMM refers to the loan transaction as separate from the payout of the loan. Therefore, as in my example, you have a loan transaction where a deposit or demand account is credited or increased and the "Loan Outstanding - Person B" is debited or increased.



Ok, I think that the misunderstanding comes from a varying use of the word "reserves". In the above, you are referring to reserves as TOTAL RESERVES (excess plus required). I had thought that you were using "reserves" earlier to mean REQUIRED RESERVES only.

As far as your example above, you must remember that the cash account is typically included as a part of total reserves. If a deposit is made there isn't both a debit cash AND total reserves and a single credit to deposit accounts. If there were, the accounts would not balance.

Ok, I think that the misunderstanding comes from a varying use of the word "reserves". In the above, you are referring to reserves as TOTAL RESERVES (excess plus required). I had thought that you were using "reserves" earlier to mean REQUIRED RESERVES only.

When I started, a week ago, I used 'reserves' to mean required reserves, but I've learned I think that reserves means everything the bank has got in terms of cash on hand and its reserve account at the Fed.

The statement that you had a problem with in the MMM refers to the loan transaction as separate from the payout of the loan.

Hmmmm, let's see.... the statement is ...

What they do when they make
loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits
to the borrowers' transaction accounts.


I do not believe that is correct. Here is another reason, the borrower's 'transaction' account. What in hell is a transaction account? That's a new one on me. Let's assume they mean deposit account. In that case, that is not the bookkeeping for making a loan. It doesn't balance. It leaves out the credit to the reserves account (cash or reserve account with the Fed).

So, with that sentence as a reference, psion10 I think, argued that the banks could make money out of thin air. The sentence above states just that. His argument was correct, but the conclusion is wrong because the reference is wrong. I just read an aphorism ... a half truth is a whole lie. That's why it should be edited IMO.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't call it a blunder. At most, I would say that the statement causes unnecessary confusion.

Keep in mind that this confusion is why that particular phrase is discussed frequently here. Some people (usually psion10) present it as “proof” regular banks are conjuring money out of thin air when they loan out money.

How this gets answered depends on whether you accept psion10’s interpretation of what that statement says. If you accept that it means what he thinks it means then the answer is that the statement is simply wrong. If you want to look at what’s really going on it makes more sense to say psion10 is simply misinterpreting the statement but this is more complex to explain.

What Saggy seems to be getting as is a example that proves banks are not conjuring money when they make loans. Looking the following end state: a bank loans money and the borrower has that loan in cash. If the bank conjured that money to make the loan then the money supply has increased. If the bank has not conjured the money and money supply only changes because of the accounting details and the fact demand deposits count as M2 money then the money supply has not increased (but would if the borrower walked down the street and deposited it in another bank)

The second answer is the correct one so the statement must be either incorrect or misinterpreted. It’s really the latter, but a few people choose to accept psion10’s interpretation at face value and simply say it’s wrong.
 
Hmmmm, let's see.... the statement is ...

What they do when they make
loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits
to the borrowers' transaction accounts.


I do not believe that is correct. Here is another reason, the borrower's 'transaction' account. What in hell is a transaction account? That's a new one on me. Let's assume they mean deposit account. In that case, that is not the bookkeeping for making a loan. It doesn't balance. It leaves out the credit to the reserves account (cash or reserve account with the Fed).

So, with that sentence as a reference, psion10 I think, argued that the banks could make money out of thin air. The sentence above states just that. His argument was correct, but the conclusion is wrong because the reference is wrong. I just read an aphorism ... a half truth is a whole lie. That's why it should be edited IMO.

Taken out of context like that the statement is incomplete, that isn’t all a bank does when it makes a loan. The surrounding document, however details everything else that happens in a modern electronic banking system. Without this surrounding context the statement would indeed be incorrect, but that context is there. It’s only when it’s quote mined and presented without context that there is a problem.
 

The statement that you had a problem with in the MMM refers to the loan transaction as separate from the payout of the loan.

Hmmmm, let's see.... the statement is ...

What they do when they make
loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits
to the borrowers' transaction accounts.


I do not believe that is correct. Here is another reason, the borrower's 'transaction' account. What in hell is a transaction account? That's a new one on me. Let's assume they mean deposit account. In that case, that is not the bookkeeping for making a loan. It doesn't balance.


Yes, when it refers to a transaction account it refers to the deposit or demand account. It isn't exactly the bookkeeping for a loan but it does represent what happens. From my earlier example, the transaction does balance. The bank, before making the loan, has $10,000 in total reserves ($10,000 in Cash ($9,000 in excess reserves and $1,000 in required reserves)). When the loan transaction is performed, a credit or increase to the borrower's transaction or deposit account and a subsequent debit to "Loans Outstanding - Person B" account. Of course, the borrower has signed a promissory note for the $9,000 which is documentation for the recorded transaction. At this point, the $9,000 is still in the bank's vault. At this moment in time, the bank still has total reserves of $10,000.

It leaves out the credit to the reserves account (cash or reserve account with the Fed).

Again, total reserves DO NOT CHANGE as long as the loan money is not withdrawn from the bank. It is only the transaction where the loan money is withdrawn that the total reserves (in regards to the loan transaction) changes. Now, REQUIRED reserves do change when the loan is created and before the money is withdrawn from the bank, but the TOTAL reserves do not.

So, with that sentence as a reference, psion10 I think, argued that the banks could make money out of thin air. The sentence above states just that. His argument was correct, but the conclusion is wrong because the reference is wrong. I just read an aphorism ... a half truth is a whole lie. That's why it should be edited IMO.

I disagree. I believe that the MMM accurately states what happens. I think it is the interpretation that is flawed.
 
Taken out of context like that the statement is incomplete, that isn’t all a bank does when it makes a loan. The surrounding document, however details everything else that happens in a modern electronic banking system. Without this surrounding context the statement would indeed be incorrect, but that context is there. It’s only when it’s quote mined and presented without context that there is a problem.

Nope, that's not it. It needs editing. Here is the entire paragraph...

If business is active, the banks with excess reserves
probably will have opportunities to loan the $9,000.
Of
course, they do not really pay out loans from the money
they receive as deposits. If they did this, no additional
money would be created.
What they do when they make
loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits
to the borrowers' transaction accounts. Loans (assets)
and deposits (liabilities) both rise by $9,000. Reserves are
unchanged by the loan transactions.
But the deposit credits
constitute new additions to the total deposits of the
banking system.

On the one hand the italicized sentence argues for your case, in that it at least mentions reserves, however it does not connect them directly to the loan to be made. But, the first two bold sentences undermine your case completely (and make psion10's case). The first bold sentence is completely wrong, not half right. Of course the money loaned is the money that has been deposited, where do you think the reserves come from. OK, it could have been borrowed by the bank, but the norm is that it is money that is deposited that is loaned. And the second bold sentence is completely wrong, because a bank can create new money by loaning deposited money using FRB. The third bold sentence is wrong too. The reserves are credited when the loan is made, if the loan is the deposited, the reserves are then debited. If the loan is not deposited, the reserves remain depleted. That is, for a loan that is deposited, the reserves are credited and then debited. For a loan paid in cash the reserves are just credited. In both cases they change (in the first case they go down and then go back up, that's changing). The paragraph is entirely hopeless.
 
Last edited:
Now you are just being stubborn.

Well, maybe. But there is a phenomenon, the randi skeptic, who is absolutely reverential toward anything the establishment promulgates, and skeptical of everything else. A sort of inverse skepticism. And, there is nothing more establishment than the Fed, and that paragraph is just wrong. So, let's see how the randi skeptics deal with it.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom