Guest 614Streets Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slowbalt Posted February 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 Money in and of itself has never had any value, even when we were on the gold standard. The value of money is now, and has always been the fact that it is readily excepted as a means of trade. Money is the only way to move past a basic agrarian economy, and even in an agrarian economy it is needed to have any kind of prosperity. Money is not a "lesser evil" it is necessary for our way of life. It all depends on what you mean by "value" i guess. When it was on the gold standard it was at least related to an amount of tangible stuff. Before that we had coins of a certain amount of metal, and many other "placeholders". I'm not sure why you claim that money is the only way out of an agrarian society but even if it is that's not where we are right now so I don't see how that would stop us anyway. Money is needed for our current lifestyle because it is based on the monetary system. Why is it better to stay with the way it is rather than look for ways to change it? Is there nothing about how the system works that should be changed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost face Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 The reason why banks will not let people withdraw large sums of money from one location is because they have to meet the cash reserve ratio. Also to prevent idiots to create bank runs and panic of bank going under. (Remember WAMU?) Money has intrinsic value, people have to believe in it for it to work. Just like paypal. Think about it like this, if dollar lost all value we have more important shit to worry about. Money creates stability and growth in the economy due to its ability to create new money, something resource economy could never support. Resource economy is inefficient and obsolete in so many ways, because you have to find a right person to barter with and for to think for a moment it can work in the time we are in, you are an idiot. BTW take some economic classes and it will open up your mind a little about how the world evolves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tractor Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 To the question of where they get it "within 24hrs", Wife says she has to order it from brinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furloaf Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 They overnight it from Japan. I mean other banks. That is what the Prime interest rate is, the rate at which banks charge other banks for overnight transfers of money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tractor Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Mentioned to wife about the guy's wife taking the money out. Thats on the bank, if he went back in and made a stink about it they owe him the money. I hope that he did this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Das Borgen Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 I listen to that show every week and it was quite surprising actually....our money has no actual physical value but we give it value and it's all that matters I also liked the Brazilian solution to counter their massive inflation story (quite genius really) anyways...kacey jordan time! http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff131/peterz40/Favorites/Black%20and%20White/Blondes/KaceyJordan.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slowbalt Posted February 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Resource economy is inefficient and obsolete in so many ways, because you have to find a right person to barter with and for to think for a moment it can work in the time we are in, you are an idiot. BTW take some economic classes and it will open up your mind a little about how the world evolves. Maybe the one that you envision. Is there some fundamental reason why this cannot work? Check out this link and then we can be talking about the same idea of a resource based economy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Zeitgeist_Movement This doesn't seem like such a bad idea at all. Thoughts? Emotional outbursts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorne Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 If the US were to go back to a "resource" based economy, although I think you probably mean a resource based currency (backed by gold, silver, or some other commodity), you would not have been able to get a loan to buy your car, and most people wouldn't be able to get home loans or other types of credit without very large cash down payments. As far as interest creating more money, this is completely true. In fact Albert Einstein said, "The most powerful force in the universe is compound interest." I think people who want to go back to the gold standard and completely get rid of government debt have their hearts in the right place, but are completely unrealistic if we want to live the kind of lives we do today. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 I don't know this is really out of the norm. When I bought my Impala I was only able to withdraw $2000 cash. I had to go to multiple branches to get the full amount. What they told me was if I wanted more than that I needed to give them 24 hours notice to make sure they had enough on hand. It was inconvenient, but it makes sense that banks are not keeping an insane amount of cash on hand. That just makes then a bigger target for a robbery. Really? I took $8,000 from a 4 branch bank (Guernsey) one day with no issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tractor Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 Really? I took $8,000 from a 4 branch bank (Guernsey) one day with no issue. Thats because that bank has a single owner that you got your money from. Nice guy, wife used to work for him and he will tackle anyone trying to rob his bank. Funny stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littleguy Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 The amount of cash a branch has on hand really depends on what day of the week you happen to go on, what estimates the bank has for what will be needed that day, cash orders from business clients, and a variety of other factors. I managed a WaMu branch for 4 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trouble Maker Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 This gets into a decent amount of it: http://www.naturalnews.com/025243_banks_economy_national.html I don't like the way the word it when they are talking about the reserves, I think it's misleading. So if I deposited $100 at Bank of America, then based on the legal reference banks use, Bank of America would be allowed to create $90 new dollars. As you can see there is no reserve involved in the process of money creation by banks. Which makes it sound like if I deposit $100, the bank keeps that $100, but 'makes' another $90 to lend out. But what actually happens is that if I deposit $100, the bank has to keep $10 (10% reserve) and can loan out $90 of that. Much different situation and the later leads to less reserves but more money in the economy. If banks only have to hold 10% of deposits,they will lend the other 90% of deposits. The person with that loan will then choose to deposit the money from the loan back into the bank at a rate of 'c' (for simplicity say c=0%.) then the bank can again loan 90% of the second deposit which was 90% of the first deposit. Reserve requirements affect the potential of the banking system to create transaction deposits. If the reserve requirement is 10%, for example, a bank that receives a $100 deposit may lend out $90 of that deposit. If the borrower then writes a check to someone who deposits the $90, the bank receiving that deposit can lend out $81. As the process continues, the banking system can expand the change in excess reserves of $90 into a maximum of $1,000 of money ($100+$90+81+$72.90+...=$1,000), e.g.$100/0.10=$1,000. In contrast, with a 20% reserve requirement, the banking system would be able to expand the initial $100 deposit into a maximum of ($100+$80+$64+$51.20+...=$500), e.g.$100/0.20=$500. Thus, higher reserve requirements reduce money creation and help maintain the purchasing power of the currency previously in use. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_requirement It's what makes our modern, debt based economy work and grow. If a bank had to keep all of your money at the bank they would have no money to loan out. This article also makes a big deal about money being real money or electronic, what's the difference? It also seems like some people are confusing reserves with how much money they can walk into the bank and get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.