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

rafeh1

(385 posts)
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:08 PM Oct 2014

Why Do Banks Want Our Deposits? Hint: It's Not to Make Loans.

Why Do Banks Want Our Deposits? Hint: It's Not to Make Loans.

By Ellen Brown

Many authorities have said it: banks do not lend their deposits. They create the money they lend on their books.

Robert B. Anderson, Treasury Secretary under Eisenhower, said it in 1959:

When a bank makes a loan, it simply adds to the borrower's deposit account in the bank by the amount of the loan. The money is not taken from anyone else's deposits; it was not previously paid in to the bank by anyone. It's new money, created by the bank for the use of the borrower.

The Bank of England said it in the spring of 2014, writing in its quarterly bulletin:

The reality of how money is created today differs from the description found in some economics textbooks: Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits.



. . . Whenever a bank makes a loan, it simultaneously creates a matching deposit in the borrower's bank account, thereby creating new money.

All of which leaves us to wonder: If banks do not lend their depositors' money, why are they always scrambling to get it? Banks advertise to attract depositors, and they pay interest on the funds. What good are our deposits to the bank?

The answer is that while banks do not need the deposits to create loans, they do need to balance their books; and attracting customer deposits is usually the cheapest way to do it.

Reckoning with the Fed


Fed tries to give impression as if it is part of federal government.


Ever since the Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913, banks have been required to clear their outgoing checks through the Fed or another clearinghouse. Banks keep reserves in reserve accounts at the Fed for this purpose, and they usually hold the minimum required reserve. When the loan of Bank A becomes a check that goes into Bank B, the Federal Reserve debits Bank A's reserve account and credits Bank B's. If Bank A's account goes in the red at the end of the day, the Fed automatically treats this as an overdraft and lends the bank the money. Bank A then must clear the overdraft.

Attracting customer deposits, called "retail deposits," is a cheap way to do it. But if the bank lacks retail deposits, it can borrow in the money markets, typically the Fed funds market where banks sell their "excess reserves" to other banks. These purchased deposits are called "wholesale deposits."

Note that excess reserves will always be available somewhere, since the reserves that just left Bank A will have gone into some other bank. The exception is when customers withdraw cash, but that happens only rarely as compared to all the electronic money flying back and forth every day in the banking system.

Borrowing from the Fed funds market is pretty inexpensive -- a mere 0.25% interest yearly for overnight loans. But it's still more expensive than borrowing from the bank's own depositors.
... rest on opednews

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Why-Do-Banks-Want-Our-Depo-by-Ellen-Brown-Banks_Public-Banking-141027-655.html#comment517415

14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
1. K & R! At the local credit union, you don't even get intrest until you have
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:10 PM
Oct 2014

Moe than $ 350 in savings!

rafeh1

(385 posts)
2. public debt has been opposed even by Henry ford
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:13 PM
Oct 2014

Its not just the general public doesn't understands how money is created but a significant percentage of MBA's don't understand it either. And as the Bank of England states "The reality of how money is created today differs from the description found in some economics textbooks"

The reason economic textbooks hide the process is because the banks and the Federal reserve don't want it well known. One of the best books is by author Stephen Zarlenga The Lost Science of Money http://old.monetary.org/lostscienceofmoney.html

Stephan has been working with Congressman Dennis Kucinich to change our rigged federal reserve system. (http://www.democraticunderground.com/110620)

The right to coin money is constitutionally part of congress job which the bankers have taken over and created the fourth branch of government and called it Federal reserve. The federal reserve is about as Federal as federal express.

Basically what Stephan says is that the federal government issues money for infrastructure and receives it back in taxes. This means the government doesn't go into debt in creating public infrastructure.

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
5. There are other people as knowledgeable about money as Stepahan who point out that the amount the
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:20 PM
Oct 2014

Federal Government spends on war each year is historically almost always the same as the amount of money that is collected by the Income Tax.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
3. It is called
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:14 PM
Oct 2014

Fractional Reserve Banking.

The banks must have a fraction of the loans made. I think it is about 10%.

That means if a bank has $10 in reserve, it can make a loan of $100. So it creates an extra $90 out of thin air.

I shoulda been a banker. But I am not a capitalist, so there ya have it.

 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
11. Indeed this is one of the ways the Fed can theoretically control growth in
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 09:50 AM
Oct 2014

the money supply. To wit, if the Fed suddenly raises the reserve requirement from your hypothetical 10% to 11%, it means that banks must now have $11 on hand for every $100 they loan which, all other things being equal, constrains bank lending a bit. Raising and lowering the reserve percentage is, IIRC from Econ 101, something of a brute-force measure. Typically, the Fed controls the money supply by entering and\or leaving the bond markets which has the effect of raising and lowering interest rates. Higher interest rates in general mean lower demand for money, i.e., a smaller money supply.

BTW, based on my coursework in Econ many years ago, your reply comes closest to any in this thread to explaining it correctly. Good job!

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
4. There is an interesting video called 'Money as Debt' on youtube
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:19 PM
Oct 2014

It is about 45 minutes long, but worth it if you have time.

roamer65

(36,745 posts)
6. Once we went to a true fiat currency in 1971...
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:29 PM
Oct 2014

the sky became the limit as far as money creation. The gold exchange system from the Bretton Woods accord after WW2 did shackle money supply growth, but Vietnam War spending ended that restraint.
Nixon closed the "gold window" in 1971 and inflation took off like a rocket, and is still running 8-10 per year pct to this day.
The result is prices about 10 times as high as what they were in 1970.

 

scarystuffyo

(733 posts)
7. If you keep money at home instead of a bank you are a criminal
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:32 PM
Oct 2014

Weeeeee need banks or face having our money seized by our wonderful government if you
had a large amount of cash at home in a safe

abelenkpe

(9,933 posts)
8. Does that mean that when a borrower
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 07:34 PM
Oct 2014

Defaults no money is actually lost?

Why did taxpayers give money to the banks when the economy crashed?

Don't the banks have to have some portion?

MFrohike

(1,980 posts)
9. Quick answer
Mon Oct 27, 2014, 09:00 PM
Oct 2014

In a default, the expected income is lost, not actual money in the bank (sorry, couldn't resist). It's not that money is leaving your pocket, but that you won't be getting any more from that source (without legal action, anyway).

The banks were bailed out because they were insolvent AND because they were illiquid. In short, they were unable to pay their debts and they weren't able to roll over their short term loans because the money market had gone bust. We chose to hand them a blanket guarantee and multiple checks rather than do the sane thing and put them into bankruptcy and have FDIC manage them during the transition. For all the hype of the last six years that there was no other choice, you can only believe that if you don't know that FDIC's business is resolving failed banks. They've resolved thousands of banks over 70+ years.

The banks loan first, then get the required reserves. Banks have to square up reserves at the end of every business day, which can be done by getting new deposits, getting an interbank loan, or going to the Fed's discount window.

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
10. Not quite. Think of money as debt.
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 09:41 AM
Oct 2014

The money is made out of thin air, but the debt is real.

ThInk of it like a credit card. I have a 5k limit, so I can create 5k in cash out of thin air, with a bit of help from Visa.

If I max out my credit card its ok, as long as I can make some payments and keep everybody happy. If I default, the debt is real, and the bank that issues the credit card takes the loss.

Fractional reserve banking is similar. The Money is made up, the debt is real. Every debt holder has the right to request real cash. (And eventually they will in one form or another). So if you default on a loan, the bank looses real money, since real money is collateral for fake money.

MFrohike

(1,980 posts)
13. That's confused
Wed Oct 29, 2014, 02:20 AM
Oct 2014

A loan default affects the balance sheet and cash flows, but not actual money in the bank, as it were. It simply affects income in the future, not cash held in the present. The easiest way to test whether or not I'm right is to determine where the money in the bank's account goes if one of its debtors defaults at the moment of the default (as a result of that default).

Demand deposits are not collateral for bank loans. That's just confused. They're simply a marker for the limit on lending for a bank at any given point in time. If they were collateral for the loans, there'd be a defined legal relationship between the depositor, the bank, AND the debtor in every instance. I've yet to run into any three party relationships in simple demand banking.

As for the rest, the distinctions between real and fake money are hollow. If it's accepted as legal tender by all parties, including as payment for taxes, then it's as real as it gets. The fact that extended credit is recognized at face value as a creation of money doesn't make some of it real and some of it not. It simply makes for a more stable system.

 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
12. Sigh. Yes, it is to make loans. As Robert Earl points out up-thread, banks must have a certain
Tue Oct 28, 2014, 09:53 AM
Oct 2014

percentage of reserves on deposit in order to make loans (the source of most bank profits). So how do they get those reserves? Two ways: attract deposits or, if they cannot attract sufficient deposits, borrow from other banks or from the Fed's overnight lending window.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
14. Fractional reserve banking has existed since the early Renaissance
Wed Oct 29, 2014, 03:24 AM
Oct 2014

I'm not sure why so many people are acting like this is a new idea.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why Do Banks Want Our Dep...