|
Bill:
I don't get your point.
My statement - "In the modern era, it is possible to take paper IOU of any given nominal
face value to the bank and it will transform it into money. The bank
would charge interest as its fee for the service rendered. How can such
money be considered debt instruments?" paraphrased
Your statement: "In
the era of "free coinage" it was possible to
take any quantity of bullion to the mint and it would be coined into money. The
mint would keep a percentage as its fee for the service rendered. How can such
coins be considered debt instruments?"
I now recognize that my wording was not
sufficiently clear for you - that "paper IOU" that a prospective borrower
takes to the bank in order that the bank "will transform it into
money" MUST mean a DRAFT IOU.
My wording reflects the customary procedure in
Iceland, where a prospective borrower fills out a "bill of exchange" for, say
100,000 krónur, takes it to his bank manager and asks him to "buy"
it.
If the bank manager says YES, the draft IOU
becomes Deposit Money.
If the answer is NO, the draft IOU is torn up
and thrown in the wastepaper basket.
Gunnar
|
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), (continued)
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), Gunnar Tomasson Sat 05 May 2001, 04:39 GMT
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), William B. Ryan Sun 06 May 2001, 05:19 GMT
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), Gunnar Tomasson Sun 06 May 2001, 13:26 GMT
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), William B. Ryan Sun 06 May 2001, 22:03 GMT
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), Gunnar Tomasson Sun 06 May 2001, 22:30 GMT
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), GGard97342 Thu 17 May 2001, 07:14 GMT
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), kevin donnelly Sat 26 May 2001, 18:29 GMT
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), Warren Mosler Sun 27 May 2001, 16:15 GMT
- Re: Creditary Economics (CE), Paul Davidson Mon 28 May 2001, 00:11 GMT