(October 18, 2013 at 5:15 am)Aractus Wrote:(October 18, 2013 at 4:14 am)davidMC1982 Wrote: That's exactly what they do and it provides a clue as to part of what the GFC was.You're an idiot.
You do not know what you're talking about.
The G.F.C. had to do with banks in the USA shorting on bad loans. More to the point it had to do with collateral and the fact that banks didn't get that upfront and passed on the risks to other investors, and yes i do believe that 90% of them should be gaoled (after a trial by peers, of course).
Hmmmmm. So, I'm an idiot because you didn't realise that banks do create money from nothing when giving out loans? Because you actually thought they only lent money that had been deposited with them? But instead of taking the time and thinking, "hey, maybe he's right", then researching some more (and explaining how I'm wrong if that were the case), you stick your fingers in your ears and throw insults.
Why exactly do you think the problems US banks had, ended up causing such problems throughout the world? Why do you think governments had to "print" money (more generating money out of thin air there) to prop up failed banks? Why do you think Cyprus (one of the worst hit Eurozone countries) had to restrict bank withdrawals (they actually stopped people withdrawing their own money)? Why do think UK banks had to increase their debt cover (cash reserves vs debt) from 5% to 10%?
And irrespective of this small aside, it still comes back to the fact that money is as abstract a thing as debt and negativity is a tangible physical quantity.
