<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why I will no longer do business with Wachovia Bank</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.geekforgod.com/2009/07/01/why-i-will-no-longer-do-business-with-wachovia-bank/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.geekforgod.com/2009/07/01/why-i-will-no-longer-do-business-with-wachovia-bank/</link>
	<description>The ramblings of a Christian geek</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:11:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Robin Munn</title>
		<link>http://www.geekforgod.com/2009/07/01/why-i-will-no-longer-do-business-with-wachovia-bank/comment-page-1/#comment-40202</link>
		<dc:creator>Robin Munn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:03:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.geekforgod.com/?p=101#comment-40202</guid>
		<description>That's nonsense. If what you're saying were true, I could take out a loan for $10,000, default on the loan &lt;i&gt;immediately&lt;/i&gt;, and the bank wouldn't be harmed by it at all.

Furthermore, all this "brand new money" being conjured "directly out of thin air" every time someone takes out a loan would have the same economic effect as the government printing large sums of money: runaway inflation.

How loans &lt;i&gt;actually&lt;/i&gt; work is that the bank is loaning out the money that is being deposited with them by people with savings accounts. But there's a limit: the bank can't loan out more money than they actually have, minus a certain percentage that they keep in reserve (the "fractional reserve" of Fractional Reserve Banking). If the bank loans money to someone who defaults on their loan, they have actually &lt;i&gt;lost money&lt;/i&gt;.

What you may be talking about is the "money creation" effect of repeated loans (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation for a chart that explains it pretty well), but that doesn't create any &lt;i&gt;actual&lt;/i&gt; money, it just makes that money circulate more widely. And each bank is limited in what they can loan out to the amount they actually &lt;i&gt;have&lt;/i&gt;. So it's in the bank's best interest to loan money to people who will actually repay it, and that's why Wachovia's offer is foolish: the only people foolish enough to &lt;i&gt;take&lt;/i&gt; a loan at 50% interest are the kinds of people who will never repay their loan.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s nonsense. If what you&#8217;re saying were true, I could take out a loan for $10,000, default on the loan <i>immediately</i>, and the bank wouldn&#8217;t be harmed by it at all.</p>
<p>Furthermore, all this &#8220;brand new money&#8221; being conjured &#8220;directly out of thin air&#8221; every time someone takes out a loan would have the same economic effect as the government printing large sums of money: runaway inflation.</p>
<p>How loans <i>actually</i> work is that the bank is loaning out the money that is being deposited with them by people with savings accounts. But there&#8217;s a limit: the bank can&#8217;t loan out more money than they actually have, minus a certain percentage that they keep in reserve (the &#8220;fractional reserve&#8221; of Fractional Reserve Banking). If the bank loans money to someone who defaults on their loan, they have actually <i>lost money</i>.</p>
<p>What you may be talking about is the &#8220;money creation&#8221; effect of repeated loans (see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation</a> for a chart that explains it pretty well), but that doesn&#8217;t create any <i>actual</i> money, it just makes that money circulate more widely. And each bank is limited in what they can loan out to the amount they actually <i>have</i>. So it&#8217;s in the bank&#8217;s best interest to loan money to people who will actually repay it, and that&#8217;s why Wachovia&#8217;s offer is foolish: the only people foolish enough to <i>take</i> a loan at 50% interest are the kinds of people who will never repay their loan.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: imafraidyoudontquiteunderstandhowitworks</title>
		<link>http://www.geekforgod.com/2009/07/01/why-i-will-no-longer-do-business-with-wachovia-bank/comment-page-1/#comment-40133</link>
		<dc:creator>imafraidyoudontquiteunderstandhowitworks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:31:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.geekforgod.com/?p=101#comment-40133</guid>
		<description>Banks do not loan out money that they *have*.

When a bank makes a loan it conjures brand new money, directly out of thin air, in to your loan account. This is the magic of Fractional Reserve Banking.

So, a bank is not actually risking any of its capital... it is only 
considering the Opportunity Costs between the different loan possibilities that the loan sharks can think up.

The Mortgage or Loan Application becomes a BRAND NEW asset on the Bank's Balance Sheet.

It is good to be king.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Banks do not loan out money that they *have*.</p>
<p>When a bank makes a loan it conjures brand new money, directly out of thin air, in to your loan account. This is the magic of Fractional Reserve Banking.</p>
<p>So, a bank is not actually risking any of its capital&#8230; it is only<br />
considering the Opportunity Costs between the different loan possibilities that the loan sharks can think up.</p>
<p>The Mortgage or Loan Application becomes a BRAND NEW asset on the Bank&#8217;s Balance Sheet.</p>
<p>It is good to be king.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
