posted on May, 15 2009 @ 10:29 AM
If the banks asked me beforehand if they could provide credit for sometimes more than 8 times as much money as they actually had available (e.g.
existed), I would've simply said "no". In fact, if the bank managers asked themselves they probably would've declined - but it's the Bank
as a Company that requires them to take risks and try to increase profit. The free market allows the banks to shape it, and the banks want a very
voluptuous shape.. And then we end up with a corrupt system.
Of course it really is our fault, because we are all of us, and we hardly can blame nature on this one. The question is whether it's truly something
we caused as a collective, or simply a by-product of capitalism. Obviously our system was corrupt in the way that there was more money 'out there'
than could actually be paid up. This isn't the first time that that happened, and it sure as hell won't be the last. It may seem easy to create a
stable system, but the problem is that our capitalism works on loans - the lending of money is actually profitable for banks. Since many conceive
banks to be the 'heart of the economy', there is an enormous drive to make way for the banks to make more profit, as much as they can without
completely overthrowing the balance. This hasn't worked out, really - whenever there is a (small or large) recession, we're told to reinforce it by
spending money, which we get from the banks. This works temporarily, building up the economy - and crashing down when it hits the breakpoint. As a
society, we have yet to find the right balance and/or process to find this balance.
So really, we just need to think of a better way to make things work.. I'd personally say, don't create money that doesn't exist - but since money
became legal tender, there is no real static amount of money, so it's all a bit cloudy to me. Definitely not let banks lend 8 times their share..
P.S. I'm talking about the western economy, not just America.. it's pretty much the same in Europe.