“BANKS” Banks allow large numbers of people to cooperate *anonymously* by aggreg

“BANKS”

Banks allow large numbers of people to cooperate *anonymously* by aggregating small amounts of money from those with small amounts of income to leverage the borrowing capacity of fiat money. The first question is only whether *bankers* are providing any coordination value that cannot be provided purely statistically (doubtful. very.) The second question is whether continuous interest or transactional fees are either beneficial(destructive) or preferable(necessary).

From what I can defend, I see a need for:

1) Mutual Funds (distributed investment risk for consumers)

2) Credit Services (and counseling)

3) Clearing Services (an account or accounts)

And I do not see any value in an other services.

The collateral system as I understand it does not achieve the desired purpose. It is a means of regulating BANKS not consumer or business behavior: the deprivation of credit alone is the only motivator for consumers. And as far as I an tell the collateral system is just a means for creating moral hazard and entrapment. The only criteria is whether individuals have an ability to pay from income streams, not whether we can ‘retaliate’ against their assets. Secondly, there is no reason why we require people to pay on a regular schedule rather than as a percentage of their income streams. Much of what we believe is true is not. Money is not money any longer.

BANKING HIERARCHY: (class based services)

check cashing services: underclass

(hole in the market): working poor

credit unions: labor class (renters)

savings and loans: homeowners

banks: small business banks

commercial banks: medium and large business banks.

semi-political banks: ‘financial institutions’

the central bank: the private sector.

the treasury: the public sector.