Hi All.
I am observing a debate - I will try and keep masked my own view for the present.
Side One: Fractional Reserve Banking is a myth. The reduction of reserve ratios to zero and/or voluntary (e.g. US and UK) has more or less meant that banks can lend as much as they want, independent of deposit levels.
Side Two: Accepts much of "Side One", but argues that Basel III (and LCR & NSFR within) rules act as de-facto constraints on lending, though that isn't their primary purpose.
Are either of these arguments valid?
Regards, Newroad
Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators
Thanks to Anonymous,bruncher,niord,gvonge,Shelford, for Donating to support the site
Fractional Reserve Banking is a myth - discuss?
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6127
- Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
- Has thanked: 448 times
- Been thanked: 2361 times
Re: Fractional Reserve Banking is a myth - discuss?
Newroad wrote:Hi All.
I am observing a debate - I will try and keep masked my own view for the present.
Side One: Fractional Reserve Banking is a myth. The reduction of reserve ratios to zero and/or voluntary (e.g. US and UK) has more or less meant that banks can lend as much as they want, independent of deposit levels.
Side Two: Accepts much of "Side One", but argues that Basel III (and LCR & NSFR within) rules act as de-facto constraints on lending, though that isn't their primary purpose.
Are either of these arguments valid?
Regards, Newroad
Banks have capital constraints and as such (potential) lending isn't infinite (unless qualifying capital is - which it isn't in practice)
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4501
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
- Has thanked: 1635 times
- Been thanked: 1637 times
Re: Fractional Reserve Banking is a myth - discuss?
Newroad wrote:Hi All.
I am observing a debate - I will try and keep masked my own view for the present.
Side One: Fractional Reserve Banking is a myth. The reduction of reserve ratios to zero and/or voluntary (e.g. US and UK) has more or less meant that banks can lend as much as they want, independent of deposit levels.
Side Two: Accepts much of "Side One", but argues that Basel III (and LCR & NSFR within) rules act as de-facto constraints on lending, though that isn't their primary purpose.
Are either of these arguments valid?
Side Two more valid IMO. The cod man-on-the-street version of FRB presented in self-help youtube videos is not a useful description of how banking works. Commercial banks can lend at will but in practice they are subject both to capital requirements and to usual business constraints. There have been bailouts but they are not guaranteed -- Lehmans -- and even if a bank is bailed out shares (and some capital) are usually written down so investors are incentivised to ensure bank management lends responsibly.
BUT -- the market...
GS
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: December 7th, 2016, 9:09 pm
- Has thanked: 369 times
- Been thanked: 1079 times
Re: Fractional Reserve Banking is a myth - discuss?
Newroad wrote:Are either of these arguments valid?
Regards, Newroad
They may both be "valid", but they can't both be universally true.
For example, Basel III requires that the bank has a reserve. So can't have 0 reserve. Of course, not all "banks" are required to comply with XYZ regulation.
Some are specifically exempted.
To take a recent example.
Together with other banks, SVB had successfully lobbied Congress for weaker regulation, which allowed it (and others) to rely on held-to-maturity accounting, and to be exempted from the Basel liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) requirement.
https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/silicon- ... -and-world
The trouble with almost all arguments, is that they rely upon each side believing that the other accepts their assumptions as facts.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6127
- Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
- Has thanked: 448 times
- Been thanked: 2361 times
Re: Fractional Reserve Banking is a myth - discuss?
Urbandreamer wrote:To take a recent example.Together with other banks, SVB had successfully lobbied Congress for weaker regulation, which allowed it (and others) to rely on held-to-maturity accounting, and to be exempted from the Basel liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) requirement.
For completeness though I think it was only exempt from some of the regulatory constraints, in this instance, a liquidity one. It wasn't exempt from all banking supervisory regulation.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1134
- Joined: November 23rd, 2019, 4:59 pm
- Has thanked: 17 times
- Been thanked: 355 times
Re: Fractional Reserve Banking is a myth - discuss?
Thanks all, for the replies.
For what it's worth, perhaps little, "Side Two" was my view.
Regards, Newroad
For what it's worth, perhaps little, "Side Two" was my view.
Regards, Newroad
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests