News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Two thought experiments to evaluate automated stablecoins by tshaddox on Thursday May 26, 2022 @05:39PM (#31523678)
Is there a misconception in the text of my previous comment? You seem to be describing a misconception that as far as I can tell isn't one I hold or one I expressed in my previous comment.
Re:Two thought experiments to evaluate automated stablecoins by lottin on Thursday May 26, 2022 @05:51PM (#31523767)
The misconception in your comment is that the reserve requirement is what limits a bank's ability to create money by extending loans.
Re:Two thought experiments to evaluate automated stablecoins by tshaddox on Thursday May 26, 2022 @06:09PM (#31523919)
I'm no expert, and I know that banking is a lot more complicated in practice, and that reserve requirements in the U.S. (even before they went to zero) were apparently not a significant factor in what actually put a ceiling on banks' ability to lend. There were apparently all sorts of tricks banks used to not be bound in practice to reserve requirements.
Re:Two thought experiments to evaluate automated stablecoins by lottin on Thursday May 26, 2022 @06:52PM (#31524249)
Yes, reserve requirements are not a significant factor, because in addition to reserve requirements banks are also subject to capital requirements. Moreover banks need reserves to operate anyway regardless of whether they're mandated by law or not. Finally they're also constrained by the demand for loans, which isn't infinite.
Re:Two thought experiments to evaluate automated stablecoins by denimnerd42 on Thursday May 26, 2022 @11:58PM (#31525894)
it's the capital requirements or capital to risk weighted assets ratio that restrict lending, not reserve requirements. reserve requirements are to protect runs by depositors and capital requirements are to protect the bank against bad loans.

at the end of every month and especially every quarter the bank submits its capital ratio and a bunch of other calculations to the regulators. if the ratio isn't good it has to increase capital reserves. if the ratio is good it can do share buybacks and dividends.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basel_III

Re:Two thought experiments to evaluate automated stablecoins by stonemetal12 on Thursday May 26, 2022 @05:49PM (#31523749)
> loan out much more than 1 dollar

They can't loan out more than the deposits they have.

Re:Two thought experiments to evaluate automated stablecoins by charcircuit on Thursday May 26, 2022 @10:13PM (#31525428)
Why not? A bank could have 0 depsitors, but could have received money from investors.
Re:Two thought experiments to evaluate automated stablecoins by majormajor on Thursday May 26, 2022 @10:56PM (#31525615)
That's not the sort of bank being talked about here in terms of "money multiplication." That's more like a VC firm or other institution.

If you could open a bank, accept 10 dollars in deposits, and loan out 100, you'd do it! You'd loan it out to your best friend and keep the cycle going until you're rich AF.

You can't loan out more than you have, but even loaning out 10 of 10 dollars has some risk - if someone comes for their money and you can't get your money back from the people you loaned it to. And it definitely increases money in circulation since it's not parked there. But it's not a magic money printing machine.

Re:Two thought experiments to evaluate automated stablecoins by stonemetal12 on Friday May 27, 2022 @12:02PM (#31531171)
The Federal Reserve says you may loan out 100% of your deposits. They didn't say you could loan out however much you have in investors' money, or 200% of your deposits.