Thanks in advance to all who read this post. As I've said in earlier posts, I'm new to all this, but reading a lot and trying to see just how everything works. But there is one issue which I'm having trouble understanding. That is the issue of banks
creating money. I think that by this point I've read enought to get the general idea, but there are some details that are sketchy to me.
For example, let's say I take out a bank loan for $1000. I sign a promissory note, which the bank then deposits as an asset. The bank then hands me $1000 in FRNs. This is an equal exchange, right. OK, now let's say that I refuse to pay them one penny of that $1000 that they so called "loaned me." Does the bank actually break even on this deal? In other words, let's say that I paid the $1000 back a day later than I borrowed it, and didn't pay any interest (just payed the principle). Did the bank just make $1000?
There are two different texts I want to refer to, because they are the main source of my inquiry. The first is by Edward Griffin, and is very long, so I'll just post the link:
http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/debtcancel.pdf
He describes (I think) that banks create money only temporarily, and when the loan is repaid the created money disappears. So then what happens if the loan is not repaid?
The second text is short, so I'll just paste it here. I found it in the downloads section of this website in the document, "Secrets of the legal industry" by Richard Cornforth.& He writes:
Commentary: Some Patriots have been lured into the argument: "They never loaned my anything!" in examination of mortgages. This argument is based on the incomplete observation that a promissory note is "given" to the bank or martgage company, then the mortgage company allegedly creates money and therefore has gotten something for nothing. OH YEAH? What happens when& a check written on the allegedly created money account is presented to the bank for payment? The bank must reduce its inventory of FRNs by enough to redeem the check-so the bank didn't get something for nothing after all. Proponents of this false theory maintain that the banks are still stealing because they get to buy mney from the Feds at the cost of printing the money. OH YEAH? Your investigation will show that member banks <U>borrow</U> FRNS from the Feds at the discount rate.
He then continues on. I in no way am asserting that anyone is right or wrong here. I'm just a newbie trying to get the facts straight. What is the truth? Please help. Thanks,
B