How Fractional Reserve Banking is Robbing Us

[midwesterner (banned)]

How Fractional Reserve Banking is Robbing Us

www.duffminster.com/times/blog/8

Our public schools and Universities in general do not give us much of a real financial education. Sure many can learn to balance a checkbook or learn to stay on a budget, but when you get down to the nitty gritty of how the banking system works, and more in-depth topics most people have little to no understanding of the workings of these financial institutions, and how they are set up to benefit the banking elites and institutions on a scale above and beyond a healthy risk taking profit.

What is Fractional Reserve Banking, and why should I care you may ask? As you shall see this deceptive practice of lending is a swindle, usury on the average folk because they don’t understand how it works. It robs from us through lending privileges granted to banks, on money that is not theirs, but also destroys purchasing power and erodes savings accounts.

Let’s start with the basics. For instance lets pretend that you have a 30-year mortgage on a say $300,000 home with $50,000 down. Say your property taxes are 1.25%, PMI insurance is 0.5% (which is 31 monthly payments), and you took out this loan in January 2011. Here’s the breakdown of your payments.


Total Monthly Payments = $1,654.55
Total Interest Paid = $229,910.29
Total Tax Paid = $112,500.00 (Your rent dues on your property to government)
Total PMI (31 months) = $3,229.17
(NOTE: PMI insurance is a scam banks use to get you to insure them if your down payment is less that 20% of loan in case of default, they are now insured from you paying their insurance for them)
Loan Payoff Date = December 2040

Total Amount of Loan Payments = $595,639.46

Now in this example, that is some major profit taken on a loan that amounted to $250,000 in which you had $50,000 down already, it’s more than double your initial investment. Not to mention maintenance and never ending tax payments (rent dues) to the government on your property.

It gets even worse

Now if looking at that example and realizing many of us are in this situation that banks make out fairly good off the so-called risk involved. You pay their insurance for a default, and they loan you money not having much to worry about since the PMI insurance covers them in case of default. But that’s not the half of it.

Let’s get to fractional reserve banking now. Fractional Reserve banking is a practice in which banks are given the ability to expand the money supply out of thin air 9 times the amount of reserve notes they have on hand. So for a simple example, lets say a bank has $100 dollars on deposit on its books. It can now instantly create a loan in excess of $900 extra dollars to be lend out. This money was not on their books; they had no possession of it, and was created out of thin air the moment the loan papers were signed. So the banks not only make outrageous profit on little risk from your mortgage from above with you paying PMI insurance, they also never even had the money they loaned you on their books until you signed the loan papers. They had $100 dollars but loaned you a $1000.

It gets even worse

Now if looking at that example and realizing many of us are in this situation that banks make out fairly good off the so-called risk involved. You pay their insurance for a default, and they loan you money not having much to worry about since the PMI insurance covers them in case of default. But that’s not the half of it.

Let’s get to fractional reserve banking now. Fractional Reserve banking is a practice in which banks are given the ability to expand the money supply out of thin air 9 times the amount of reserve notes they have on hand. So for a simple example, lets say a bank has $100 dollars on deposit on its books. It can now instantly create a loan in excess of $900 extra dollars to be lend out. This money was not on their books; they had no possession of it, and was created out of thin air the moment the loan papers were signed. So the banks not only make outrageous profit on little risk from your mortgage from above with you paying PMI insurance, they also never even had the money they loaned you on their books until you signed the loan papers. They had $100 dollars but loaned you a $1000.

Now this is where it gets extra worse, the $900 dollars in excess of what they even had on hand, is to be paid back with your monthly payments each month. So you are not only expected to pay the principle back on the loan made, but interest payments on top of the money that was just created. They don’t just charge you interest on the $100, which would be a fair deal, but they charge you interest on the $900 as well.

In the example above, you now are paying the bank back a profit above the $225,000 principle on the loan back in which they only had $25,000 in excess of $233,139.46 in interest payment on this total loan.

That’s a total profit for them of: $458,139.46, profit made on money they never had or owned, on a $25,000 investment, only by legal right to create it are they able to profit on this. If you default, you paid the PMI insurance to cover their loan, and $112,500.00 in property taxes is your rent dues to the government in order to rest your head at night.


BOY THAT’S A SCAM, BUT IT GETS EVEN WORSE THAT THIS (INFLATION)

I can hear many now saying, wow, this is completely unfair and usury. Well it is, but to add insult to injury it doesn’t end there. This process done over and over again and destroys your purchasing power by causing inflation.

Inflation is due to the printing of money or expansion of the money supply. When a new dollar is created, it takes away value from the pervious dollar in existence. Say for a simple example we have $1000.00. Now the banks create $9000.00 more from that $1000.00 on books, which increase the money supply by 9 times what it was. This is the cause for why we have inflation. Now the same goods and services are chasing larger amounts of dollars in existence, putting downward value on the previous dollars ($1000.00) and raising prices of all things purchased. This is why we have a very low savings rate because it can’t keep up with the level of inflation. With a sound money system backed by gold and silver, this sort of manipulation and expansion of the money supply couldn’t happen unless new reserves of the metals were mined into existence. Inflation from the new metals would hardly affect the money supply that drastically over time and would be very unlikely we would find enough to cause major inflationary problems. The money in savings accounts could be used then by banks for loans made, with interest attached, and a reasonable profit made for banks, and savers for lending the banks money to use for their loans.


Can Fraction Reserve work fairly?

Many critics of not having fractional reserve lending say it would limit growth, by not creating new dollars for investments having static money supply cripples an economy by limiting it’s expansion. There are many schools of thought on this, and fractional reserve banking may work, but not in it’s current form.

What do I mean? Well a restructuring of this system into a workable, and reasonable system for the citizens, not the bankers would need to be applied. Say we agree as a society that we want a fiat fractional reserve banking system, and except a certain amount of inflation or erosion of purchasing power and savings for the overall benefit of the economy. Well the real trick is taking the profit out of this system and bankers hands. If we are to expand the money supply through this system, then the bankers should not profit from it, and the excess money should not have to be paid back to them since it was never theirs.


Bottom line

No matter what system we choose as a society, the main thing we need to be concerned about is that the banking institutions do not profit off our hard labors to make profits on something that never belonged to them in the first place. There is much room for discussion as of how we recreate this or go back to Gold standard, but the banking industry currently profiting from this, needs to end.

CONTINUED @: www.duffminster.com/times/blog/8

[Deleted]

I hate to speak badly about Duff, but that blog entry is just pure rubbish.

[midwesterner (banned)]

I hate to speak badly about Duff, but that blog entry is just pure rubbish.

I wrote it, so your speaking badly about me. So why not attack the agruement instead of the person, cause you saying it's rubbish doesn't mean much.

[Deleted]

The entire first half is a lesson in loan amortization schedules, which has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking.

The fractional reserve portion is more about bank risk and profit than it is it about fractional reserve. If mortgage loans were outrageous profit on little risk, the economy would not be in the trouble it is in.

[midwesterner (banned)]

The entire first half is a lesson in loan amortization schedules, which has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking.

The fractional reserve portion is more about bank risk and profit than it is it about fractional reserve. If mortgage loans were outrageous profit on little risk, the economy would not be in the trouble it is in.

It's oh so obvious you didn't read the whole thing. Please don't comment negatively on my articles if you can't take the time to read them fully. As you can see only part of it was posted here, and you need to visit the website to get the whole thing. You would have known that if you read it all. It starts out explaining loans, and the profits involved, which is important if you are going to understand the fractional reserve portion. If you continued reading I was never 100% opposed to the fractional system, just in it's current form.

[Deleted]

Mid


Did you ever consider what the economy would look like if we had full reserved banking?

What that would mean to our entire way of life.....

[Deleted]

Jan 18, 2011 11:45:33 GMT -5 midwesterner (banned) said:

The entire first half is a lesson in loan amortization schedules, which has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking.

The fractional reserve portion is more about bank risk and profit than it is it about fractional reserve. If mortgage loans were outrageous profit on little risk, the economy would not be in the trouble it is in.

It's oh so obvious you didn't read the whole thing. Please don't comment negatively on my articles if you can't take the time to read them fully. As you can see only part of it was posted here, and you need to visit the website to get the whole thing. You would have known that if you read it all. It starts out explaining loans, and the profits involved, which is important if you are going to understand the fractional reserve portion. If you continued reading I was never 100% opposed to the fractional system, just in it's current form.

I read what was posted here. I didn't realize there was more.

[midwesterner (banned)]

People, please read the entire blog entry before quickly responding. You need to go to the site to read it all, only have is posted here. Any yes I have looked at it, it's worked before, but I also said I'm open to using the system if it was rehashed and wealth consolidation was taken away from the bankers.

I have put the whole blog entry here now, with a link to orignial source.

[Deleted]

How do you plan to "take" the profit out of the bank....

So...you want to borrow money for free?

1. Banks or any institution has to have a profit built into their spread to pay for the defaults that naturally occur (not everyone will pay back the loan)

2. Someone has to actually monitor the loan, collect the payments, and people do not work for free

Those are just two quick issues i see...i am sure there are dozens more

[runewell]

I think the post is mostly rubbish as well. If you want to avoid PMI, put 20% down. Property taxes are a way of life and pay for our communities, they are irrelevant to the topic at hand. It's just a bunch of ranting about mortgages, really. If you want to carry a 30-yr mortgage to full term, fine.

The tidbit that actually speaks to fractional reserve banking could have been summarized in a single sentence and doesn't begin to educate anyone on the effects of the topic.

(I said all this before the post was changed. Frankly I'm not too impressed with the change either)

[midwesterner (banned)]

How do you plan to "take" the profit out of the bank....

So...you want to borrow money for free?

1. Banks or any institution has to have a profit built into their spread to pay for the defaults that naturally occur (not everyone will pay back the loan)

2. Someone has to actually monitor the loan, collect the payments, and people do not work for free

Those are just two quick issues i see...i am sure there are dozens more

Well I don't see anything wrong with a bank with reserves making a loan, and profit on that. The problem comes when they are allowed to stretch their holdings 9 times what they have, then make principle and interest profit off this nonexistent money.

Doing this process over and over will erode savings, and consolidate wealth in bankers hands. Think about how many loans and mortgages are out there, and people on average pay more than the value of the 30 year mortgage loan than the value of the home. This also creates bubbles and has increased money supply over and over again. Can we say cheap money and housing crisis.

This cheap money led to this situation, and if it wasn't cheap it wouldn't have been abused, cause accountability would have been considered. You have PMI covering risk, pulse a loss is a write off as a loss, not good for bank, but also nothing was put forth, so why care much about a loss. If I have the power to give you something over and over again, but everyone considered it of value, then what stops me from doing this over and over again. I've got nothing to lose cause they keep giving it back to me more so than I give it out. The system is designed to expand and inflate. In other words inflation is inherently built into the system from the get go.

I'm also not saying we can't have banks, but no profit for no risk. Period. This is only business that I know of that can make money without putting forth much risk. Not only that it's above and beyond what other businesses can make in general.

There are I'm sure hundreds of ways to go about this, but depends on if you want a fixed or expanding currency. That's a decision that must be made, and we are reaching that point.

[Virgil Showlion]

The entire first half is a lesson in loan amortization schedules, which has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking.

In fairness, the author is trying to make the point that the interest on a mortgage is leveraged up by the RR.

Hence, they can put a $595,639.46 30-year asset (your mortgage) on their books while keeping $30,000.00 in reserve.

Still, everything gdgyva and runewell have said is true.

[Deleted]

And no risk in banking?

Ask Decoy how many banks have folded JUST this year

There is risk...and actually in a bad economy, there is a LOT of risk

But do we need better regulations....that i could agree with

[Deleted]

Jan 18, 2011 12:20:48 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

The entire first half is a lesson in loan amortization schedules, which has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking.

In fairness, the author is trying to make the point that the interest on a mortgage is leveraged up by the RR.

Hence, they can put a $595,639.46 30-year asset (your mortgage) on their books while keeping $30,000.00 in reserve.

Still, everything gdgyva and runewell have said is true.

yes, but the whole first part was focused on the interest paid on the loan, not on the fractional reserve aspect.

[midwesterner (banned)]

think the post is mostly rubbish as well. If you want to avoid PMI, put 20% down. Property taxes are a way of life and pay for our communities, they are irrelevant to the topic at hand. It's just a bunch of ranting about mortgages, really. If you want to carry a 30-yr mortgage to full term, fine.

The tidbit that actually speaks to fractional reserve banking could have been summarized in a single sentence and doesn't begin to educate anyone on the effects of the topic.

(I said all this before the post was changed. Frankly I'm not too impressed with the change either)

Thank you Mr. 7 posts Zero Karma. So your saying that you feel comfortable paying ever increasing taxation on property that is supposed to be yours, in your possession, but if you decided to refuse to pay, you would have that place you rest your head taken from you with zero compensation. Sound like land of the free home of the brave to me.

Fact is Mr. I may have enough to pay for down payment, is that many do not. You fail to address that PMI is a scam, and is used by bankers to collect on insuring themselves with your money for a default on the loan. This is extra protection, for the banks, out of your pocketbook. That's insane, you make a loan for the risk reward factor. The bank should foot the PMI bill.

The whole process is loan shark practice, and should be done away with. If companies would stop outsource good paying jobs, and inflationary bubble keep under control with a sound currency, maybe then more people could afford the 20% down. A national average of $30,000 - $35,000 a year salary doesn't cut it when you have cost of living expenses, and your supposed to save 20% %200,000 dollar home would be $40,000 dollars down. How long you suppose it would take someone living on $30,000 a year cause they can't find better job to save for that down payment you say is so easy to save for?

[Virgil Showlion]

I agree that the article seems a bit too concerned about bankers making money through legitimate business.

[midwesterner (banned)]

And no risk in banking?

Ask Decoy how many banks have folded JUST this year

There is risk...and actually in a bad economy, there is a LOT of risk

But do we need better regulations....that i could agree with

Oh but it's not the mega banks folding, it's the small ones. You have to realize this system is in it's end days, unless they issue a new currency and play the game all overwith. Your missing the whole point here.

[midwesterner (banned)]

I agree that the article seems a bit too concerned about bankers making money through legitimate business.

Now Virgil, you know better than that. How is this practice legit? Making profits from currency that one does not have then making that money back on top of interest due from that made up money?

[Deleted]

Jan 18, 2011 12:33:43 GMT -5 midwesterner (banned) said:

And no risk in banking?

Ask Decoy how many banks have folded JUST this year

There is risk...and actually in a bad economy, there is a LOT of risk

But do we need better regulations....that i could agree with

Oh but it's not the mega banks folding, it's the small ones. You have to realize this system is in it's end days, unless they issue a new currency and play the game all overwith. Your missing the whole point here.

Banks should have never been allowed to get to big to fail and the big ones need to sliced and diced.

[Deleted]

Jan 18, 2011 12:30:50 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I agree that the article seems a bit too concerned about bankers making money through legitimate business.

Article?!?

Blog post.

[midwesterner (banned)]

Banks should have never been allowed to get to big to fail and the big ones need to sliced and diced.

That's the whole point, they mega banks will never fail, cause they have consolidated wealth in this system. They can buy out congress like they have. See how easy it is to control a population if you control the issuance of debt notes. You keep getting richer while more and more expanding loans are being made. They buy real assets, real estate, companies, metals, then when all goes south, get bailouts on our backs.

They will just re-fire the game all over-with and continue with new currency once they destroy this one.

[robinking]

Mid,

I agree with you. I don't know where we'd be as a society right now had we kept banking under control. But, many believe the wealth explosion last century was due to cheap energy and not cheap money. All cheap money has done is erode savers ability to save. It has punished the thrifty and forced them to gamble in the markets. The stock market had a great run, but now it's purely a PONZI, similar to Social Security... just people don't see it yet. Without the FED's admitted intervention, the market would have crashed as Flow predicted. All bets are off now, as reason has been abandoned. The market could triple this year, but what good is it if food prices go up 5 times? I see your reasoning and applaud the effort to expose banking for what it is, a SCAM! I believe bankers have a right to make money, but when it's guaranteed similar to a casino... then they need to pay much higher taxes. Multi-million dollar bonuses based upon guaranteed returns is wrong.

[bimetalaupt]

Jan 18, 2011 12:56:31 GMT -5 robinking said:

Mid,

I agree with you. I don't know where we'd be as a society right now had we kept banking under control. But, many believe the wealth explosion last century was due to cheap energy and not cheap money. All cheap money has done is erode savers ability to save. It has punished the thrifty and forced them to gamble in the markets. The stock market had a great run, but now it's purely a PONZI, similar to Social Security... just people don't see it yet. Without the FED's admitted intervention, the market would have crashed as Flow predicted. All bets are off now, as reason has been abandoned. The market could triple this year, but what good is it if food prices go up 5 times? I see your reasoning and applaud the effort to expose banking for what it is, a SCAM! I believe bankers have a right to make money, but when it's guaranteed similar to a casino... then they need to pay much higher taxes. Multi-million dollar bonuses based upon guaranteed returns is wrong.

Robin,
Yes but I have a old friend that used to own the majority of stock in an very old fashion farming bank. He told me the large central banks made more money on their equity (ROE) then small banks did because they too more risk. I used to joke with me on my MBA in finance.. He told me i needed real world experience not a fancy Ivy League Sheep skin.

Funny thing was He learned banking from an AIB classes thought my my father in Midland. It was interesting to note the numbers of President in Credit Unions and Banks my father thought.. My father thought banking is all about "TRUST". Like trust in your correspondent banks and bankers...etc.. Miss that today as I have missed my father.. +

There is one option most farmers have as swell as teachers.. The local Credit Union. Over the last 15 years in West Texas Credit Unions have gained a huge market share of the small accounts.. The ones that had cost banks money to maintain. It is funny about how little our M2 has grown.. This is all about banking and the small saving account. We saw the same in japan from 1990 to 2010.. Huge increase in monetary base with little increase in M2.. The effect of QE has been and will in all likelihood be disappointing. Please see chart..this is Japan but I think we have the same dynamics. The bottom line is the price of the gold in the New York Federal Reserve bank that is owned by the Federal Reserve is growing faster then the monetary base. If we increase reserves on checking accounts more people will just go to savings account with debit cards: lower Factional reserve requirements so banks can lend more of the monies. If they will
The Truth will set you free [/img]
The best thing to do per James Bullard, Thomas Hoenig and Axel Weber would be to raise interest rates to encourage savings for more M2.. There is a new dynamic for America.

Just a thought,
Bi Metal Au Pt

Attachments:

[usaone]

How many banks folded between 1989 and 1993 during the S&L crises?

[midwesterner (banned)]

bimetalaupt

So what do you think is a reasonable solution to this. We discourage savings in the country, and inflation eats away at any profits. Is it ok for banks to lend and earn outrageous profits on what they don't hold?

Banking system in place today is set up for the cartels, not the small local banks. Which is a shame, and business should be encouraged for the little banks. I'm not anti lending, I think it's necessary for business, I'm against this fractional reserve system, and think it is very possible to go back to the way we used to do it. The money creation, and who benefits and who loses is the biggest problem with this system in place.

What I see happening is in the form of how the federalist, and anti federalist back in the olden days, had different visions of how the country should be. I think we are seeing similar situation in America today, but globalist uber capitalist pro corporation type, and the small business live within means getting back to basics duking it out.

I'm more of a Jeffersonian if you haven't noticed. ;D

[Deleted]

Who discourages savings?

Not the banks...they love paying .05% on savings...and then lending it out at 16% on credit cards

My mortgage is through my credit union....and i love the local small banks (where the tellers actually know their customers names)

But TBTF banks have bought out a lot of the community lenders....

Less competition for them and more profits

[robinking]

I'm sure all who know me can tell I'm no socialist/communist, but the current banking system isn't capitalism either. They privatize profits and socialize losses. I agree with the credit unions and wish they would get much more prevalent. But if this occurs, they MUST stay true to their roots. Too much power, with no regard for ethics and morals is the reason we're in this hole. Once the dollar has been destroyed we'll be looking for an alternate currency. What should it be backed by since every fiat currency has always given us inflation. This latest test of fiat policy gave us 30 pretty good years.

I believe the 2000 recession was the beginning of the end until 9/11 gave us a reprieve. The housing bubble then gave us 7 more false years of prosperity. Now, the bill is coming due and no amount of fractional reserve magic can save us. The debt is simply too much to tax away or even inflate away. Add up the municipal, state and federal entitlement/pension issues alone. They're not even calculated into the well publicized national debt. How can any sane person look at the numbers and think we'll be OK? How can these debts be paid?

This isn't the 1946 world economy! Western Europe loved and needed us, the Middle East hadn't grown in power and resentment yet and Asia was still third world. There are no great inventions to save us now! Look at the youth in this country, do you think they could do as the WWII generation did? Come on now! Where are the jobs? Unions care more about social policy than living wages for their members! Do you believe inflation is only 1% or unemployment is only 9.4%? Wake up if you haven't already and get prepared for some rough times. The longer we kick the can, the longer the transition period into the next phase of the world economy.

World population is exploding and food technology isn't keeping pace. How long before this hits home? Droughts, floods, cold wealth spells... this year is shaping up to be bad as far as food prices go. Add to this the fact that gas is $3.20 a gallon and only going up! Where's the outcry from the Left? They want this, so people drive less and their global warming agenda gets implemented! Both sides are colluding for the MIDDLE'S demise. Or maybe I'm wrong and life will be back to normal is a few short months.

[bimetalaupt]

Jan 18, 2011 13:58:59 GMT -5 midwesterner (banned) said:

bimetalaupt

So what do you think is a reasonable solution to this. We discourage savings in the country, and inflation eats away at any profits. Is it ok for banks to lend and earn outrageous profits on what they don't hold?

Banking system in place today is set up for the cartels, not the small local banks. Which is a shame, and business should be encouraged for the little banks. I'm not anti lending, I think it's necessary for business, I'm against this fractional reserve system, and think it is very possible to go back to the way we used to do it. The money creation, and who benefits and who loses is the biggest problem with this system in place.

What I see happening is in the form of how the federalist, and anti federalist back in the olden days, had different visions of how the country should be. I think we are seeing similar situation in America today, but globalist uber capitalist pro corporation type, and the small business live within means getting back to basics duking it out.

I'm more of a Jeffersonian if you haven't noticed. ;D

Mid,
I have two feelings on the subject.The first one is as you may have noticed I am In the hard money camp.. Like Father like son. .. It must be that Germanic-Luxembourg side of the Family vs my Grand deal making past in Vineyards, Oil and gas and Pharmacy I got from My Mothers Father. Putting money in the bank and leaving it there is the old way to keep bankers happy but today they do not give you a point on your FICA report for 25 years worth of savings.
The very funny thing about the super large corporations is they are not in need of bank loans but sell bonds cheaper and longer then the small firm can. Small banks lend more to small business through SBA loans. The one thing the Oboma team did was to forgive fees for over one year for small firms needing money. .. We are looking at this from the small self employed Computer software developers point of view in the form a high service Credit Union: No Cash Internet only.. No bricks. Banking is all about service not three piece suits and with a $50,000 gold watch.

Just a thought,
Bi Metal Au Pt

[midwesterner (banned)]

bimetalaupt,

Some great commentary there. I have no love for mega banks or corporations unless they are chartered and up for recharter through democratic process. This was the way of old, maybe it's outdated, but it worked so far as they were serving the greater good. Would it be to our benefit to have some corporations, I think there are some I can think of. UPS, and shipping companies, car manufacturers just to name a couple. I think it's not the corporation or bank that is inherently bad, it's the rules and systems set up to benefit the few, and screw the many.

Here's a thought, could we have mega banks and corporations if all people were good natured and would never screw anyone over. Yes. Reality is that's not going to happen, so just like the founders of this nation wanted limited government, we must strive for limited banking influence and profiting off of scams, and corporations working in our best interest.

Fact of the matter is the money powers get their way, cause they have the money. So how do we in society limit the money powers influence and unfair competition, outsourcing and currency manipulation.

I believe our USA Constitution is one of the best documents ever made by man, but was lacking one major component, an economic bill of rights. Some back then understood this, some like Hamilton was pro banker and IMO and opportunist. I think not addressing the slavery issue, and the international bankers at that time was less to do with not wanting to by many, but some their had vested interest in not addressing them. In order to win that war, it seems some important things were left out.

Banking being #1 IMO. Thomas Jefferson understood this threat.

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.
Thomas Jefferson, (Attributed)
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)

Fact is this fractional lending with funds there were not there, created the real estate bubble, and credit card debts, national debts, ect. It's cheap money, cost nothing, but one day it ends and it's time to pay the piper.

[dumdeedoe]

Jefferson had a bit of prejudice built up vs bankers as he died insolvent and owing thousands.....