ECONOMY: Is it really this dire?

[StageLeft]

1) Glenn is a "doom and gloomer", although granted one of these days a D&G will get it right. BTW, his fear about this money printing is shared by me, too. It's unprecedented on the extent it's taking place now, and some other countries have started it, too. This truly, undeniably, represents a huge indication of desperation by the government.

2) Not sure how these gold derivatives impact things, but you can hold literal, physical gold

3) Gold will never lose all its value, never has (longer history than any fiat currency). It may be "overvalued" now, but if hyperinflation comes in it will be the closest thing to money with value. Modern-day example, Zimbabwe which has destroyed its currency, many poor people mine for gold in streams each day as it's the only thing others accept as payment or food. Obviously, tangible goods like a house, cars, sex toys will also have inherent value.

4) Inflation is considered by most to be an ultimate effect of all this spending. The main disagreement is on when and to what severity, but the idea that the fed will shut off the tap at the right time to counter significant inflation is simply dismissed by pretty much everybody at this stage, though they are still in disagreement about how bad inflation will get. Short term deflation is still the main concern.

5) Second video. Glenn's simple chart echos what I've read. In fact, it really echos what Bernanke says. You can see when he talks that they're "closely monitoring" and the intent of this is to time things exactly (so far they've sucked at this, BTW) to avoid things fvcking up on the upside.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Heres a qoute from MSnbc from today .

Heres the plan. It was announced today. But its still only telling part of truth. I touched on this problem yesterday. I knew what the FED was planning . Its the only thing that adds up recent economic events. Heres the FEDS plan to fix this problem .

Geithner was set on Monday to detail plans to use $100 billion in federal bailout funds to leverage as much as $1 trillion in so-called toxic assets off the books of endangered banks.


Anyone who thinks this will work . Should not be living under capitilized system. They are traitors and liars. Heres how it works and I can get links to prove it.


The Fed gave us 300 billion. With 100 billion of that we buy the most toxic assets likely. They default . The 1 trillion of toxic assets still exist. Or they default. The Fed says that 100 billion will retire that 1 trillion, Seems like a fair deal right. Say what!

The part he isn't telling you see this. That 100 billion willl default. The Fed is giving a leverage of 1:9 on these toxic assets . That aren't worth 1 dime.

So when that 100billion goes threw the banking system they are allowed to leverage that exact same 100 billion with a ratio of 1:90. thats 9 trillion dollars of loan value. The Fed thinks given the banks 100 billion in real dollars so they can leverage it to 9 trillion is a risk were willing to take. Better think this threw people . That 1 trillion in assets toxic will default. That 1 trillion od toxic shit will become 9 trillion in deadly toxic shit.

Why did Fed only tell part of story. The good part. They only say that 100 billion will leverage 1 trillion of toxic. If its US tax payers paying this. That 100 billion should retire 9 trillion in toxics. Thats 100 billion goes to the BANKS first than they write new loans backed with new the 100 billlion cash in the amount 9 trillion in loan assets.

OH . My this will never ever work , Why because the basket of assets are pure toxic garbage that have zero value. Its A 9 trillion dollar wright down not 1 trillion as he claims . Who pays that 9 trillion TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[The-Noid]

You are assuming too much with the amount of leverage at 1:90. Reserve requirements are higher than that even in a perfectly levered situation. Also 100B is being put up in new private capital to leverage 900B from the federal reserve to buy those assets. That same money is buying assets that are going to come off the banking systems balance sheet and not be completely leveragable. They have already levered out the toxic assets and because of the write offs it has written down capital. This will increase capital and bring down TCE and TIER3 ratios but will not necessarily facilitate in an increase in lending of 9T. This will completely depend on the amount of leverage a bank has already instituted and if the price paid is higher or lower than the actual book value or impaired value of these assets.

In a state of economic depression of financial failure history shows us you need to flood the system with liquidity.

All the Ron Paul and federal reserve nuts forgot how truly easy it is to take money out of the system. Even with 12-13% GDP growth and +15% real rate of inflation China was able to cool down their economy last year.

Bank failures cause depressions, monetary policy causes recessions.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
In a state of economic depression of financial failure history shows us you need to flood the system with liquidity.

Do we have a direct historical point of comparison? The loss of liquidity in the late 1920s was not the same loss of liquidity we have now. That was a supply problem; investors pulled out of the system. Right now we have a demand problem; everybody's credit line is maxed out.

Even if you assume that the money injected into the economy right now could be pulled out completely and with perfect timing, we'd be right back in the same situation. Consumers are tapped out.

It seems to me that the only way to get out of this is to intentionally cause several years of high inflation in hopes that middle class incomes will get a boost and home prices will stabilize if only because the market is flooded with new cash.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
You are assuming too much with the amount of leverage at 1:90. Reserve requirements are higher than that even in a perfectly levered situation. Also 100B is being put up in new private capital to leverage 900B from the federal reserve to buy those assets. That same money is buying assets that are going to come off the banking systems balance sheet and not be completely leveragable. They have already levered out the toxic assets and because of the write offs it has written down capital. This will increase capital and bring down TCE and TIER3 ratios but will not necessarily facilitate in an increase in lending of 9T. This will completely depend on the amount of leverage a bank has already instituted and if the price paid is higher or lower than the actual book value or impaired value of these assets.

In a state of economic depression of financial failure history shows us you need to flood the system with liquidity.

All the Ron Paul and federal reserve nuts forgot how truly easy it is to take money out of the system. Even with 12-13% GDP growth and +15% real rate of inflation China was able to cool down their economy last year.

Bank failures cause depressions, monetary policy causes recessions.

You missed the video on how it works. Or you didn't take time to watch the 2 hour show. But it was all explained perfectly and professionally. They may have change the ratio of leverage. It doesn't matter if its 1:1000 If the ratio is anthing other than 1:1 it will fail . In the beginning the ratio thing worked great for the rich. They got there money. The money thats gone in bad assets = roughly what was lost in 401K money. 1:1 is the only ratio that will work . Anything else promotes debt. Debt = Death to system. The only people who want to leverage money are the rich so they can leverage more. Than when system crashes push debt onto public. You guys can buy into this all you want. But don't dance in the streets because the fighting thats going to go on . In those streets will dull the spirit of any dance. This is a complete fraud and its not even been hidden . 1:9 leverage outragious.

 

[The-Noid]

We have a supply problem even now for qualified buyers, I won't even get into unqualified buyers that is the banks fault.

1930's was a loss of confidence in that there was not going to be money in your account should you got there which causes supply problems for banks and demand problems. No deposits were coming in so no money was being loaned out.

You also have Japan's lost decade where they waited too long and numerous South American crises to learn from.

Consumption needs to go down but the I in C + I + G + NX needs to go up. There are simply companies right now that are credit worthy not able to issue debt still at reasonable rates. Without securitization of the bank loan market and banks issuing in this market there is a problem with building the investment side of the economic equation.

Flooding the market late with liquidity leads to inflation or deflation you still can't get a hold of. Japan flooded the market with 8 stimulus plans and a Central bank that would buy * assets, although this was after they let the zombie banks continue under capitalized. Japan still monetizes 9-20B a month in debt to the central bank with quantitative easing and has less than warm inflation over the last decade.

Again consumption was unsustainable over the last few years but we still must continue to spur business investment to increase demand or experience a long term shift in GDP/LSAS that will have devastating effects on long-term prosperity in this country.

 

[The-Noid]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
You are assuming too much with the amount of leverage at 1:90. Reserve requirements are higher than that even in a perfectly levered situation. Also 100B is being put up in new private capital to leverage 900B from the federal reserve to buy those assets. That same money is buying assets that are going to come off the banking systems balance sheet and not be completely leveragable. They have already levered out the toxic assets and because of the write offs it has written down capital. This will increase capital and bring down TCE and TIER3 ratios but will not necessarily facilitate in an increase in lending of 9T. This will completely depend on the amount of leverage a bank has already instituted and if the price paid is higher or lower than the actual book value or impaired value of these assets.

In a state of economic depression of financial failure history shows us you need to flood the system with liquidity.

All the Ron Paul and federal reserve nuts forgot how truly easy it is to take money out of the system. Even with 12-13% GDP growth and +15% real rate of inflation China was able to cool down their economy last year.

Bank failures cause depressions, monetary policy causes recessions.

You missed the video on how it works. Or you didn't take time to watch the 2 hour show. But it was all explained perfectly and professionally. They may have change the ratio of leverage. It doesn't matter if its 1:1000 If the ratio is anthing other than 1:1 it will fail . In the beginning the ratio thing worked great for the rich. They got there money. The money thats gone in bad assets = roughly what was lost in 401K money. 1:1 is the only ratio that will work . Anything else promotes debt. Debt = Death to system. The only people who want to leverage money are the rich so they can leverage more. Than when system crashes push debt onto public. You guys can buy into this all you want. But don't dance in the streets because the fighting thats going to go on . In those streets will dull the spirit of any dance. This is a complete fraud and its not even been hidden . 1:9 leverage outragious.

A.) You can't spell.
B.) Banking is not new.
C.) Where do you come up with this stuff?
D.) I made a video once with a lady, I attempted to make money by selling it. This is what the people that post their youtube and shadowstats videos are trying to do. Maybe they will buy gold though where its value is based on a levered contract that has 1:25 leverage, OUTRAGEOUS. Diamonds however have a real value, but they also have a game theory oligopoly/monopoly that tries to control the world's supply and not a lot of data on how much supply there really is in the world. I will take my fiat and continue to hedge via derivatives positions on known futures exchanges that have never had a default in their history. Should the value of fiat go down I am still hedged on other fiats and other hard assets. Yippee. Too bad the market is in contango otherwise I could get a fabulous rollover yield every month and lever my gold position even more, causing the price to go up even more!

How do you turn crazy? Do I continually read things on the internet that anyone writes and believe it and then portray it as reality? It sounds very similar to being in a cult. A lot of people now days should join the sky is falling cult.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Well when you find a deal were $1000 in cash will leverage $15000 in Gold let us know early on so when the bubble breaks and gold goes to $100,000 troy. Than tell me what that $1000 cash buys ya. Ratio economics are only good for the guy that figures it out. He is the only one how can win in the end, Its called monopoloy. The game is real. 4 players 4 corners of the earth. Its immoral to pay interest. It causes fraud and makes people do evil deals. Get rid of interest That the TRUE bank charges problems solved. The whole problem is interest. It doesn't matter anyway . There only 1 player left playing . Make a loaned dollar = to a loaned dollar . Leveraging is for Criminals who are tring to figure a way to cheat the system without breaking it or exposing themselves to risk. Its cowardice illeagal or should be . In time the leverage(DEBT)will always win. As it did this time . The guilyt people got Rich by leveraging when the same house that cost $200,000 was leveraged maybe 30x times. So a $200,000 is costing tax payers $200,000 x30. This is exactly whats going on here. These bastards belong in jail . There are 100.000 of thousands of people involved in this world wide all are guilty of fraud . Every last one.

Obama will never fix this. Middle class america learned from this. The middle class is going to start pulling the same shit as BOTH the Rich and Poor. What do the rich and poor have in common. Neither will except responsibility of there actions. There lame as loser both.

This problem can never be fixed. The problem exposed middle america to the trueth and fraud and greed of both the poor and rich . Poor people shouldn't buy $200,000 homes . Should they. Rich people shouldn't give them rope to hang them with either. Both = in guilt.

Middle america became more corrupt threw all of this. If we can match the Rich and the Poor for there zeal to do exactly whats wrong. We should have America completely torn apart in 2 years. Good luck middle America. Might as well live it up and follow no code . Because upper and lower america certainly have no morals or honor code. Time to be like our brothers folks resistane is futile. ignorance is bliss.

 

[BoberFett]

You're addressing the moral hazard component, and it is an important issue. You do realize though, hopefully, that without interest nobody would ever loan money and everyone would be limited to what they themselves produced. That would put us back into a subsistence society.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
You're addressing the moral hazard component, and it is an important issue. You do realize though, hopefully, that without interest nobody would ever loan money and everyone would be limited to what they themselves produced. That would put us back into a subsistence society.

On the interest thing not true . It was tried and it worked very well. But those leaders died . The money changers stayed the corse and won threw time consistancy.

Look I am 58 now. I have little debt . Other than what I use credit card to purchase online. I have never missed a payment or been late.

I Have made good $$$ in stocks and lost good money in stocks. I am not a million dollar man . But close. I closed all my acconts last weal . Sold all positions.,. Bought all gold.

Because my credit is so good. I borrowed 20, 000 on my sig.

I have zero intention of making 1 payment. They can't do a dam thing about it either.

I didn't need the money. I just felt the need to get mine also. This is the first time I have stolen anything since I was 14-15. Ya know what . I feel shameful because it feels good to take back from a system . That has stolen so much of my wifes life savings. It really does feel good to say F--- you sometimes. Shameful but in a good sort of way.

 

[The-Noid]

Margin requirements on the nymex are $3999 for a contract of 100 troy ounces. 1:24 on the exchange where gold is priced.

 

[BoberFett]

I fail to see what the impetus to lend would be if there nothing in it for the lender? Why not just keep the money in a coffee can? Why would anybody have loaned you $20K if they were not expecting to get something in return for giving you the use of their belongings? Are you against rentals also? Interest is nothing more than the rental fee for money.

Please, enlighten me.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
I fail to see what the impetus to lend would be if there nothing in it for the lender? Why not just keep the money in a coffee can? Why would anybody have loaned you $20K if they were not expecting to get something in return for giving you the use of their belongings? Are you against rentals also? Interest is nothing more than the rental fee for money.

Please, enlighten me.

Because a lender has other assets to carm the consumer. A lender never ever needs more than 1% interest charge. If colateral was used. If leveraged is used that calateral only covers 1 contract not 90. In the case of the USA. If Our FEd was actually our bank (governments) No need to charge interest . Its in government interest to promote loans to stimulate. Only banks need interest are private banks. But if National bank is interest free than banks who borrow from national bank need apply only 1/2% to make money on books. Thats after all cost figured. Your saying a loaner is a big man . A say a loaner is a man with other peoples money in hios pickets. My view is correct. You assume the banks use there own money not true . So interest need not apply.

 

[StageLeft]

I didn't need the money. I just felt the need to get mine also. This is the first time I have stolen anything since I was 14-15. Ya know what . I feel shameful because it feels good to take back from a system . That has stolen so much of my wifes life savings. It really does feel good to say F--- you sometimes. Shameful but in a good sort of way.

I understand that. You do realize, though, that if you haven't called this right, or even at the correct time (i.e. if everything is a house of cards, maybe it won't fall this time and it could be another decade, for example), you have made an awfully risky move.

Bobber is right, you don't lend money without interest. There is nothing in it for you and this is a fact of human history. Also, without any lending, plenty of people would be worse off. Lending is not evil, it is merely investment. I lend to you, I am investing in you, you pay me back for it and I make money and you do something with that investment like buy a house you otherwise could not have bought.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: nullzero
PC Surgeon,

Those of us who even said the word hyperinflation were laughed over a year ago. Now all the idiot keynesian economist and believers are running around like a chicken with its head chopped off with no idea how to fix this problem other then destroying the currency and the country. LegendKiller and others have been touting all the bailouts and impotent programs that the government and FED has come up with.... After each program passes it has almost no effect on stopping the train from derailing. The more you screw with the free markets the more screwed up the economy will get.

at least we are not in depression yet.

with your free market thing, we'd already be in depression with 30-50% unemployeement rate.

reply if you actually have something worth trying to save our economy, otherwise, you are just bitchen.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Fern
I think it's a bit premature to feel confident the banking crisis is fixed or has bottomed out etc.

I'd be leary of buying banking stocks early tomorrow too.

Geithner is supposed to finally unveil his plan tomorrow, I guess you could go long or short on bank stock early tomorrow depending on how you bet his plan is gonna be received. But that strikes me more as gambling than 'investing'

And since they're just getting around to announcing the plan, I think it's a bit early to proclaim any successes for it. Why not give it a while? I love seeing 'confidence', but I guess I'm so cautious I see it as more bravado than anything at this point.

Did anybody go AIG-like crazy and sell a bunch of CDS for eastern European mortgages? Are other 'shoes' gonna drop? Any big governmental/regulatory changes comming down the pike? (Here or in Europe?). I haven't heard much about Chinese banks, anything lurking there? IDK, so I'm 'uncertain'.

Fern

i'm not a short term investor, i'm thinking a year down the road at the very minimum.

Yep me too. I dont keep cash I may need in the next couple of years in anything other than money market accounts. All my stock investments are for 10+ years from now, so Im loving this market

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: BoberFett
I fail to see what the impetus to lend would be if there nothing in it for the lender? Why not just keep the money in a coffee can? Why would anybody have loaned you $20K if they were not expecting to get something in return for giving you the use of their belongings? Are you against rentals also? Interest is nothing more than the rental fee for money.

Please, enlighten me.

Because a lender has other assets to carm the consumer. A lender never ever needs more than 1% interest charge. If colateral was used. If leveraged is used that calateral only covers 1 contract not 90. In the case of the USA. If Our FEd was actually our bank (governments) No need to charge interest . Its in government interest to promote loans to stimulate. Only banks need interest are private banks. But if National bank is interest free than banks who borrow from national bank need apply only 1/2% to make money on books. Thats after all cost figured. Your saying a loaner is a big man . A say a loaner is a man with other peoples money in hios pickets. My view is correct. You assume the banks use there own money not true . So interest need not apply.

Well you did say no interest, but are you now saying 1% is OK?

And banks are merely conduits for lenders. Everyone who has a personal savings account is a lender. They put the money in the bank with the expectation that the bank will pay them interest. They way they do that is be loaning the money out to others for more interest then they're paying.

These are fairly basic concepts.

Also, if the government was the sole lender, you'd see corruption like nothing the US has ever known. When a private person invests they do so with the intention to get their money back plus some. They have a reason to investigate the borrower and their claims about ability to repay. The government would have little such incentive because it is even less their money than a banks money belongs to them. When a bank invests foolishly they go out of business and the shareholders lose everything. When the government invests foolishly it's called stimulus and everybody loses.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Margin requirements on the nymex are $3999 for a contract of 100 troy ounces. 1:24 on the exchange where gold is priced.

I don't do com. They money boys can take a small player down on a whim if they choose to . Margines can kill ya. The big players have enough money to were they can munipulate the pricies. Gas Bubble housing bubble dot com bubble all engineered. When wealth is created . Somebody lost. Mostly in all this the only real money I can see missing is the 401K money . Thats what was stolen here. There calling it housing bubble . But it was infact theft of 401K money . If the stock market lost all this value. That means sellers were in play. How much was lost . Trillions. That was not LEVERAGED money . It was real money on like the bank phoney loans. that has zero colaterial behind it.

In the stock market . If the stock market loses a trillion dollars . Thats real dollars. not phoney boloney. So if 401k people lost trillions which none can deny. I want to know names of biggest gainers in markets this year. This money was stolen . This should be were the investigation starts . Its Know brainer. They can't hide its matter of public record WHO made the money in stock market collapse and you will find the guility.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
at least we are not in depression yet.

with your free market thing, we'd already be in depression with 30-50% unemployeement rate.

reply if you actually have something worth trying to save our economy, otherwise, you are just bitchen.

Whoa, when did we get the influx of Harvard scholars?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: nullzero
PC Surgeon,

Those of us who even said the word hyperinflation were laughed over a year ago. Now all the idiot keynesian economist and believers are running around like a chicken with its head chopped off with no idea how to fix this problem other then destroying the currency and the country. LegendKiller and others have been touting all the bailouts and impotent programs that the government and FED has come up with.... After each program passes it has almost no effect on stopping the train from derailing. The more you screw with the free markets the more screwed up the economy will get.

at least we are not in depression yet.

with your free market thing, we'd already be in depression with 30-50% unemployeement rate.

reply if you actually have something worth trying to save our economy, otherwise, you are just bitchen.

Prove it. Thats just talk . You will never be able to prove. Empty words that bare no fruit. Its gone beyond that now. So your statement is almost GODLIKE.

 

[The-Noid]

Interest is the risk associated with lending plain and simple.

Even in your Utopia of a land lets take for example me putting in 100,000 and according to you I can lend out 1:10 and get interest of 1%.

If you default (as you have already said you are going to do in this thread) all of my capital is now gone and I have no capital left which is fine since the money was mine. Now if the money was shareholders or a partnership we have a much larger problem.

Interest in its purest form is made to pay the depositors for loans that are facilitated by the bank to borrowers who run into problems. A bank is simply a conduit between borrowers and lenders of capital. Should the bank not be able to take a finders fee for this service and borrowers of capital not be rewarded there would simply be no lending. The government also would not have the wherewithall to accomplish any kind of systematic lending to individuals unless taxes were significantly higher and there were many more government jobs.

 

[The-Noid]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Margin requirements on the nymex are $3999 for a contract of 100 troy ounces. 1:24 on the exchange where gold is priced.

I don't do com. They money boys can take a small player down on a whim if they choose to . Margines can kill ya. The big players have enough money to were they can munipulate the pricies. Gas Bubble housing bubble dot com bubble all engineered. When wealth is created . Somebody lost. Mostly in all this the only real money I can see missing is the 401K money . Thats what was stolen here. There calling it housing bubble . But it was infact theft of 401K money . If the stock market lost all this value. That means sellers were in play. How much was lost . Trillions. That was not LEVERAGED money . It was real money on like the bank phoney loans. that has zero colaterial behind it.

In the stock market . If the stock market loses a trillion dollars . Thats real dollars. not phoney boloney. So if 401k people lost trillions which none can deny. I want to know names of biggest gainers in markets this year. This money was stolen . This should be were the investigation starts . Its Know brainer. They can't hide its matter of public record WHO made the money in stock market collapse and you will find the guility.

Commodity margin is different from equity margin. They really should not have the same name. Commodities trading involves paying for a portion of the contract (called margin) if the contract goes down in price to the maintenance level you have the choice to exit the contract (sell it, or buy it) or put money back into the initial margin level, watch out those because those money boys will force you to pay all your money to them.

You don't get killed on futures you are thinking of equity margin where you use your purchases shares as collateral for another purchase. This turns problematic if you bet the wrong way as your losses are intensified.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

I didn't need the money. I just felt the need to get mine also. This is the first time I have stolen anything since I was 14-15. Ya know what . I feel shameful because it feels good to take back from a system . That has stolen so much of my wifes life savings. It really does feel good to say F--- you sometimes. Shameful but in a good sort of way.

I understand that. You do realize, though, that if you haven't called this right, or even at the correct time (i.e. if everything is a house of cards, maybe it won't fall this time and it could be another decade, for example), you have made an awfully risky move.

Bobber is right, you don't lend money without interest. There is nothing in it for you and this is a fact of human history. Also, without any lending, plenty of people would be worse off. Lending is not evil, it is merely investment. I lend to you, I am investing in you, you pay me back for it and I make money and you do something with that investment like buy a house you otherwise could not have bought.

You guys are missing the interest part . IF the FED was really the BANK of AMERICA . We owned it. Other banks get money from fed interst free . Fed doesn't need profit on loans. Loans promote growth. Growth = more taxes . Fed wins.

Banks that get interst free money from fed only need to charge small upfront user fee. NO interest. If Banks can't make that work . Let Fed give me 1 billion interest free and I can show you how that 1 billion will make me millions without coruption. In banking.

 

[Nemesis 1]

People assume loans have always carried interest . STOP . ChecK history . There was a period. It was GOOD. But people die and evil marches forward. Stop with the lies they hammered into your minds. Half of what they teach is distorted. More than half. Point is their was interest free banking and it worked.

 

[The-Noid]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
People assume loans have always carried interest . STOP . ChecK history . There was a period. It was GOOD. But people die and evil marches forward. Stop with the lies they hammered into your minds. Half of what they teach is distorted. More than half. Point is their was interest free banking and it worked.

A.) Islamic banking worked but only for the rich, there is a reason there was no middle class. You also shared proportionately in the profits, this is now known as venture capital.
B.) Banks used to charge money to deposit your money there because of the safety of having your money in the bank. They then loaned the money at a very low interest rate as the bank was taking interest to hold your deposits. If you really want to go back to that we can try but I am not sure it would work.
C.) You could combine Islamic banking and reserve banking to create an interest free lending society but this would of course cause the banks and suppliers of capital to be more concerned with their investment so suppliers of capital would take more leadership in the business as is the case with VC and Islamic/Arabian lending of the 1000BC-1000AD era.

Nemesis, I don't know who is teaching you, but they are spinning you a web of lies and leaving out some very key facts.