Summary.
Science attaches importance to simple
laws that explain a lot, e.g. E=MC2.
The UK’s Vickers commission, Basel III
and Dodd –Frank expended millions of words and failed to solve the main problems
that afflict banking. In contrast, the basic rules of full reserve are set
out in eighty five words below. And full reserve actually solves those
problems.
|
Certainly
the attempts by the above three bodies to solve banking problems have been a
failure if the following critics are any guide:
See LaurenceKotlikoff for a scathing indictment of Vickers.
See MervynKing and Ben Bernanke on the fact that “too big to fail” has not yet been
solved.
See MervynKing who said “Basel III on its own will not prevent another crisis….”
See MartinWolf who suggests that the 3% capital ratio advocated by Basel III is nonsense
and that the ratio should be nearer 25%.
See AndrewHaldane on the complexity of bank regulation.
1. Bank
subsidies including the too big to fail (TBTF) subsidy.
2. Reducing
the number of banks that go bust.
3. Sorting
out the mess when they do go bust (i.e. “living wills”, how best to organist
bankruptcy proceedings, etc).
4.
Irrational exuberance / asset bubbles of the sort that preceded the recent
crisis and largely caused the crisis. This problem was not central to the above
three attempted solutions, but full reserve does ameliorate this problem.
The basic
rules of full reserve.
The basic
rules are thus.
1.
Commercial banks cannot create money. Only the government / central bank can.
2. Depositors
must choose between:
i) having
their money in instant access form and kept 100% safe (e.g. having it lodged at
the central bank where it will earn little or no interest), or
ii) letting
their bank invest or lend on their money, in which case they do not have
instant access, but they do get interest, plus if it all goes wrong, they take
a hair cut.
So why
does that solve the four banking problems?
Well let’s
run thru them in turn.
1. There is
no need for any sort of bank subsidy (TBTF or otherwise) because depositors or
creditors who have chosen to have their money put at risk carry those risks.
2 & 3.
As to banks going bust, they just can’t under full reserve: depositors or other
creditors who have chosen to take risks can lose out, but banks as such cannot
suddenly go bust, though it’s perfectly possible for them to shrink over a
period of time to non-existence.
4. Asset
bubbles derive in part from the freedom that commercial banks have to lend
money into existence: i.e. create money and lend it out. They were doing that
big time before the recent crisis. If
commercial banks cannot do that, then asset bubbles, booms and slumps are
ameliorated.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Post a comment.