So you're calling fractional reserve banking "counterfeiting". I assume you oppose it.
Let's analyze your argument. Fractional lending doesn't particularly benefit the rich. A lot (IIRC, the vast majority) of the current millionaires in the US are 1st generation. They got their money in their lifetime. The vast majority therefore required a loan at some point, to fund their money-making venture. Even the evil financiers in virtually all cases get rich by leveraged (i.e. loan-fueled) investments.
So at least for those people who are able to help successful businesses - by creating, funding, or helping them in any way - fractional lending is a good thing. The vast majority, or at least a substantial number, of poor people who are now rich were able to do so because at some point, they received a loan of money that fractional reserve banking made more readily available.
You can still ban fractional lending, pulling the financial system back 500 or so. By doing that, you will get all the effects of the system that existed at that time: limited money supply, reduced lending, limited allocation of funds and investment to grow businesses, therefore stunted growth, less innovation, reduced social mobility, etc, etc.
Are you sure that's what you want? Because you haven't explained why fractional lending is bad yet, so it seems like we'll be sacrificing an awful lot for unclear benefit.
In all seriousness, a community focused on creating new businesses is the last place I'd expect to see fractional lending attacked so severely.
The fact that current millionaires are first generation is kind of inapposite. We haven't really been on a fractional reserve system for long enough to really create generations of financial dynasties.
Let's analyze your argument. Fractional lending doesn't particularly benefit the rich. A lot (IIRC, the vast majority) of the current millionaires in the US are 1st generation. They got their money in their lifetime. The vast majority therefore required a loan at some point, to fund their money-making venture. Even the evil financiers in virtually all cases get rich by leveraged (i.e. loan-fueled) investments.
So at least for those people who are able to help successful businesses - by creating, funding, or helping them in any way - fractional lending is a good thing. The vast majority, or at least a substantial number, of poor people who are now rich were able to do so because at some point, they received a loan of money that fractional reserve banking made more readily available.
You can still ban fractional lending, pulling the financial system back 500 or so. By doing that, you will get all the effects of the system that existed at that time: limited money supply, reduced lending, limited allocation of funds and investment to grow businesses, therefore stunted growth, less innovation, reduced social mobility, etc, etc.
Are you sure that's what you want? Because you haven't explained why fractional lending is bad yet, so it seems like we'll be sacrificing an awful lot for unclear benefit.
In all seriousness, a community focused on creating new businesses is the last place I'd expect to see fractional lending attacked so severely.
Edit: phrasing.