A Conversation with a Loans Officer

Thursday, 14 August 2014 12:53

Wallace Klinck

Rate this item

(1 Vote)

Some time ago, I had the following conversation with a loans officer from a major Canadian bank:

Wally: When you issue these loans to borrowers you create the money out of nothing, don't you?

Banker: (with slight hesitation) Yes, that is true.

Wally: You do not actually take the money from anyone’s account?

Banker: No, we don’t.

Wally: And you say that you own the credit that you issue--correct?

Banker: Yes that is correct.

Wally: You must because you want it paid back.

Banker: Yes.

Wally: And you want interest paid on the outstanding principal--another claim of ownership. Right?

Banker: Yes, that is correct.

Wally: And furthermore, if we should ……………

Banker: (anticipating my next words) Yes, if you default on your loan we will foreclose on your assets.

Wally: Did you create those assets?

Banker: (perceptively at unease) No, we did not.

Wally: Do you return these foreclosed assets to the Community?

Banker: (visibly troubled and hesitating as having encountered a disturbing denouement) No, we do not.

On a subsequent encounter this same person asked me with obvious concern: “What can we to do about it?"

Last modified on Saturday, 10 February 2018 18:00

Published in The Bank Creation of Money Out of Nothing

More in this category: Yes, Virginia, the Banks Really Do Create Money Out of Nothing »

Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.

2 comments

Comment Link Sunday, 16 July 2023 01:22 posted by Pat Cusack
Dear Wally,

When the Banker answers: "Yes that is correct", to your question about OWNERSHIP of "credit", he commits fraud. He LIES, and he knows he is lying, because any "credit" in that bank's account is the bank's liability. The bank is DEBTOR on such a liability account. The CREDITOR on that bank liability account is the customer. The credit-balance in any bank account is an asset of the CREDITOR (i.e., customer). The customer OWNS that credit-balance, as he would any other credit-balance in an bank account bearing his name.

I just came here to see where Social Credit was today. I am a retired mechanical engineer who first discovered C.H. Douglas' writings over 50 years ago and followed his works avidly - until about 2014. You see, I'd forced myself to understand the basic rules of double-entry accounting and, by 2014, I finally become aware of the true nature of "bank-credit" and realized where Douglas had misled me to believe "credit" is a noun, when, in banking terms, it is an adjective, describing the balance in a LIABILITY account, where the bank is DEBTOR and the customer is CREDITOR, at all times.

It is not the creation of credit which is wrong, it is the fraudulent claim to ownership of it by the bank, AS YOU POINT OUT.

To see hard evidence of this crime, in public documents created by a bank in Australia, check out the first three articles on my new Substack - https://patcusack.substack.com/
Comment Link Thursday, 11 June 2020 23:42 posted by พุซซี่888
What i don't understood is if truth be told how you're
not really much more smartly-favored than you may be right now.
You are so intelligent. You already know therefore considerably when it comes to this matter,
made me for my part believe it from numerous varied angles.
Its like women and men don't seem to be interested unless it's something to do with Lady gaga!
Your personal stuffs nice. Always handle it up!

Latest Articles

The Ghost in the Ledger: How Financial Depreciation Double-Charges Society for Physical Capital
Modern industrial society suffers from a profound economic paradox. While the real, physical cost of constructing capital assets is fully expensed and liquidated at the exact moment of completion, orthodox financial accounting bottles this cost up on corporate balance sheets, pushing it into the future as an ongoing debt burden. By forcing consumers to pay for capital depreciation through retail prices long after the physical resources have been consumed, the financial system structurally starves the public of purchasing power. This systemic flaw was first comprehensively exposed by engineer and macroeconomic thinker C. H. Douglas. By bridging the engineering-based insights of Douglas’s Social Credit framework with contemporary accounting realities, this essay demonstrates how the divergence between thermodynamic reality and bookkeeping conventions drives systemic economic crises, forcing the community to buy back its own productive capacity twice.

Written on Thursday, 08 October 2026 15:51 Read more...
The Creditary Nature of Money in Post Scarcity
The Austrian School of economics maintains that money originated as a high-saleability commodity selected by market forces to reduce barter friction, treating credit as a secondary mechanism backed by pre-existing physical savings. This paper demonstrates that the Austrian foundational model rests on dual empirical and operational fallacies: the myth of commodity money and the myth of absolute physical scarcity. Drawing on A. Mitchell Innes’s credit theory of money, modern balance-sheet mechanics, C.H. Douglas’s Social Credit analysis, and the realities of modern industrial capacity, we show that money has always been credit—a system of clearing debt—and that credit creation precedes both savings and physical production. In a technological era characterized by systemic capacity abundance, holding to gold-standard or loanable-funds assumptions misdiagnoses the nature of financial capital, misunderstands the true drivers of inflation, and severely distorts macroeconomic analysis.

Written on Sunday, 23 August 2026 12:14 Read more...
Morality, Douglas Social Credit, and Economics
It is possible to frame the Douglas Social Credit diagnosis for our financial and economic woes, as well as its remedial proposals for monetary reform in the common interest of the citizenry, in terms of morality. Like the thread of Ariadne that led Theseus through the labyrinth of the Minotaur and safely out again, a specific understanding or conception of morality can serve as the fil conducteur—the guiding thread—which unfolds the DSC diagnosis and remedial proposals step by step in a systematic, logical way. Yet the deeper reason this moral framing actually succeeds as an explanatory heuristic is that the DSC model is itself endogenously moral: morality is not to be applied to the system from outside by the action of some agent (who presumably directs the system to moral as opposed to immoral ends); rather, morality is built right into the ordinary operating structure and everyday functioning of the…

Written on Thursday, 06 August 2026 08:02 Read more...