Thursday, 14 August 2014 12:53

A Conversation with a Loans Officer

Rate this item
(1 Vote)
A Conversation with a Loans Officer

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 »

Leave a comment

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

2 comments

  • Comment Link Pat Cusack 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 พุซซี่888 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!

back to top

Latest Articles

  • Douglas’ 2nd Proof for the A+B Theorem (The Misalignment of Accountancy Cycles)
    In The Monopoly of Credit (1931), C.H. Douglas presents his second proof for the A+B theorem, arguing that the two core accountancy cycles of an industrial economy: the creation and destruction of money (Cycle 1) and the creation and liquidation of costs (Cycle 2) are misaligned, resulting in a systemic deficiency in purchasing power. The money cycle (Cycle 1) operates at a faster pace than the cost creation and liquidation cycle (Cycle 2), creating a gap between prices and purchasing power that widens with greater dyssynchrony and narrows with greater synchrony. Indeed, if the cycles were perfectly aligned, money creation/spending and cost creation/liquidation would occur simultaneously, eliminating the gap entirely. [1] C.H. Douglas, The Monopoly of Credit 4th edition (Sudbury, England: Bloomfield Books, 1979), 46-50.
    Written on Tuesday, 13 May 2025 09:39 Read more...
  • Douglas Social Credit Through the Lens of Market Failure
    Recently, perhaps as a result of some interactions on social media, it has occurred to me that the best angle for approaching the Douglas Social Credit analysis and proposals for the benefit of those on the conventional right of the economic and political spectra is to frame Douglas’ stance in terms of the concept of market failure. To the question: “What is Douglas Social Credit all about?”, we can respond as follows: Douglas Social Credit is an economic model that is based on a diagnosis and a set of prescriptions. The diagnosis is that the number one cause of economic failure is a specific category of market failure, and the number one cause of the market failure in question is the existing financial system.[1] The remedy is to reform the financial system, to correct its faulty design in such way that not only will it no longer interfere with the…
    Written on Monday, 10 February 2025 18:16 Read more...
  • Social Credit and War
    Social Crediters have repeatedly warned that there is a chronic economic cause, entirely artificial in nature and, therefore, unnecessary, which inexorably leads nations to take up arms against each other.
    Written on Monday, 11 November 2024 06:20 Read more...