Topic: Do we Need Central Banks? - page 12. (Read 2997 times)

In my view, we need that, the central bank monitors all financial markets and they also issue notes. They are also in control of all commercial banks.

Of course we need central banks, you know the countries need that

It is very much importance that a country have a central bank because it helps to regulates banks, print fiat money and a country without rules, limits, regulations in terms of money will be a loosed country or state.

In today's money systems, central banks are absolutely necessary. They are essential to every  country's banking operations. Regular banks wouldn't be able to  transact among themselves without problems, because without a regulator, (central authority), trust is needed between the different banks, and that can be abused easily.

It would be a mistake to say that we all do not need the central bank. In fact, the central bank plays a vital role in our lives and in every country. Bitcoin or any other currency will not be valid unless there is a standard currency - USD. It is the only way to determine the value of digital currency.

Of course! Central banks are a must in any country. Who would regulate banks, print paper money and other stuff essential to a functioning government. Central banks are not created to oppress citizens. Only people with criminal intents are afraid of regulations.

Of course we need central banks based on central bank the economy are moving also they set many things based on this they also protect us from bank theft and many regulations so central bank is important if we think about coins the Norway central bank is also thinking about coins.

If we understand what banks are and why they are needed, we will come to the conclusion that banks control our money, and by and large we do not need them if everyone could be responsible for their money, we need to move away from this system and raise the financial literacy of the population.

Central Banks are generally for fiat currency. There're people who condiser as technical handicap. They can hardly use the crypto currency. So, for them specially, central bank is very essential.

Why would the economy collapse in the absence of a central bank though? You provide no reason for it and I sincerely doubt that would be the case. We don't need a private organization to give us and create money, that is essentially futile. All they are doing is lining their own pockets with money by taxing us through inflation. If the monetary policy was reasonable I would welcome central banks, but they are far from it. Bitcoin's monetary policy however is reasonable and can't be created out of thin air. If people trust the Bitcoin system then that is all we will need worldwide, but it would have to be legal tender everywhere, which is something I don't think governments and nation states want to relinquish the power on just yet.

Yes you are right. What you mentioned is exactly what some people ignore that. They think making transactions is the only thing banks do. And a decentralized system like bitcoin can completely replace banks.

From my perspective i think every country need central bank. Because central bank monitor all the financial market and they also issue note. They are the controller of all commercial banks also. Absence of central bank economy will collapse.

I agree with you, the central bank also functions as an atribute and guardian of value and existence of national currency. therefore I predict that in the future, the central bank and cryptocurrency will be part of a legal transaction tool.

but I'm not sure the central bank will survive if it does not innovate, the meaning is the central bank must include the blockchain system element as a transaction tool.

and ultimately the central bank will exist but the transaction will be dominated by bitcoin and gold.

Bankers do not intend to increase risk without safety backups. In the financial crisis banks were incompetent just as much as unethical -- they had risk models that told them they had a safety net, but their models were wrong
They also generally don't operate like a casino. They have customers, and sell products. The securitized RMBS products at least in theory offered social benefit: decreasing cost of housing without increasing risk. The idea was that by pooling mortgages you could reduce risk through diversification. Risk reduction through diversification is a very well established phenomenon. So buying mortgages, bundling them to reduce risk and selling them in theory (and in practice, til the bust) enabled more people to get mortgages and own homes
The bad stuff happened 1) when realty diverged from their models and 2) the market evolved into a complex beast with a massive snowball of people doing unethical stuff (inside and outside of banks).
So in theory and in reality before the bust, rmbs provided a benefit to investors who got products that provided them a good financial return and lowered the cost of owning a home. Greed played a role in popping the bubble but so did incompetence
Not sure what your investing situation is but your second to last paragraph isn't true. The rise of ETFs has enabled average investors to invest with very low fees and many banks offer commission free trades. If you're the "best investor today" you probably have a lot of money and thus get decent deals from banks. If you are losing money it's bc too much competition from other investors due to easy money rather than banks squeezing you
reply

of course , we need bank central for withdraw FIAT money from exchanger cryptocurrency.
we need bank central for Deposit FIAT money.

I think cental banks are sores on our society's body. They are usually main causes of economic depressions and crises. Monopoly on money gives governments carte blanche over money supply, so they can fiddle with the economy in a way they wish. For instance, they can boost it for the election cycle knowing that negative consequences would follow only several years later.

The government of every country has some different rules. Yes according to those five pillers it shows that, there is no need of central banks. But it will be varies how the governments of each country will think.

If there is no central bank it is obvious that problems will create in the monetary system. Things like inflation and balance is very much necessary. In that case, the rich will become richer & the poor will become poorer, because the rich can hold money as much as they want but the poor need daily expense so it becomes quite impossible for them.

The fact is that central banks are an integral part of the current state system. Each state is a complex system that can no longer do without central banks, which, first of all, form the monetary policy of the state and support the course of national money with monetary measures. Therefore, in fact, no one will ask us if we want to continue to exist central banks. They will continue to exist, regardless of whether we want it or not.

If the central bank will work on artificial intelligence, then we need this bank Because now central banks enrich the people which lead it