Topic: Do we Need Central Banks? - page 7. (Read 2997 times)
At this time we still need central banks, we need banks to liquify and encash our cryptocurrencies. When time comes that we can almost used the cryptocurrencies for all types of transactions and trading, then we can day now that we don't need banks anymore.
Unfortunately, the so called "experts" that cause majority of the financial dooms will never agree with this view because they are the profiteers of the current debt-based econmony, powered by the fractional reserve banking system. Having a central bank is something foreign to the evolution of money historically
If the central bank will work on artificial intelligence, then we need this bank Because now central banks enrich the people which lead it
one time the central bank will also cooperate with the cryptocurrency working system, maybe the central bank can supervise and monitor its cooperation not to burden its investorscooperating with the central bank about crypto is indeed difficult, because sometimes the banks are neutral assuming that crypto is a competitor for the progress of the central bank. even though that is not true, only the news is not true. so with the news circulating like that, until now the bank sentrai has not been willing to cooperate.
Well, central banks and fiat currencies are only a pretty new concept to humankind. The economy, as well as the currency, can definitely function without a central bank, as demonstrated by the days where paper currency did not exist and we used gold and silver as main forms of currency.
These are essentially the most basic forms of decentralized currencies, and they certainly worked well to serve their purpose - to store value, and to serve as a medium of exchange in transactions.
It's up to debate whether or not society would function better without a central bank, but all I know is that if I wanted to save my net worth in something, I would not put the majority of it in something which value is based on a central organization's trust, and they essentially can inflate the supply of as much as they want to.
These are essentially the most basic forms of decentralized currencies, and they certainly worked well to serve their purpose - to store value, and to serve as a medium of exchange in transactions.
It's up to debate whether or not society would function better without a central bank, but all I know is that if I wanted to save my net worth in something, I would not put the majority of it in something which value is based on a central organization's trust, and they essentially can inflate the supply of as much as they want to.
Yes , still we need the central bank. As we stepped forward to modernisation that every country produce their own local monetary identity which helps to organise and monitor their national economy.
Join the Cryptocurrency world, there is no central banking, no middlemen. You are your own bank. Protest doesn't ever do anything, if you want a better system you have to get educated and help build it...
in no case can you cooperate with central banks. what is the meaning of all this? there will be exactly such hedgehogs the electronic money that we have now? It is necessary to do everything possible to prevent this from happening
If the central bank will work on artificial intelligence, then we need this bank Because now central banks enrich the people which lead it
one time the central bank will also cooperate with the cryptocurrency working system, maybe the central bank can supervise and monitor its cooperation not to burden its investors Well, central banks and fiat currencies are only a pretty new concept to humankind. The economy, as well as the currency, can definitely function without a central bank, as demonstrated by the days where paper currency did not exist and we used gold and silver as main forms of currency.
These are essentially the most basic forms of decentralized currencies, and they certainly worked well to serve their purpose - to store value, and to serve as a medium of exchange in transactions.
It's up to debate whether or not society would function better without a central bank, but all I know is that if I wanted to save my net worth in something, I would not put the majority of it in something which value is based on a central organization's trust, and they essentially can inflate the supply of as much as they want to.
These are essentially the most basic forms of decentralized currencies, and they certainly worked well to serve their purpose - to store value, and to serve as a medium of exchange in transactions.
It's up to debate whether or not society would function better without a central bank, but all I know is that if I wanted to save my net worth in something, I would not put the majority of it in something which value is based on a central organization's trust, and they essentially can inflate the supply of as much as they want to.
Yes , still we need the central bank. As we stepped forward to modernisation that every country produce their own local monetary identity which helps to organise and monitor their national economy.
I do not see the essence of central banks in the bitcoin and blockchain technology. Bitcoin is decentralised and that is a good part of it. Getting a central bank for bitcoin means bitcoin owners will no longer remain anonymous.
That is right, maybe one of the purpose of having a bitcoin or crypto is to avoid third party for us to have a smooth and fast transactions with everything that we are doing so that we don't need bank to do it.
I do not see the essence of central banks in the bitcoin and blockchain technology. Bitcoin is decentralised and that is a good part of it. Getting a central bank for bitcoin means bitcoin owners will no longer remain anonymous.
Hello crypto-fans Bankers are shifting their views on blockchain integration and benefits by being open to implementing DLTs across platforms to ensure they remain competitive.
"Banks seem smitten by blockchain. Seems everyone is getting into the act. Traditional banks, especially, and central banks, too. But might the more enthusiastic adopters be getting a bit ahead of themselves?" Read more: https://www.pymnts.com/news/b2b-payments/2018/blockchain-distributed-ledger-international-regulations
P.S. The owners of banks are attracted by the transparency of operations, which all participants can follow. Another possibility is the identification of clients (KYC) and protection from hacker attacks!
"Banks seem smitten by blockchain. Seems everyone is getting into the act. Traditional banks, especially, and central banks, too. But might the more enthusiastic adopters be getting a bit ahead of themselves?" Read more: https://www.pymnts.com/news/b2b-payments/2018/blockchain-distributed-ledger-international-regulations
P.S. The owners of banks are attracted by the transparency of operations, which all participants can follow. Another possibility is the identification of clients (KYC) and protection from hacker attacks!
Shifting from Central Planning to a Decentralised Economy: Do we Need Central Banks?
by Professor Richard A. Werner, D.Phil. (Oxon)
I. The Central Bank Narrative
For more than the past four decades, public policy discourse, especially when touching on macroeconomic and monetary policy, has been dominated by the views held and actively sponsored by the central banks, particularly in Europe and North-America, as well as Japan.
Their policy narrative has been consistent over time and virtually identical between central banks, which is why I shall refer to it collectively as the ‘central bank narrative’. It has been mirrored in the type of economics that central bankers have supported and that has indeed subsequently become dominant in academia and among the economists selected as the experts of choice in the major newspapers and television channels: the theoreticians advancing neo-classical economics.
This central bank narrative (and hence also the dominant neo-classical economics, also known as ‘mainstream economics’) has at least five major pillars, which I shall list briefly:
The truth of the matter is: We don’t need central banks. Since 97% of the money supply is created by banks, the importance of central banks is far smaller than generally envisaged. Moreover, the kind of money that commercial banks create is not privileged at law. Legally, our money supply is simply private company credit, which can be created by any company, with or without banking license.
Eurozone countries, having given up the right to their own currencies, can still create money and reflate the economy: the government, for instance in Spain, simply needs to stop the issuance of government bonds, and fund the entire public sector borrowing requirement from the domestic banks that create it out of nothing – and can do so at more competitive rates as the bond markets: this policy of Enhanced Debt Management (Werner, 2014b) not only would make it obvious that Spain does not need the ECB, but it would also put the national debt profiteers – the bond underwriting firms such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley – out of business.
This reality of private money creation also means that we can, without legal obstacles, create a decentralized system of local currencies, without central bank involvement.
The key principle of such decentralization is local autonomy, self-determination, self-responsibility and self-administration. These are in fact the fundamental principles of the co-operative movement, as championed by Hermann Schultze-Delitzsch and Wilhelm Raiffeisen over 150 years ago. This co-operative movement early on realized that a crucial role for co-operatives is in the creation of co-operative banks controlled by the local communities. Sadly, in the UK credit unions are not banks, since they are not allowed to lend to firms in meaningful amounts, and don’t have a banking license. Thus we need to create true community banks.
Lord Action pointed out:
“It is easier to find people fit to govern themselves than people fit to govern others”.
“Towns were the nursery of freedom.”
The German banking system is dominated by 1,500 community banks, which are also the majority of banks in the entire EU. This means that 80% of German banks are not-for-profit, which has strengthened the German economy for the past 200 years. A banking system consisting of many small banks is also far less prone to boom-bust cycles and it creates more jobs per given amount of loan than large banks. Thus community banks also result in a more equal income and wealth distribution.
Local banking is highly popular in Germany, because SMEs get access to finance that would not be serviced by large banks. The community banks provide their services at competitive rates and support their customers also during recessions. With community banks, the wider community gets a bank whose goals are aligned with theirs, banks that pay taxes, banks that support local growth and jobs. At the same time community banks offer customers a place to put their money where it can benefit the local community, not far-flung projects or speculators.
Can we tackle this challenge?
Until the 1970s, there has been much optimism in economics and there have been high expectations that many of the problems of mankind would soon be solved.
Was this a reasonable expectation?
While it has not come true, it was a reasonable expectation. This is because
“Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings”
John F. Kennedy
Yes, im totally agree with these opinion. The initial goal of bitcoin is something that free and fair without the role of middleman or other parties rather than the buyer and seller only. so i think we don't need the role of central bank at all. by Professor Richard A. Werner, D.Phil. (Oxon)
I. The Central Bank Narrative
For more than the past four decades, public policy discourse, especially when touching on macroeconomic and monetary policy, has been dominated by the views held and actively sponsored by the central banks, particularly in Europe and North-America, as well as Japan.
Their policy narrative has been consistent over time and virtually identical between central banks, which is why I shall refer to it collectively as the ‘central bank narrative’. It has been mirrored in the type of economics that central bankers have supported and that has indeed subsequently become dominant in academia and among the economists selected as the experts of choice in the major newspapers and television channels: the theoreticians advancing neo-classical economics.
This central bank narrative (and hence also the dominant neo-classical economics, also known as ‘mainstream economics’) has at least five major pillars, which I shall list briefly:
The truth of the matter is: We don’t need central banks. Since 97% of the money supply is created by banks, the importance of central banks is far smaller than generally envisaged. Moreover, the kind of money that commercial banks create is not privileged at law. Legally, our money supply is simply private company credit, which can be created by any company, with or without banking license.
Eurozone countries, having given up the right to their own currencies, can still create money and reflate the economy: the government, for instance in Spain, simply needs to stop the issuance of government bonds, and fund the entire public sector borrowing requirement from the domestic banks that create it out of nothing – and can do so at more competitive rates as the bond markets: this policy of Enhanced Debt Management (Werner, 2014b) not only would make it obvious that Spain does not need the ECB, but it would also put the national debt profiteers – the bond underwriting firms such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley – out of business.
This reality of private money creation also means that we can, without legal obstacles, create a decentralized system of local currencies, without central bank involvement.
The key principle of such decentralization is local autonomy, self-determination, self-responsibility and self-administration. These are in fact the fundamental principles of the co-operative movement, as championed by Hermann Schultze-Delitzsch and Wilhelm Raiffeisen over 150 years ago. This co-operative movement early on realized that a crucial role for co-operatives is in the creation of co-operative banks controlled by the local communities. Sadly, in the UK credit unions are not banks, since they are not allowed to lend to firms in meaningful amounts, and don’t have a banking license. Thus we need to create true community banks.
Lord Action pointed out:
“It is easier to find people fit to govern themselves than people fit to govern others”.
“Towns were the nursery of freedom.”
The German banking system is dominated by 1,500 community banks, which are also the majority of banks in the entire EU. This means that 80% of German banks are not-for-profit, which has strengthened the German economy for the past 200 years. A banking system consisting of many small banks is also far less prone to boom-bust cycles and it creates more jobs per given amount of loan than large banks. Thus community banks also result in a more equal income and wealth distribution.
Local banking is highly popular in Germany, because SMEs get access to finance that would not be serviced by large banks. The community banks provide their services at competitive rates and support their customers also during recessions. With community banks, the wider community gets a bank whose goals are aligned with theirs, banks that pay taxes, banks that support local growth and jobs. At the same time community banks offer customers a place to put their money where it can benefit the local community, not far-flung projects or speculators.
Can we tackle this challenge?
Until the 1970s, there has been much optimism in economics and there have been high expectations that many of the problems of mankind would soon be solved.
Was this a reasonable expectation?
While it has not come true, it was a reasonable expectation. This is because
“Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings”
John F. Kennedy
we need a decentralized bank. fiats are scam!!!
Shifting from Central Planning to a Decentralised Economy: Do we Need Central Banks?
by Professor Richard A. Werner, D.Phil. (Oxon)
I. The Central Bank Narrative
For more than the past four decades, public policy discourse, especially when touching on macroeconomic and monetary policy, has been dominated by the views held and actively sponsored by the central banks, particularly in Europe and North-America, as well as Japan.
Their policy narrative has been consistent over time and virtually identical between central banks, which is why I shall refer to it collectively as the ‘central bank narrative’. It has been mirrored in the type of economics that central bankers have supported and that has indeed subsequently become dominant in academia and among the economists selected as the experts of choice in the major newspapers and television channels: the theoreticians advancing neo-classical economics.
This central bank narrative (and hence also the dominant neo-classical economics, also known as ‘mainstream economics’) has at least five major pillars, which I shall list briefly:
The truth of the matter is: We don’t need central banks. Since 97% of the money supply is created by banks, the importance of central banks is far smaller than generally envisaged. Moreover, the kind of money that commercial banks create is not privileged at law. Legally, our money supply is simply private company credit, which can be created by any company, with or without banking license.
Eurozone countries, having given up the right to their own currencies, can still create money and reflate the economy: the government, for instance in Spain, simply needs to stop the issuance of government bonds, and fund the entire public sector borrowing requirement from the domestic banks that create it out of nothing – and can do so at more competitive rates as the bond markets: this policy of Enhanced Debt Management (Werner, 2014b) not only would make it obvious that Spain does not need the ECB, but it would also put the national debt profiteers – the bond underwriting firms such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley – out of business.
This reality of private money creation also means that we can, without legal obstacles, create a decentralized system of local currencies, without central bank involvement.
The key principle of such decentralization is local autonomy, self-determination, self-responsibility and self-administration. These are in fact the fundamental principles of the co-operative movement, as championed by Hermann Schultze-Delitzsch and Wilhelm Raiffeisen over 150 years ago. This co-operative movement early on realized that a crucial role for co-operatives is in the creation of co-operative banks controlled by the local communities. Sadly, in the UK credit unions are not banks, since they are not allowed to lend to firms in meaningful amounts, and don’t have a banking license. Thus we need to create true community banks.
Lord Action pointed out:
“It is easier to find people fit to govern themselves than people fit to govern others”.
“Towns were the nursery of freedom.”
The German banking system is dominated by 1,500 community banks, which are also the majority of banks in the entire EU. This means that 80% of German banks are not-for-profit, which has strengthened the German economy for the past 200 years. A banking system consisting of many small banks is also far less prone to boom-bust cycles and it creates more jobs per given amount of loan than large banks. Thus community banks also result in a more equal income and wealth distribution.
Local banking is highly popular in Germany, because SMEs get access to finance that would not be serviced by large banks. The community banks provide their services at competitive rates and support their customers also during recessions. With community banks, the wider community gets a bank whose goals are aligned with theirs, banks that pay taxes, banks that support local growth and jobs. At the same time community banks offer customers a place to put their money where it can benefit the local community, not far-flung projects or speculators.
Can we tackle this challenge?
Until the 1970s, there has been much optimism in economics and there have been high expectations that many of the problems of mankind would soon be solved.
Was this a reasonable expectation?
While it has not come true, it was a reasonable expectation. This is because
“Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings”
John F. Kennedy
by Professor Richard A. Werner, D.Phil. (Oxon)
I. The Central Bank Narrative
For more than the past four decades, public policy discourse, especially when touching on macroeconomic and monetary policy, has been dominated by the views held and actively sponsored by the central banks, particularly in Europe and North-America, as well as Japan.
Their policy narrative has been consistent over time and virtually identical between central banks, which is why I shall refer to it collectively as the ‘central bank narrative’. It has been mirrored in the type of economics that central bankers have supported and that has indeed subsequently become dominant in academia and among the economists selected as the experts of choice in the major newspapers and television channels: the theoreticians advancing neo-classical economics.
This central bank narrative (and hence also the dominant neo-classical economics, also known as ‘mainstream economics’) has at least five major pillars, which I shall list briefly:
The truth of the matter is: We don’t need central banks. Since 97% of the money supply is created by banks, the importance of central banks is far smaller than generally envisaged. Moreover, the kind of money that commercial banks create is not privileged at law. Legally, our money supply is simply private company credit, which can be created by any company, with or without banking license.
Eurozone countries, having given up the right to their own currencies, can still create money and reflate the economy: the government, for instance in Spain, simply needs to stop the issuance of government bonds, and fund the entire public sector borrowing requirement from the domestic banks that create it out of nothing – and can do so at more competitive rates as the bond markets: this policy of Enhanced Debt Management (Werner, 2014b) not only would make it obvious that Spain does not need the ECB, but it would also put the national debt profiteers – the bond underwriting firms such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley – out of business.
This reality of private money creation also means that we can, without legal obstacles, create a decentralized system of local currencies, without central bank involvement.
The key principle of such decentralization is local autonomy, self-determination, self-responsibility and self-administration. These are in fact the fundamental principles of the co-operative movement, as championed by Hermann Schultze-Delitzsch and Wilhelm Raiffeisen over 150 years ago. This co-operative movement early on realized that a crucial role for co-operatives is in the creation of co-operative banks controlled by the local communities. Sadly, in the UK credit unions are not banks, since they are not allowed to lend to firms in meaningful amounts, and don’t have a banking license. Thus we need to create true community banks.
Lord Action pointed out:
“It is easier to find people fit to govern themselves than people fit to govern others”.
“Towns were the nursery of freedom.”
The German banking system is dominated by 1,500 community banks, which are also the majority of banks in the entire EU. This means that 80% of German banks are not-for-profit, which has strengthened the German economy for the past 200 years. A banking system consisting of many small banks is also far less prone to boom-bust cycles and it creates more jobs per given amount of loan than large banks. Thus community banks also result in a more equal income and wealth distribution.
Local banking is highly popular in Germany, because SMEs get access to finance that would not be serviced by large banks. The community banks provide their services at competitive rates and support their customers also during recessions. With community banks, the wider community gets a bank whose goals are aligned with theirs, banks that pay taxes, banks that support local growth and jobs. At the same time community banks offer customers a place to put their money where it can benefit the local community, not far-flung projects or speculators.
Can we tackle this challenge?
Until the 1970s, there has been much optimism in economics and there have been high expectations that many of the problems of mankind would soon be solved.
Was this a reasonable expectation?
While it has not come true, it was a reasonable expectation. This is because
“Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings”
John F. Kennedy
I think we need central bank in classical economy method. Someone has to arrange money supply and demand. So someone has to print it paper. I mean someone has to create a value and sell it. But if cryptocurrencies will be succeedd, then we can talk they are useless. Because cryptos (real ones) doesn't need supply thing.
we don't need any central banks with blockchain technology. and I fairy don't follow the logic of those coins who help the banks with transactions!
Every country has a central bank that regulates printing money. Cetral banks are still used to be able to provide direction about finance.
To maintain fiat money, the Centra bank was still used even though in this crypto bank to pass and exchange as fiat money.
To maintain fiat money, the Centra bank was still used even though in this crypto bank to pass and exchange as fiat money.
Why would we need central banks for cryptocurrencies? The fact that it's not regulated will defeat its purpose if they will be regulated by the banks. If banks will ever get involved, it is if they want to invest on it and not regulate it.
The central bank is made up of a regular and strong exchange process. However, for the crypto market the bank stands out as intermediaries it seems difficult.
I think yes. Some say that without a central bank, paper money does not exist, they use gold and silver to trade. This is the opposite of human development because it was used by people thousands of years ago. The central bank will keep its economic growth priorities in perspective. People will fall into chaos without a central bank.
We need central banks at the moment. Cryptocurrencies should be exchanged into cash before using... only few online stores accept bitcoins. 
all truly the author. we do not need banks then that this completely contradicts the original idea of the creator of the crypto currency which considered it absolutely decentralized
Jump to: