And you are here why?

Interfluidity has a nifty writeup - " What is a bank loan ", which explains, in lucid prose, exactly what is sez, viz, what a bank loan is. Suppose I go to my local bank and ask for a loan. The bank says yes, and suddenly there is “money in my account” where there was not before. Am I now a “borrower” and the bank a “creditor”? No. Not at all. The transaction that has occurred is fully symmetrical. It is as accurate to say that the bank is in my debt as it is is to say that I am in debt to the bank. The most important thing one must understand about banking is that “money in the bank” also known as “deposits” are nothing more or less than bank IOUs. When a bank “makes a loan”, all it does is issue some IOUs to a borrower. The borrower, for her part, issues some IOUs to the bank, a promise to repay the loan. A “bank loan” is simply a liability swap: I promise something to you, you promise something of equal value to me. Neither party is in any meaningful sense a credi...

Most people have one of three perspectives on the FDIC U.N. sponsored gummint agency, that makes black helicopters for use by the Trilateral Commission Something to do with medicine approval? Something to do with regulating banks? If you ignore the Trilateral wingnuts, and the numb-nuts who mix the FDA and the FDIC up, you have the vast majority of people out there who realize that the FDIC has something to do with banks, but no real idea what. As it turns out, there is actually a perfectly valid reason for the existence of the FDIC - and it has to do with Banks, and Nash Equilibrium . To put it simply, a Nash Equilibrium is the equivalent of a self-reinforcing law, i.e., one that nobody has an incentive to break, despite the absence of a police force , because you end up worse off breaking it than if you don't. Or ask XKCD puts it "Huh? Whut?" " What on earth does the above have to do with the banks?" I'm glad  you asked. Consider ...