Agile banking group
15 views
Skip to first unread message
Ryan Fugger
Jul 13, 2009, 6:52:10 PM7/13/09
to Ripple Users
I should mention a related group started by Pelle Braendgaard:
http://groups.google.com/group/agile-banking
He wants to get some people together to "reboot banking". See his blog post:
People on this list might be interested in this undertaking.
Ryan
wizardwatson
Jul 14, 2009, 10:15:59 AM7/14/09
to Ripple users
This was interesting, from the "Limited Purpose Banking" link (ref'd
from above stakeventures link):
"There is a better way to restore trust in our financial system and
get our economy rolling: Limited Purpose Banking. It's a simple and
essentially costless change in our financial system that limits banks
to their legitimate purpose: connecting, and intermediating between,
borrowers and lenders and savers and investors. Under Limited Purpose
Banking, all financial corporations engaged in financial
intermediation, including all banks and insurance companies, would
function exclusively as middlemen who sell safe as well as risky
collections of securities (mutual funds) to the public. They would
never, themselves, own financial assets. Thus, they would never be in
a position to fail because of ill-advised financial bets. No-risk
banking? Exactly. It means making banks--meaning all financial
corporations--be the disinterested intermediaries they pretend to be."
This is along Chris Cook's line of thinking. I especially like the
last sentence.
When I see people initially get motivated in this direction, I'm
always kind of disappointed at the oversimplification of the problem
that usually follows. I guess it's not any worse than supposed
'experts' trying to pretend its secrets can only be contemplated by
old men in ivory towers.
But it is good to see people in general starting to grasp the
numerical chaos that our current monetary system generates.
On Jul 13, 5:52 pm, Ryan Fugger <rfug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I should mention a related group started by Pelle Braendgaard:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/agile-banking
>
> He wants to get some people together to "reboot banking". See his blog post:
>
> http://stakeventures.com/articles/2009/07/03/entrepreneurs-coders-and...
from above stakeventures link):
"There is a better way to restore trust in our financial system and
get our economy rolling: Limited Purpose Banking. It's a simple and
essentially costless change in our financial system that limits banks
to their legitimate purpose: connecting, and intermediating between,
borrowers and lenders and savers and investors. Under Limited Purpose
Banking, all financial corporations engaged in financial
intermediation, including all banks and insurance companies, would
function exclusively as middlemen who sell safe as well as risky
collections of securities (mutual funds) to the public. They would
never, themselves, own financial assets. Thus, they would never be in
a position to fail because of ill-advised financial bets. No-risk
banking? Exactly. It means making banks--meaning all financial
corporations--be the disinterested intermediaries they pretend to be."
This is along Chris Cook's line of thinking. I especially like the
last sentence.
When I see people initially get motivated in this direction, I'm
always kind of disappointed at the oversimplification of the problem
that usually follows. I guess it's not any worse than supposed
'experts' trying to pretend its secrets can only be contemplated by
old men in ivory towers.
But it is good to see people in general starting to grasp the
numerical chaos that our current monetary system generates.
On Jul 13, 5:52 pm, Ryan Fugger <rfug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I should mention a related group started by Pelle Braendgaard:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/agile-banking
>
> He wants to get some people together to "reboot banking". See his blog post:
>
Jason Kolb
Jul 14, 2009, 10:42:32 AM7/14/09
to rippl...@googlegroups.com
This makes a lot of sense--banks act as an exchange, assuming the risk that their customers default in exchange and convert between debt types
cjen...@googlemail.com
Jul 15, 2009, 5:14:35 AM7/15/09
to Ripple users
Limited Purpose Banking essentially re-applies Glass Steagall, and so
could be expected to improve matters.
But it doesn't take away the point that a credit intermediary's
interests are opposed to those of the end users ie the depositor and
the lender, or the seller and the buyer (on credit terms).
He is trying to extract a profit at their expense, and to maximise
this profit for the benefit of his unproductive "rentier"
shareholders.
In the model I advocate we instead see a "shared surplus" model. So
the credit platform users - sellers and buyers etc - pay an agreed
amount to a consortium of platform service providers. If capital is
needed, it comes from the stakeholders who invest in future revenues
ie they "pay it forward".
This "Social Business" model is essentially a cooperative of
cooperatives or partnership of partnerships. It is what Dr Yunus calls
"Not for Loss" or what some Danes I know doing P2P micro credit call
"Profit for Purpose".
http://www.slideshare.net/ChrisJCook/social-investment-mechanism-12-03-09
Within a partnership framework there is no "profit" and no "loss",
merely the exchange and mutual creation of value in all its forms -
and money created ex nihilo as interest-bearing credit by credit
intermediaries is not one of them....
Best Regards
Chris Cook
could be expected to improve matters.
But it doesn't take away the point that a credit intermediary's
interests are opposed to those of the end users ie the depositor and
the lender, or the seller and the buyer (on credit terms).
He is trying to extract a profit at their expense, and to maximise
this profit for the benefit of his unproductive "rentier"
shareholders.
In the model I advocate we instead see a "shared surplus" model. So
the credit platform users - sellers and buyers etc - pay an agreed
amount to a consortium of platform service providers. If capital is
needed, it comes from the stakeholders who invest in future revenues
ie they "pay it forward".
This "Social Business" model is essentially a cooperative of
cooperatives or partnership of partnerships. It is what Dr Yunus calls
"Not for Loss" or what some Danes I know doing P2P micro credit call
"Profit for Purpose".
http://www.slideshare.net/ChrisJCook/social-investment-mechanism-12-03-09
Within a partnership framework there is no "profit" and no "loss",
merely the exchange and mutual creation of value in all its forms -
and money created ex nihilo as interest-bearing credit by credit
intermediaries is not one of them....
Best Regards
Chris Cook
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages