Sentences with phrase «on fractional reserves»

As the exchange does not operate on fractional reserves like banks, you can always sell or withdraw all of your funds without quantity issues.

Unlike banks, Poloniex does not operate on fractional reserves.

From a financial security perspective, Poloniex does not operate on fractional reserves.

Poloniex does not operate on fractional reserves.

(Note now that we are not talking about a free banking system — I want to make a point about fractional reserve systems in general and show how the problem is that the system isn't free, not that it's based on fractional reserves.)

As we pointed out in a previous essay on fractional reserves banking, a deposit contract is essentially different from a loan contract.

As I have described above, it can be loaned into existence by banks operating on the fractional reserve system.

the most truly inconvenient truth is that the world's economic system, which is based on fractional reserve banking (which essentially allows for printing money whenever a government chooses to do so, independent of any real productive value underlying the printed currency), which then requires constant growth to pay the interest on ever increasingly debt on the new «money» that is then used to create loans or government financing of whatever.

Using the EOS.IO software, bandwidth and computational capacity are allocated on a fractional reserve basis because they are transient (unused capacity can not be saved for future use).

They were operating on fractional reserve and then suddenly announced they had lost most of the money.

Not exact matches

Concurrent with this orgy of public debt, the State encourages massive expansion of private credit via fractional lending, low bank reserves, and other forms of leverage, in a vain attempt to stimulate demand in an economy burdened with overcapacity, declining employment, marginal return on capital and saturated markets.

One of his views that always stuck with me on that subject, at least as a starting point for thinking about it, was that it was somewhat nonsensical to talk about what «equilibrium exchange rates» should be in a world of fiat currencies and fractional reserve banking.

(As an aside, equilibrium means «no tendency to change,» fiat means deriving its value from law rather than some underlying commodity backing, and fractional reserve means that banks hold only a fraction of deposits on reserve, loaning the rest out.).

Here is a post from Libertarian News that begins, «I recently got into an argument over on the Reddit Bitcoin boards where I held the position that fractional reserve banking with Bitcoins was not possible,» which sounds fun; he recants that view but does make what I think is a very valid point:

So there's a conflict between the «owed or obligated» language in the press release, which would prohibit basically any bitcoin leverage, and the «custody or control of Virtual Currency on behalf of another Person,» which would allow leverage — but still not fractional - reserve deposit banking, etc..

With banks holding fractional reserves of Federal Reserve dollars (notes and deposit claims on the books of the Fed, whose sum is called «the monetary base»), when the Fed increases the quantity of Federal Reserve dollars by $ 1 billion, the banking system ordinarily creates a multiple amount of deposit dollars.

But an expert in that market, Jeffrey Christian of the CPM Group, acknowledged at the March 25 hearing of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, as he had acknowledged in an explanatory report published in 2000, that the London bullion market is actually a fractional - reserve gold banking system built on the presumption that most gold buyers will never take delivery of their metal but rather leave it on deposit with the LBMA members from whom they bought it.

I mean given that the fractional reserve banking system is so over-levered, globally, but just thinking about the U.S. for a minute if everybody put 5 % -10 % of their money in Bitcoin or some other cryptocurrencies, the whole banking system implodes on itself.

Once a bank has built up a reputation of solidity, it will be fairly easy for it to just keep a fractional reserve at hand — this is to say, instead of actually warehousing the entire amount on deposit, it will only keep a certain percentage at hand that it estimates will suffice to satisfy withdrawal demands in the «normal course of business».

In terms of its philosophy, it is a similar prospect to a Europe - based proposal, Saga, which we reported on recently — though that intended to induce stability by tying itself to a fractional reserve of fiat currency.

«PROMISE establishes CTA as a viable alternative to stress testing for the evaluation of patients with suspected coronary disease,» said Udo Hoffmann, M.D., principal investigator of the PROMISE Imaging Core and Professor of Radiology at Harvard Medical School and Director of Cardiovascular Imaging at Massachusetts General Hospital «With the addition of high - risk plaque assessment and CT fractional flow reserve technology on the horizon, we may have yet to see the full potential of CTA.»

For those unfamiliar with fractional reserve banking it just means that the bank isn't required to keep 100 % of the amount on deposit in the bank at all times.

If I deposited 100 newly minted coins into a bank and that bank proceeded to loan out 80 of my coins where 80 are deposited into another bank who then proceeds to loan out 60 of the coins, and so on... the production of coins only changed by the initial 100 that I minted - not by the fractional reserve multiple.

In the fractional reserve system, a bank can have loans of $ 100 for every $ 50 they have on deposit.

Let's start with a quick definition of banking before moving on, because it is essential to the discussion of any specific type of banking, such as fractional reserve banking.

There is no limit as to how much Credit the banking system can create through fractional reserve banking — other than the ability of the borrowers to pay interest on the money they have been lent.

Yes, transparency is a problem, but that would ALWAYS be true under our current fractional reserve banking system — it's inherently a Ponzi scheme that functions on public gullibility and government edict — banks get to violate private property rights.

Critics will say that the nation had recurring booms and busts while on the classical gold standard, but they may be confusing the chaos of fractional reserve banking (being able to pyramid loans on top of deposits with fiduciary media) with the classical gold standard (the citizenry is able to convert currency into a fixed amount of gold).

Just like you said for Ponzi schemes «the only source of the so - called interest on the money was the contributions of future investors», for fractional - reserve banking the source of interest is the future profit made by lending the investor's money - to the investors themselves!

Fractional reserve banking is the practice of keeping only a fraction of a bank's demand deposits on reserve, while lending out the rest.