User:Andrewedwardjudd/sandbox

The first paragraph is misleading about FRB and provides implicit support for the relending model of money creation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking

"Fractional-reserve banking is the banking practice in which only a fraction of a bank's deposits are kept as reserves (cash and other highly liquid assets) available for withdrawal"

It would be more truthful and realistic if it read,

"Fractional-reserve banking is the banking practice in which only a fraction of a bank's customer deposits are backed by reserves of cash and other highly liquid assets, which can be used to facilitate customer withdrawals, and the remainder of the bank's customer deposits are backed by the banks illiquid loan assets, which cannot be easily used to repay customer money."

The third paragraph reads:

"When cash is deposited with a bank, only a fraction is retained as reserves and the remainder can be loaned out (or spent by the bank to buy securities). The money lent or spent in this way is subsequently deposited with another bank, creating new deposits and enabling new lending."

This text clearly supports the relending model of FRB.

All attempts to change this text have been reverted.

I have managed to get some central bank citations on the page but my edits in the text have been reduced to almost non-existant level or fringe. Basicly editors are using their opinions to delete my edits with revert comments such as
 * 'mainstream science view is plainly stated, minority views noted in body
 * Incorrect reading of the literature
 * stop edit warring

And yet they are refusing to discuss the changes i have clearly shown i would like to make. The theme appears to be that text books know better than bankers and specialist banking economists.

What can i do? Mediation has failed. I have provided a very large number of labouriously created high quality citations

Andrewedwardjudd (talk) 10:18, 4 May 2011 (UTC)andrewedwardjudd