<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Economics Questions</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/5.aspx</link><description /><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2008.5 SP2 (Build: 40407.4157)</generator><item><title>Re: Huerta de Soto and secondary deposit</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/519266.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 09:38:06 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:519266</guid><dc:creator>Retrolives</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/519266.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=5&amp;PostID=519266</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	I have a question if you don&amp;#39;t mind&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Are there any situations where fiduciary media does not equal a secondary deposit or a derivative deposit? Do these terms all mean the exact same thing in all cases or are they applied differently?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Many thanks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: Huerta de Soto and secondary deposit</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516648.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 02:44:51 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:516648</guid><dc:creator>Smiling Dave</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516648.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=5&amp;PostID=516648</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
	&lt;p&gt;
		...because the first deposit in the bank is not of 1 000 000 m.u. but 150 000 less: of 850 000 m.u.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	I totally agree. He&amp;#39;s assuming 150K is going to be taken out of the bank, so those 150K cannot be a &amp;quot;reserve&amp;quot; for fractional reserve banking, leaving only 850K.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Glad it straightened out.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: Huerta de Soto and secondary deposit</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516645.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 02:23:37 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:516645</guid><dc:creator>Zordon</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516645.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=5&amp;PostID=516645</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	Thanks for the reply regarding my first problem!&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	As for the second...&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	I came to the solution myself after a lot of experimentation.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	But first, I would stick to the table on p. 230 for the purpose of clarity, because regardless of the banking system we are talking about (one monopolistic bank or a system of small banks) the operations are the same, even Huerta de Soto writes:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	&amp;quot;This formula [[27] - for total deposits in the system of small banks with c=0,1,k=f=0] is identical to the deposit multiplier in the case of a single, monopolistic bank [14].&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	So the reason why my calculations deviated from Soto&amp;#39;s results is the confusion I had with his [40] example, since I mistakenly took numbers from his first numerical example in this subchapter on p. 239:&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	&amp;quot;f = 0.15, then when Bank A loans 900,000 m.u., the amount of money which would return to the banking system would be equal to (1 &amp;ndash; f) 900,000 = (1 &amp;ndash; 0.15) 900,000 = 0.85 x 900,000 = 765,000 m.u.&amp;quot;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	However in the [40] example there is no loan of 900 000 if my simulation is to be consistent with his calculations, because the first deposit in the bank is not of 1 000 000 m.u. but 150 000 less: of 850 000 m.u. The reserve, then, is 85 000 and the first loan is 765 000, the filtered out m.u. equals 765 000 x 0,15 = 114 750 and so on. Only with this procedure his [40] numerical results are consistent with my simulation results.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	So if the first (primary) deposit in the bank is of&amp;nbsp;&lt;em&gt;d&lt;/em&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;in quantity, then the formula [36] has to look like Dn=(d/(1-f))/(c+(f/(1-f)))&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	and formula [30]:&amp;nbsp;F=f*Dg-d*f&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	If it&amp;#39;s still messy here are the calculations:&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="http://www.mediafire.com/?u073bd9p3s0pbyn"&gt;http://www.mediafire.com/?u073bd9p3s0pbyn&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	1 page contains my mistaken numbers&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	2 page contains correct numbers&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	3 page contains my mistaken numbers with the correction to the formula&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: Huerta de Soto and secondary deposit</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516526.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 05:17:42 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:516526</guid><dc:creator>Smiling Dave</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516526.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=5&amp;PostID=516526</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	Gross Deposits is what he used to call Deposits, meaning the sum of the amounts appearing as &amp;quot;Deposits&amp;quot; in the Credits Column [and the Liabilities Column] of the bank&amp;#39;s&amp;nbsp; Balance sheets.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Net Deposits is defined by the formula. There is no better definition than a formula.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;
	&lt;p&gt;
		I tried to derive those definitions inductively...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	I&amp;#39;m not sure if there is a language problem here. You cannot derive a definition by simulating the credit expansion of something. The definition is something the author makes up in his head, and it is a short way of saying a lot of words.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;
	&lt;p&gt;
		...(akin to the table on p.230). I compared the sums in rows with result of numerical example [40] on p. 241...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Numerical example [40] is talking about a single bank. The table on 230 is talking about a series of banks. Of course the results won&amp;#39;t be the same with one bank and a series of banks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: Huerta de Soto and secondary deposit</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516522.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 04:54:42 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:516522</guid><dc:creator>Smiling Dave</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516522.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=5&amp;PostID=516522</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	page 196:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;em&gt;. Of this amount,&lt;br /&gt;
	1,000,000 m.u. correspond to physical monetary units; that is,&lt;br /&gt;
	to primary deposits. The other 900,000 m.u. reflect fiduciary&lt;br /&gt;
	media created from nothing; in other words, derivative or sec-&lt;br /&gt;
	ondary deposits.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	page 219:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;em&gt;Bank A&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;em&gt;Balance Sheet&lt;br /&gt;
	c=0.1 and k=0.2&lt;br /&gt;
	Assets&lt;br /&gt;
	Cash 121,952&lt;br /&gt;
	Loans 1,097,560&lt;br /&gt;
	Total Assets 1,219,512&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Clearly, you are right.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: Huerta de Soto and secondary deposit</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516477.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:03:40 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:516477</guid><dc:creator>Zordon</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516477.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=5&amp;PostID=516477</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	+ I have a second problem: on p. 239 author introduces the term &amp;#39;gross deposits&amp;#39; without defining it, the same goes for &amp;#39;net deposits&amp;#39;, the term that he only gives formula for but again no definition.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	I tried to derive those definitions inductively by simulating the credit expansion in bank&amp;#39;s book entries in spreadsheet (akin to the table on p.230). I compared the sums in rows with result of numerical example [40] on p. 241, but they do not match, as they should given the formulas.&amp;nbsp;Anyone, please?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;I don&amp;#39;t have an access to&amp;nbsp;&lt;em&gt;University Economics&amp;nbsp;&lt;/em&gt;by Alchian&amp;amp;Allen, which Huerta de Soto cites.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Huerta de Soto and secondary deposit</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516409.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 00:07:52 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:516409</guid><dc:creator>Zordon</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/516409.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=5&amp;PostID=516409</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	In his book &amp;quot;Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles&amp;#39; in chapter 4 subchapter 5 he writes on page 223 (second english edition, .pdf version - http://mises.org/books/desoto.pdf) that: &amp;quot;ds1 represents Bank A&amp;rsquo;s secondary deposits and equals 1,219,512 m.u&amp;quot;, while (if I correctly understand the definition) I would argue that Bank A&amp;#39;s secondary deposits equal 1 097 560 money units and 121 952 of primary deposits (pp 218-219). Do I err or he errs?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>