- The film starts with a quotation from a banker: â€œPermit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes it laws.â€ In light of what you learned watching this film, is this comment worth taking seriously? Why or why not?
- The film tells the story, â€œThe Goldsmithâ€™s Tale.â€ It briefly describes the development of the banking system as a largely rational system by which credit was extended by bankers, and bankers and depositors both benefitted. But, driven by a desire for greater profits, the banker started lending against deposits that werenâ€™t in his â€œvault.â€ Question: briefly, to what extent will the human desire for more (more money, more prestige, more possessions, more power) continue to shape economic systems and structures?
- The film explains the development of the fractional reserve system, whereby central bank regulators initially limited the amount of â€œfictionalâ€ loan money to about 9 times as much as actual money secured by gold and silver deposits. While this system became the dominant system worldwide, the basic nature of money has in time changed. Money used to represent value (namely, a fixed weight of gold or silver). Now, according to the film, money represents debt. To you, which system seems more rational? Why?
- The film discusses a scenario wherein a new bank starts with deposits of $1,111.12 (known as â€œhigh-powered moneyâ€). Assuming fractional reserve regulations would allow a bank to loan out 9 times as much as its deposits, the bank would be able to loan $10,000 against the $1,111,12 on deposit. A borrower then would use the $10,000 to buy a used car. The used car seller in turn puts $10,000 in their own bank. The second bank has to reserve $1,000 of that $10,000, leaving $9,000 for a new loan. Ninety percent of that loan can be lent, and so on down the line, to the point where close to $100,000 of new money is created off the original $1,111.12, still sitting untouched at the central bank. However, the banks end up collecting interest on almost $100,000 they never had. The film claims this system is â€œridiculous.â€ Question: Please make a brief statement in support of and in contradiction of this claim.
- This system is ridiculous becauseâ€¦
- This system is not ridiculous becauseâ€¦
- Every major religion used to forbid charging interest. Eventually the moral argument gave way to acceptance of the belief that itâ€™s ok to make money from money. The film suggests that today, the charging of interest is a practical problem. Briefly, do you agree or disagree? Why?
- Link to a movie:
- Please include the questions in the answer, thank you!
The work provided by the experts of Academicscare.com are model papers for students and it should not be submitted as it is in their school, college, or university. Our crafted papers are strictly intended to help students on their grades
+1 (914) 607-8799