Government can help the poor only by removing obstacles in their way not with positive endorsement

It is misguided to think that Government using force can create good, the only good possible, using force, is to remove the problems suffered by other people. We cannot help someone by making them do something against their wishes. Forcing people to pay taxes helps no one (it does not help the victim, by definition) and neither can third parties benefit from the suffering of another person. Suffering is good for no one. The only way to help the poor is to enable access to resources, by limiting the extent to which other people are able to own assets, or other kinds of Capital.

If a bank has a deposit guarantee from the Government then it is a fully reserved bank

Modern banking systems are described as practicing Fractional Reserve Banking, but this is something of a misnomer. To use the term 'fractional reserves' suggests that bank deposits are not themselves a from of money, but the deposit guarantee indicates that they are regarded (considered) to be money by the authorities, which, in a fiat economy, assigns monetary status to bank deposits. So banks have fully reserved liabilities because of the deposit guarantee and (due to the fact that) Governments consider bank deposits to be a form of money, which then makes them money.

The deposit guarantee means that banks no longer have fractional reserves, they are fully reserved.

Money is what the Government thinks that it is which is why banks are able to print money

If banks do not print money then there would be no need for deposit insurance. It is because bank deposits are money that the State must support the banking system with deposit insurance. It is because bank credit is money (in the opinion of the Government) that we have deposit insurance, otherwise the banks would fail and there would be huge deflation.

It is immoral that banks can increase the money supply when others cannot

It is a moral law, or rule that we should have no higher powers than others, that we should not have any exclusive rights above other people, and so be equal, and yet banks have the ability to increase the money supply when no one else (apart from the Government) has this right.

Banks are not special it is because of the Government that they are able to cause inflation

The presence of deposit insurance means that no one is deprived of money when it is loaned from the banks. This means that not only the person borrowing has the money, but also the person loaning the money has it also, the deposits remain in place. This type of magical money creation is not possible in the private sector. It is for no other reason than Government interference that banks are able to increase the money supply, not because of anything special that banks do.

In a free market it would not be so easy for people to get into debt

Without the deposit guarantee it would not be possible for people to increase the money supply by taking out a mortgage, they would need to earn it (the money needed to purchase an asset) in the conventional way. Having the deposit guarantee means that it is possible for people to obviate the need to earn money, it is a form of printing wealth in that sense. The lack of a free market means that people can easily get into debt, to acquire assets.

Deposit insurance ruins Capitalism because people are able to increase the money supply easily instead of earning wealth

The banks increase the money supply when a loan is made, even if the reserves are reduced in this process, the money will return quickly to the banks to enable them to make more loans. The person who made the original deposit now must rely on the Government guarantee, to get their money back, whereas before they were confident that the bank retained the money. If we don't trust the Government guarantee then we can use a fully reserved bank instead, by removing our deposits, the bank will not crash because the Government will simply print more and more. This process makes earning money (to mean protected value) difficult because anyone that is willing to get into debt can quickly become as rich as someone who must, for rear of debt, earn their money. If people can easily 'borrow' wealth this makes money worth very little, measured only by the unpleasantness of debt; people can earn more by taking out a large mortgage, hard work is made redundant and we compete to be worthy of being given credit.

Fractional reserve banking makes Capitalism fail to work properly because it ruins the value of labour and work, since anyone can have wealth if they can get an inflationary loan. It's easier to get a mortgage than to work for a living, when buying a house and we then see that land is the primary form of (material) wealth.

Inflationary banking makes it difficult to obtain property without being in debt

If a Government is able to print wealth in the form of fiat currencies, then all commodities will be measured with reference to it, it will be the unit of account, and hence the primary medium of exchange.

If the primary medium of exchange can be 'borrowed' from an inflationary bank then it is easy for people willing to face debt to obtain resources. Those that are unwilling to get into debt then face hardships, since they cannot gain property. At its most extreme, this type of banking results in a choice between obtaining property (and necessarily being in debt) and having nothing; we cannot both have (obtain) property and be free of debt.

We can be free and secure at the same time with no Government

Freedom is peaceful.

Since it is costly in any civilised Society to commit a crime, then in a free Society (where no crimes are allowed) there will be disincentives against committing crimes. True freedom will not allow crimes because free people are able to defend themselves, either individually or collectively. It would be difficult to be a criminal in a free Society because there is no legal privilege to entitle your actions, no Government and no crime is permitted.

A free Society would not allow taxation, or any form of coercion, by definition.

It is best to get rid of the Government if we have the option to do so

We are not being assisted by someone if we have no choice enabling us to refuse (the help) and especially if we are being forced to pay. A protection racket is harmful to its victims. We are victims of the Government.

We do more harm than good when we use coercion, almost always. We would be better off without the Government, they are not needed.

Proportional voting accelerates freedom because it gives voters more choice

If there is only one winner in a constituency seat then people will feel constrained to vote for one of the leading parties, be it of the left or right. This means that minority parties are excluded as people do not want to risk wasting their vote.

The advantage of enabling minority parties to do well is that it makes it possible (for voters) to enforce their core beliefs without imposing extraneous violations of liberty which they do not support. A voter that is illiberal in a particular area is able to be liberal in all others, provided they get their particular wishes enforced, or at least represented, they are not compelled to support a collection of prejudices, only their own.

We use the Government to make laws, to compel and prevent certain actions. If we can do this with precision, allowing all other freedoms where possible then this leads to more freedom and a smaller State. Excluding minority parties, as with existing voting systems, which are not proportional, reduces freedom because we have no choice but to support a party that is tyrannical in ways which we do not like.

If money is considered to be anything that can pay taxes then banks print money

As a consequence of the deposit guarantee, bank liabilities are supported by the State and, by extension, the taxpayer. No other business has the advantage of their liabilities being sponsored in this way by the State. It means that, in spite of risky business practices, banks can continue to stay in business even when they might otherwise be considered insolvent.

State liabilities can, of course, be used to settle a tax debt which makes it more difficult for the rest of the population to pay their taxes, as they are not able to issue State liabilities and must use their cash savings. Being able to issue State liabilities means that we have an advantage over those that do not have this ability, taxes are not a problem and people will pay (cash) to be given the State liabilities. So, the bank deposits can easily be converted, sold, if the need arises, into 'real' cash.

The Government will accept, not only cash, but also bank deposits (and perhaps also Treasuries, and even perhaps the promise of State services, such as healthcare or a pension) to settle a tax debt.

If the credit of a business is guaranteed, there is no (at least certainly, less) reason to execute good business practices, it will always be possible to make an income by selling your credit, if it can settle taxes. Bank credit will always have value if it can be used to settle tax debts. Bank credit is State credit which has financial value due to it being a suitable form of payment to settle a tax debt.

In general terms, money is (defined to be) the most commonly circulating medium of account, specifically in fiat economies we see that it will be the medium decreed by the State to have special value, hence a fiat currency. So, (in most economies) money is anything which can be used (is acceptable to the Government) to settle a tax debt and hence includes all State liabilities, we can assume, not only cash notes and coins.

The deposit guarantee gives value to bank credit which causes inflation and reduces the value of cash

Deposit insurance causes inflation.

If deposits are guaranteed then there is never a reason to fear a bank run and customers will always leave their money on deposit. This means that the banks cannot go bust in the conventional sense which results in price inflation because the value of bank credit is (mandated to be) equivalent to that of cash. The deposit guarantee gives bank credit value and subsequently reduces the value of existing notes and coins, there is less premium in holding cash as a result.

When banks are given a banking licence it enables them to cause inflation

Banks (as well as the Government) are permitted to increase the money supply, if they have a banking license. It is not only Governments that are able to increase the money supply. To be given deposit insurance is to enable banks to cause price inflation.

Not everyone is aware that the banks increase the money supply

Banking is fraud because there is deception (deliberate or otherwise) which leads to economic, or material gain. People are not aware that the banks have the legal entitlement to increase the money supply, and it is to the advantage of the banks that it remains like that because (we can presume) people would not tolerate the arrangement, they would vote against it. There is no particular fraud at an individual, local level, the fraud happens Nationally, globally across the entire economy and political jurisdiction. It is a fraud because people would prefer Government to be without it, if possible, were they to know about it.

Banking is fraud not at an individual level but because people do not know that banks are able to increase the money supply. It is fraudulent (or deceitful) not to inform the public, given that they assume only the Government is able to increase the money supply. It is better to inform our customers and associates of the arrangement between us, if there is a possibility of misunderstanding. Some people might not realise that the banks increase the money supply.

There is nothing special about cash to make it valuable above bank credit

In a fiat economy the physical nature of the money is not the crucial feature, instead it is the contract or promise encapsulated in the unit of account. Cash is arbitrarily valuable, it can be used to cancel a tax liability if there is no disincentive against paying taxes, and no one goes to gaol then there would be no value in a fiat currency. If it becomes too difficult to collect taxes then the Government will lose power and the underground black economy will thrive.

Given that there is nothing inherent in cash which gives it value, only what it represents then we see that (it makes sense that) bank credit has the same value since it performs the same role, being able to extinguish a taxation debt. There is nothing special about cash to make it especially valuable as compared against bank credit.

Fractional reserve banking would not be possible without taxation because the money would be worthless

Bank credit is valuable only because of the deposit guarantee. The deposit guarantee makes it valuable because then if the Government is to refuse it in the payment of taxes, it will be being a hypocrite.

The deposit guarantee makes bank credit valuable because it makes it suitable for the payment of taxes, without the Government and taxation bank credit would be worth nothing, as with fiat cash. Bank credit is valuable only because of the Government and taxation, it is a suitable substitute for cash because of the guarantee. It is the combination of taxation and the deposit guarantee that makes bank credit worth more than nothing.

Printing credit is equally damaging in terms of prices as it is to print cash

Taxes aren't legitimate, but since we have taxes and a fiat currency it is not right (fair and equitable) that some organisations are allowed to increase the money supply, to the exclusion of others. Printing money by banks is not a violation of property rights because it is not aggressive but it is not fair, equitable that they have this exclusive (legal) privilege.

People are not (very) concerned about bank inflation unless they are printing bank notes in a fashion identical to a typical counterfeiter. They think banknotes (legal tender) are the only form of 'real' money.

There is no reason to care about the relative quantities of narrow money to broad, all that matters (and all that affects prices) is the sum of bank deposits plus the small sum of money (cash) outside the banking system. It is no worse, in economic terms, for a bank or institution to print cash than it is for them to issue credit, if they have a deposit guarantee; it is no less bad to print credit, printing credit is equally damaging.

If bank deposits are guaranteed then they will always be a suitable form of payment to settle tax debts

Banks do not collapse even though they have insufficient reserves for the reason that, because of deposit insurance, bank deposits are like cash and are suitable payment to the Government for taxes. Bank deposits become a form of money (recognised by the Government and suitable payment for taxes) because of the guarantee. Bank deposits are money because the Government declares them to be so.

If the value of bank deposits is guaranteed by the State then they will always be suitable for the payment of taxes.

If bank deposits are guaranteed then they will be suitable for the payment of taxes.

A fiduciary medium or commodity (in a fiat economy, where the fiat currency is prevalent and dominant) has value if it can settle tax debts. Bank credit is able to settle tax debts because it is guaranteed, the guarantee must, we can assume, mean that it will be suitable to settle tax debts. It would be a contradiction for the credit to be guaranteed by the State and to not be suitable in the payment of taxes. If bank credit is not acceptable to the State in the payment of taxes then we can say that it is not truly guaranteed, conversely if the guarantee is true then it must always be a suitable medium with which to settle tax debts.

A behaviour is not ethical if it is not being returned and reciprocated

Taxation is not ethical, it violates the ethic of reciprocity because no one wants to be taxed, by definition and we are not able to tax the Government. Ethical behaviours are ones that are reciprocated.

Credit is money if it is guaranteed by the Government

A banking licence turns credit into money. The Government can turn anything into money, as it can collect taxes which makes fiat currencies valuable. Banks can print money (valuable fiduciary media) because they have been permitted to do so by the Government. Credit becomes money if it is guaranteed by the Government.