Frac. res. banking is the worst way to get inflation

Fractional reserve banking enables the government to have inflation and erode savings. But sometimes it might be preferable to allow some degree of inflation... we might argue that this is somewhat progressive because it means that the rich who have savings are penalised in favour of the poor who have no money. Although this is generally not the case (the rich have non-money assets such as real estate) there is nevertheless an argument to say that some inflation is good. So the 'problem' with fractional reserve banking is not that it causes inflation but that the means by which the inflation is generated is not optimal. There are almost unlimited different methods by which inflation can be produced by the state... frb is about the worst possible choice to make. If inflation is good then there are many better ways for the government to produce inflation than frb. Fractional reserve banking is about the worst way for the government to produce inflation.

Anything other than full res. banking is inflationary

If a bank makes loans with insufficient reserves this is liable to cause inflation... especially when there is deposit insurance. The problem with deposit insurance is that it encourages banks to make loans which are not fully backed. They are encouraged to practice fractional reserve banking which means they have less than full reserves. If there is not full reserves (and no bank run) then banks are creating an excess of currency. Inflation is caused whenever it is possible for a bank to practice fractional-reserve banking. Banks cause inflation if they are not full reserve banks.

Fractional reserve banking causes poverty

Fractional reserve banking causes homelessness because it enables people to get into debt and purchase property which would otherwise be too expensive for them. The result of this is that house prices in general increase to the point where people who are not willing to get into debt cannot afford them. Fractional reserve banking makes houses too expensive for people who are not willing to get into debt. The problem with fractional reserve banking (frb) is that it makes assets such as housing too expensive for people who do not want to get into debt. Frb makes housing expensive which causes poverty and homelessness. Frb causes poverty because people who do not get into debt cannot afford to obtain assets such as housing.

Only the left want to change banking

Assuming that it is not good for private firms to have the ability to increase the money supply (that banking is bad) then we would assume most people would be opposed to how banking operates. If we do not want to allow private firms to be able to cause inflation we would want to change the system. If we want a 'sound' currency. Because the government allows the banks to inflate the currency it is inconsistent to be supportive of the government and for sound money. We cannot support the government if we support sound money. But it is not so important that we are able to support the government. (It is not vital that we are able to support the government.) If being against the government is not a problem for your philosophy then the currency arrangement with banking is fine. We only have a problem with banking if we object to the role of the government in enabling the banks to cause inflation. If we are fine with the role of the government in allowing the banks to cause inflation then we have no objection to banking. Only people who support the government want to change banking.

The government is letting banks print money

One of the functions of government is to protect the people from out-of-control inflation. If there is too much inflation the economy cannot function properly and there can be no civilisation. We require a stable currency for commerce to work properly. But if the banks are able to increase the money supply at will due to their being insured by the government then we will have excessive inflation. We have excessive inflation because the government provides deposit insurance to the banks and enables them to engage in fractional-reserve banking. It is the fault of the government that banks are able to increase the money supply and it is the role of government to protect the people from inflation. The government has a responsibility to stop inflation even if it is being committed by the banks. Not even the banks should be able to cause inflation. The government should stop the banks from causing inflation if it is being consistent in protecting the people from economic hardship. It is one of the functions of government to prevent inflation and it is failing to do so.

Banks cannot legally print money

Despite the fact there have been no arrests it is a crime to counterfeit the currency and increase the money supply. The only exception to this rule is that the government can print money. An organisation such as a commercial bank with private assets is not the government and so cannot legally print money. Only the government can legally print money and so the banks are breaking the law when they practice (guaranteed) fractional-reserve banking. If frb is not guaranteed by the government and banks can fail this is not counterfeiting. It could be considered to be fraudulent but it is not counterfeiting because it does not increase the money supply. Banks are only committing a crime if they have deposit insurance and are guaranteed. Fractional-reserve banking is a crime unless the bank is not guaranteed by the government and can fail. If there is deposit insurance then frb is a crime. It is a crime for banks to increase the money supply.

It is strange that voters let banks print money

The problem with banking is that the voters enable banks to increase the money supply which leads to inflation. There is no reason why the voters are better off enabling the banks to act in this manner. If it is good to have a fiat currency then it is possible for only the government to print money. There is no reason why voters (unless they are a bank) would want the banks to print money.