Main content
Finance and capital markets
Course: Finance and capital markets > Unit 8
Lesson 1: Banking and money- Banking 1
- Banking 2: A bank's income statement
- Banking 3: Fractional reserve banking
- Banking 4: Multiplier effect and the money supply
- Banking 5: Introduction to bank notes
- Banking 6: Bank notes and checks
- Banking 7: Giving out loans without giving out gold
- Banking 8: Reserve ratios
- Banking 9: More on reserve ratios (bad sound)
- Banking 10: Introduction to leverage (bad sound)
- Banking 11: A reserve bank
- Banking 12: Treasuries (government debt)
- Banking 13: Open market operations
- Banking 14: Fed funds rate
- Banking 15: More on the Fed funds rate
- Banking 16: Why target rates vs. money supply
- Banking 17: What happened to the gold?
- Banking 18: Big picture discussion
- The discount rate
- Repurchase agreements (repo transactions)
- Federal Reserve balance sheet
- Fractional Reserve banking commentary 1
- FRB commentary 2: Deposit insurance
- FRB commentary 3: Big picture
- LIBOR
© 2023 Khan AcademyTerms of usePrivacy PolicyCookie Notice
Banking 4: Multiplier effect and the money supply
How "money" is created in a fractional reserve banking system. M0 and M1 definitions of the money suppy. The multiplier effect. Created by Sal Khan.
Want to join the conversation?
- It still sounds like a pyramid scheme... Just replace 'good investment' with 'recruiting more investors'. Both rely on people to bring more money into the system. Surely this would eventually collapse?(4 votes)
- The difference between this model and a Ponzi scheme is in what happens between the deposit and the loan. Ponzi schemes are merely wealth transfers: no one does any additional work, no additional value is created, nothing is done to improve the economy. Good investments, on the other hand, DO provide a value-added. They do provide wealth, and create additional value. It's a perfectly sustainable model, assuming that everyone does not, all at once, decide that banks are not a safe place to keep their money (which sometimes happens, which is one of the functions of the FDIC and the NCUA.(8 votes)
- Why does Mr Khan have to stop his videos to go onto the next one in which he re-explains what happened in the previous one, couldn't he just make one really long, continuous video for a single topic?(2 votes)
- In his book he explains that effective attention spans are 10 to 15 minutes. Some people can go longer, come lose concentration.(4 votes)
- do you mean that deflation is meaning that the economy is growing upward in term of productivity?
and inflation represents the productivity going downward in all economic field of this island you created.(3 votes)- In this context he just meant, the good investments lead to wealth creation without diluting the value of per unit money. So there is more money (often a source of inflation) still its value per unit hasn't gone down contrary to what inflation does. Inflation/deflation and their impact is out of context here. Just speaking my mind and ofcourse i am not an expert :-)(2 votes)
- What if I get a loan to do something that doesn't increase wealth? Say I get a loan to start a career as a comedian. That wouldn't actually lead to more production, but I would still be getting paid for my services, so how would this impact wealth? Am I just causing inflation?(2 votes)
- No, assuming people are willing to pay to listen to you, you are providing a service, and Gross Domestic Product is the sum of goods and services. So, you aren't contributing to inflation.(3 votes)
- I don't believe that gold is an abstract symbol for wealth. Gold is wealth in its own right. Gold is a tangible item that provides a function, just like an automobile. An automobile provides transportation, status, shelter from the elements, etc for the owner. Gold facilitates the transfer, incrimintalization, and storage of value for its owner. Paper money on the other hand facilitates the transfer and incrimintalization but allows for the manipulation of value in a way that gold does not. Isn't that true?(2 votes)
- What if people decided that gold really was worthless and that you could not buy apples with gold, you could not pay your rent with gold, essentially that gold was worth about as much sand. (We'll ignore there's a market for sand). You state that gold "is a tangible item that provides a function" and it does, but only if there exists a consensus that gold is worth something at all.
I'm not entirely sure by what you mean when you say that the value for paper money can be manipulated because you could have different countries who all have different kinds of gold coin and you could have a foreign exchange simply in gold coins and even with purely physical representation the relative value of each country's gold coin could change (be "manipulated").
Perhaps a handy way to think about it is to think about trust. A currency has value so long as you 'trust' that somebody will also think it has value and thus would be willing to trade you something for it. Gold coins and paper money fulfill the same roles. (Yes, gold can be used in electronics and other things but that's not what we're talking about).(3 votes)
- It seems to me that banks benifit it's community. Doesn't it?(2 votes)
- what happen to the people who died but saved money in bank and nobody knows it. where would those go?(2 votes)
- People usually have will of testament which allocates the money in the bank after someone dies. Even if they did not have a will, the state will give the money to next of kin if there is one. Either the children or a related family member. This is what happens in the United States.(1 vote)
- I have a big problem to understand this video
We have 1000 peaces of gold in the system at the beginning 10% of them was kept as reserve, then the bank lent 900 golds to investor who wanted to invest in irrigation project
then the worker who are paid by the investor put back 900 as check able deposit..
The bank again kept 10% as reserve and lent out 810 golds....
my problem started when he said that M1 represents the total gold amount that have been put as check able deposit
ok great.. but how do we consider this amount as a real wealth??
it is not.. the real amount is only 1000 golds
the rest are loans..
Even if those project are generating profit these profits must be flow back to the bank in order to settle their loans..
Please any one can help me to understand this situation?(2 votes)- The real wealth is not the gold coins ( not the 2710 nor the 1000)...the real wealth are the apples and the coins are a way of accounting for that by proxy.(1 vote)
- Sal I disagree with your conclusion that M1 is "real". If everyone that had their gold pieces deposited in their bank accounts demanded their 2710 gold (M1), the bank would only be able to fulfill the demand up to 1000 gold (M0). After the bank exhausted the 1000 gold they would have zero. They would need to call in loans and the system risks collapse. I think it may be better to say that M0 represents "absolute" gold, M1 represents "dependent" gold - dependent upon the banks abiity to collect it. Do you agree with me Sal ?(2 votes)
- There is a concept in accounting called "going concern" which assumes a company will continue to be solvent and the same assumption s behind the central banking... as long as people have faith in the central bank and the government, no one would ask for their 2710 coins or notes. In any case if everyone asks for their 2710 coins they would anyway be worthless ( in this scenario as this scenario would only play out in case there is no faith in the system or its creations)(1 vote)
- Why are all the deposits from the bank's clients in the checking account or is the principle more of a practical one?(1 vote)
- You could add savings and money market accounts, but that would just make the discussion a lot more complicated without adding any better understanding.(2 votes)
Video transcript
Let's think a little
bit about what happened in the last video. I'll review again
these different notions of money supply. And then let's talk about
whether it's fair for people to think that they really have
the money that they have. So in the original video, after
the crop was harvested, the farmers deposited 1,000
gold pieces in my bank. Then I lent out 900 of those. I had to keep some reserves in
case those farmers wanted some of their money back. And I figured they would never
need more than 10% at a time. I lend it out. Someone has a great idea to
build an irrigation canal, so that more fields become usable
and get access to water. To build that irritation canal,
they take those 900 gold pieces, and they pay
a bunch of workers. Those workers now have
the gold pieces. They need someplace
safe to put it. They put it back in my bank. Now I get 900 gold pieces
of deposits. I put 10% aside again. And now I lend out
810 gold pieces. Let's say I lend it out for an
entrepreneur who wants to build a factory to build some
type of tools that might make the apple harvest more
efficient, or faster, or need less labor, or whatever. That entrepreneur takes those
810 gold pieces and pays the builder in the town. And then the builder now has 810
gold pieces, and then he gives the money back
to me in my bank. Because I'm the safest
place to keep it. I stop the chain there. You can keep going on and on. Although there is some end. Notice that these values
get smaller and smaller every time. And we'll do a little bit of
math on that to figure out how far it can go. But then I take the builder's
money, and I said, well, you know, this banking idea's
a new idea to me. I'm just going to leave
it all as reserves. I want to see how it all plays
out first. So then we said, how much money is
in the system? And it all depends on how
you define money. And we made one definition
of money called m0. In m0 we said-- we'll call this
our narrowest definition. And this is literally,
how much gold is there in the system. Or how much stuff is there in
the system that could be immediately used for conducting
a transaction. And I'm assuming, for the sake
of this argument, that none of these players actually kept any
gold in their pockets, or kept some cash in their wallets
for a rainy day. Although if they did, we would
included it in this calculation. I assume that everyone always
deposits their gold with Bank of Sal. So when we did that calculation
there was this 100 gold pieces of reserve that
we had set aside at first. Then 900 here. And then 810 here. And if you add those up,
you get 1,000 gold pieces in the system. Which makes a lot of sense,
because we originally had 1,000 gold pieces
in the system. In the example, at least as I
described it, we didn't have anyone discovering
any new gold. Nor was any a gold eaten or
destroyed in some way. So it makes sense that there
are 1,000 gold pieces. But then there's a more
interesting question. If you went around the city
and you asked everyone how much money they had, they'll
say, I have this much in my checking account with
the Bank of Sal. If you ask me how much money I
had, I would tell you how much is in my checking account. I actually have very little cash
in my wallet right now, if any of you are thinking
of mugging me. All of my money is in
a checking account. So if someone asked me how much
money do you have, I'd give that number. So if you went around the town,
and you asked everyone, how much money do you have, and
you added it up, you would get the total of the of their
checking accounts. And so we had 810 gold pieces
from the contractors, 900 gold pieces from the ditch diggers,
and then 1,000 gold pieces from the farmers. Let's see, 1,900 plus 810. You get 2,710 gold pieces collectively in checking accounts. And since I'm the only bank,
that's the total of my liabilities here. And we call that m1. And I'm calling these that for a
reason because these are the actual words that are used
by economists and our government officials. There's a couple of really
interesting questions here. One is how did a 1,000 gold
pieces get turned into 2,710. And then, this 2,710, does it
represent real wealth, or was this some kind of weird shell
game we played, and it represents some type of
weird pyramid scheme? How it got created-- we went
through the mechanics, right? Every time I set a little aside,
I lent some out, and then they deposited,
et cetera. That's how it got created. The interesting question is,
does it represent real wealth? The answer is it represents real
wealth if each of these investments were real
investments. So if this 900 gold pieces that
were used to build this irrigation ditch or whatever
it is, if that project actually does generate at
least 900 gold pieces of future wealth-- essentially you
could at least pay back the 900 gold pieces. It'll probably generate more
if it's a good project. But if it generates at least
900 gold pieces of future wealth, then this is a
real asset, right? This is a real asset. Likewise, if this factory really
does generate at least 810 gold pieces of future
wealth, if it really will allow us produce that much
more apples or gold or whatever, this is a
real asset here. So these people, this wealth,
really does exist. This 2,710 gold pieces of, quote unquote
wealth, really does exist as long as the projects that were
the justification for borrowing the money actually
do generate future wealth. So there's a couple of
things to realize. There are not 2,710 gold
pieces in this world. There only 1,000 physical
gold pieces. But if these projects are real
projects that are actually not mismanaged, they're not just
some type of pouring money into a hole type of project,
then we do have 2,710 gold pieces worth of wealth. And I really want to
stress this point. Remember gold isn't wealth
in of itself. Gold is used to represent
wealth. You cannot eat gold. You cannot live under gold. Gold will not transport
you someplace. Gold will not improve
your health. It's something that's used
to represent wealth. Sometimes people think it is
wealth itself, and that's actually a misconception. So this 2,710 perceived gold
pieces, that does represent real wealth, although
it doesn't represent real gold pieces. And once again you might say, oh
boy, this is some type of a shell game. But it's really not. As long as these investments
are good investments. Remember, these are wealth
generating investments. And notice, the money supply--
at least as we defined it with this m1-- it expanded to
facilitate real economic production. So as long as this factory does
generate wealth, or this irrigation ditch does generate
wealth, then the money supply did not grow faster than the
amount of wealth out there. If before a gold piece bought an
apple, now hopefully a gold piece will still buy an apple. In fact, and this is an
important thing to realize, if these investments are very good,
you're actually going to have-- let's say that
we used to produce 1,000 apples per year. Notice apples are real wealth. Apples are something that
you can consume. They will keep you living. And you can also view them as a
form of investment, because by eating them you're
able to do work. But anyway, let's say before all
of this investment started happening, our economy could
produce 1,000 apples. Now let's say that after this
irrigation ditch was produced, we go from being able to produce
1,000 apples to being able to produce 2,000
apples a year. And once again, a lot of
wealth was created. Remember, we only took 900 gold
pieces to build this. And all of a sudden
we're doubling. We're able to produce
another incremental 1,000 apples a year. Which, in our old economy, was
worth 1,000 gold pieces. So that actually will
definitely pay off. You borrowed 900 gold pieces
and this project will generate, not 1,000 gold
pieces in total, it'll actually generate the equivalent
of 1,000 gold pieces per year. It increases our production
of 1,000 apples per year. And likewise, let's say that
this takes us from 2,000 apples a year to 3,000. So let's think about it. Now in a a given year, how many apples are being produced? We used to only have 1,000
apples being produced. Now we have 3,000 apples being
produced, because these were really good investments. They really improved
our productivity. So now, if you say everyone in
the economy thinks that they have 2,710 gold pieces, or some
equivalent of them, and we can produce 3,000 apples, now
the money supply, 2,710, actually grew slower
than our wealth. Let me let me draw that out. Let's say money. Wealth. I think it's really important to
separate the two concepts. Money is used to transact wealth
or represent wealth. It is not wealth in
and of itself. And that has some important
philosophical underpinnings to it. It'll probably make you live
happier if you realize this difference. But before we had 1,000 gold
pieces, before the banking and this fractional reserve
system existed. And we had 1,000 apples
of wealth per year. And I'll go more into the
velocity of money. But after all this stuff
happened later, we had 2,710 perceived gold pieces. This was our m1 definition. Our m0, the actual physical
gold, was still 1,000. But how many apple do
we produce a year? We now produce 3,000 apples. So notice, the ratio
of gold to apples has actually improved. And now, if you think about it,
an apple is actually going to cost less gold. Before roughly you had one
gold piece per apple. Now you have less than one
gold piece per apple. So because of our
innovation, we actually experienced deflation. So you might have said,
all of this money was created out of nowhere. This money doesn't exist. This
will lead to inflation. But no, this is a very important
point, because the money was put to work in actual
productive investments that create wealth, that make
the pie bigger, or the pie of apples bigger, we actually
experience deflation. And our economy actually grew. And this was actually a very
very positive example. I'll see you in the
next video.