So you are now arguing that it's the paper that the money could theoretically be printed on, or the magnetic flux patterns on a computer's disk, or the ink on the central bank's ledger that means it's not created out of nothing? I suggest if you want to see the sort of confusion people are having you look in Archive 1 at   comments, in fact I'm going to put the comment here. This is from someone who is an editor of the QE page and declares they have a BS Economics 2006, MA Applied Economics 2008 and work as Investment Analyst at 60B institutional fund"  "Banks started to hold excess reserves after Lehman collapse, essentially as a response to the central bank liquidity measures at the time. That is where the money (600B+) came from, primary dealers gave it to the central bank/fed. Myself and other people have posted several authoritative references to the actual mechanics of QE, yet you still insist that you're correct because you read it in a BBC news article. Again, there is no money created out of thin air to fund the fed purchases. It's been proved over and over."
Flux patterns on computer disk are in no way tangible assets that can be constituted as not nothing in this context.