Talk:Free banking

message: In the United States section, it says "These laws made it unnecessary for new entrants to secure charters, each of which was subject to a vote by the state legislature with obvious opportunities for corruption." This should pretty obviously say necessary instead of unnecessary, right? Did I miss something?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.171.156.23 (talk) 21:50, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States? 

message: I've removed Murray Rothbard from the list of advocates of free-banking, he was a full-reserve and gold standard defender. --186.137.90.116 (talk) 05:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not so sure about that. In this article, for example, Rothbard comes out in favour of free banking. While he definitely supported full-reserve lending and gold, his view was that a free market would settle on exactly those things if left alone, because any fractional-reserve schemes wouldn't last without government intervention. --76.10.170.249 (talk) 23:59, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rothbard? 

message: I placed the tag after reading this sentence:
:The results was a spate of bank 'failures' that provides a blemish to an otherwise favourable record for free banking.
There are more examples and if someone objects to the tag being placed I will provide a more complete list. - FrancisTyers 17:07, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the tag is appropriate but a more thorough list would probably help in cleaning up POV issues. Night Gyr 16:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: In Britain, in colloquial use at least, "free banking" usually refers to the practice of banks offering accounts with no maintenance fees. I came here looking for information about that because of this BBC News story: where should I be looking instead? Loganberry (Talk) 03:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "free banking" usually refers to the practice of banks offering accounts with no maintenance fees
That's truly Orwellian.
See TANSTAAFL. Put otherwise : you will be charged one way or another, no matter which bank you choose, the bankers don't work for free. Arronax50 (talk) 00:25, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative use 

message: I've wikified this article. I'm not well versed in the subject matter of it though, so I would appreciate it if someone would check the links I've made to see if they point to the right page. Ma8thew 12:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikification 

message: By revert of version : During free banking tax have to be payed. Since, by the lede, no central bank exists, central bank currency can not be used for tax payment. Because the only available currency is private currency, private currency have to be used for tax payment. Despite this, in section Free banking#Characteristics of Free Banking, it is stated that central bank money should be used for tax payments. Since this contradicts the prerequisites of free banking, the section has to be adjusted. Najro (talk) 18:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In either case you need a WP:RS.  I'd like to see people take the subject seriously, but don't have time right now. Might ad a few books that are obviously missing.  Carol Moore 14:00, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tax payment 

message: I'm assuming there must be notable criticisms of free banking, would it not be worth having a section on them? 86.184.160.59 (talk) 13:06, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. Add it with citations. Toddst1 (talk) 20:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticisms

message: It would have to start with some factual material rather than fantasy.  In the U.S. the state banks ceased issuing notes in 1866 following the imposition of a 10% bank note tax in the aftermath of the civil war.  As happened when the Bank of England secured a monopoly of paper issue, the result was an immediate substitution of checking deposits.
GN842  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gn842 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: factual material

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:35, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: Dr. Carbo Valverde has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:
We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.
We believe Dr. Carbo Valverde has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:
*Reference : Santiago Carbo & David Humphrey & Francisco Rodriguez, 2010. "A revenue-based frontier measure of banking competition," Working Papers 10-9, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 15:26, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I second this. Ripple, Bitcoin and such should be mentioned. Remember costs are not just monetary, liquidity is also increasing. Transactions are becoming much faster (ergo "cheaper"). The total "opportunity cost" is decreasing for rapid banking and larger numbers of transactions as well. Endercase (talk) 00:37, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dr. Carbo Valverde's comment on this article 

message: bank of India 112.79.59.238 (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Akbar Ali