Having read most of the comments here, I come to the conclusion that y'all need to start comprehending the difference between 'cash' and 'bank money', and no, I don't mean the conspiracy theory laden bullshit spread around by the most terrible Zeitgeist movies. I mean the real deal. Here, a paper on it:

http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue80/Huber80.pdf Huber, Joseph - Split-circuit reserve banking - functioning, dysfunctions and future perspectives

Abstract:
"This paper first provides a detailed outline of how the present money system works. This then serves as a backdrop to discuss a number of orthodox fallacies and heterodox flaws in money theory, followed by a summary of the dysfunctions of split-circuit reserve banking and a brief outlook on the perspective of a single-circuit sovereign money system."

Keywords; monetary economics, money theory, credit creation, banking theory,
fractional reserve banking, monetary policy, monetary reform

One may find comments on the paper here:

https://rwer.wordpress.com/comments-on-rwer-issue-no-80/

I'll quote part of the paper here, and I'd strongly recommend reading all of it if you want to have any understanding of modern economics at all:

"[...]

Modern money is non-cash

As far as traditional solid cash (banknotes and coins) is still in use, cash circulation represents a third circuit. In contrast to precious-metal coins, and like reserves, cash is token fiat money today. But rather than circulating between central bank accounts (reserves) or between bank accounts (bankmoney), traditional solid cash circulates from hand to hand in public circulation, without needing banks, or central banks respectively, as a trusted third party. Regarding the future of money, modern digital cash based on some form of blockchain technology might become a modern equivalent of traditional cash (notwithstanding the question of who will issue and control the stock of such digital currency). In any case, in a basically cashless money system based on money-on-account, traditional cash is no longer of defining relevance.

Within the frame of reserve banking, cash and money-on-account must not be confused as is done by negligent speak, and even by official accounting standards.¹ At source, modern money is non-cash, a credit entry into a respective account. In the split-circuit structure, this applies to both bankmoney and central bank money. Traditional solid cash (coins, notes) has become a residual technical subset of the bankmoney in circulation, withdrawn from or exchanged back into a bank giro account.

Since about the 1920 – 60s, when bankmoney was definitely driving out solid cash in the course of the general dissemination of cashless payment practices, cash has no longer been constitutive of the money system. Cash now represents about 3 – 15% of the stock of money (M1), depending on the country, and a continued declining share in the long run. When referring to broad money aggregates (M2/3/4 which include, for example, deposit savings and money market fund shares) cash amounts to only 2 – 10%. Accordingly, cash can now largely be excluded from monetary system analysis (in spite of its present role as an effective hindrance to misguided negative interest rate policies of central banks). The means of payment that dominates everything today is bankmoney with its share of 90 – 98% in the entire money supply.

[...]

---

¹ Cf. Financial Accounting Standards Board: FASB Accounting Standards Codification, Topic 305-2011, Cash and Cash Equivalents. The same in US GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). For a critical assessment see Schemmann, Michael. 2012. Accounting Perversion in Bank Financial Statements. The Root Cause of Financial Crises, IICPA Publications.

[...]

[...]"