That Forbes article, as far as I can tell, maybe I didn’t finish it, didn’t mention agreeing to lend out your savings by agreeing not to take it back before a period of time. I think it had a different definition of “bank” than I do, too. I don’t see how lending based on just a fraction of the savings is not a money multiplier, either. The fact that that money has to be paid back, essentially bringing back down the money supply, is demonstrated by the saw tooth money supply graphs before the federal reserve, I guess. I don’t think he mentions that the central bank keeps the equilibrium from happening by its system of inflation. I know this is from lending to the banks or the open market–the open market being the more culpable–the writer doesn’t mention all that, though, does he?