82,891
edits
CASS Anatomy: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
*Now this special case creates a [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] problem, because when you look after something, you’re not meant to take ownership of it. You’'re just a {{tag|custodian}}. But as noted above, you ''can’t'' "just look after" someone else’s cash: Cash is special. Just by holding it, you own it. | *Now this special case creates a [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] problem, because when you look after something, you’re not meant to take ownership of it. You’'re just a {{tag|custodian}}. But as noted above, you ''can’t'' "just look after" someone else’s cash: Cash is special. Just by holding it, you own it. | ||
*This necessitates two things: | *This necessitates two things: | ||
**''First'': A person agreeing to look after your money can’t keep it: it must pass it on to someone else to look after, and | **''First'': A person agreeing to look after your money can’t keep it: it must pass it on to someone else to look after, and since — hang on: that creates an infinite regression doesn’t it? — therefore... | ||
**''Second'': there needs to be one class of special people who ''are'' allowed to look after your money by keeping it for themselves but promising to pay it back when you want it. | |||
**And so, lo and behold, there are: they are called ''{{tag|bank}}s''. | **And so, lo and behold, there are: they are called '''{{tag|bank}}s'''. | ||
** | **When you deposit your money with a bank you have its credit risk. But, as we all now know, banks are special: they’re carefully regulated, well capitalised and generally designed to be appropriate places to look after your money. | ||
{{box| | {{box| | ||