This is an interesting article which helps you think differently on role of money and banking in a society. Both money and banks are seen as wealth creators and we want more and more of both. However, this is not how both began to emerge. The idea for money and banks was to help communities and foster local commerce.
Interestingly, we are seeing some experiments which take us to the original roles of money and banks:
Bitcoin was conceived as a modern solution to an ages-old problem: How can two parties agree on and verify an exchange of value? In this sense, Bitcoin is an effective technology, in that it trains the massive processing power of distributed personal computers on the same situation that paper currency was built to resolve.
But in important ways, Bitcoin transposes some of the shortcomings of traditional currency onto the digital realm. It ignores a whole host of questions about the potential to reimagine what money can be designed to emphasize: What sorts of money will encourage admirable human behavior? What sorts of money systems will encourage trust, reenergize local commerce, favor peer-to-peer value exchange, and transcend the growth requirement? In short, how can money be less an extractor of value and more a utility for its exchange?
Around the world, people have proposed experimental, tentative answers to these questions. What follows are three ways that people have toyed with rearranging the priorities of transactions—all of which would encourage a radical reimagination of what money is and can do.
The three experiments talk about berkshares, favor bank and banking based on community buy in..