ARNOLD KLING
August 14, 2011
The Top Political Contributors
August 11, 2011
Gender and the New Commanding Heights
August 11, 2011
Jamie Galbraith Makes an Assumption
August 11, 2011
Macroeconometrics: The Science of Hubris
August 10, 2011
Real and Nominal Bond Yields
BRYAN CAPLAN
August 14, 2011
The Effect of Thumb Sucking on Income
August 12, 2011
The Voice of Cold, Hard Truth to All Would-Be Educators
August 12, 2011
Ability, Morality, and Prosperity: A Paper and a Report
August 11, 2011
The Theory of Time and Frittering
August 10, 2011
Male Variance and the Remnants of the Gender Gap
DAVID HENDERSON
August 9, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken", Part Two
August 8, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken"
August 5, 2011
James Bovard on the Peace Corps
August 4, 2011
Summers Way Off on FDR and 1941
August 3, 2011
The "Amazon" Tax


How does reducing capital requirements on just new loans help much? My image of a commercial bank is that it's usually pretty much maxed out; if it has a lot of money sitting around to lend, it lends it. If the value of those loans drops, your assets-to-debt ratio drops, and you can't make new loans. If I say new loans are subject to a lower equity requirement, but the old loans are still subject to the old one, you still can't make new loans. If I say capital requirements are now 8% instead of 10%, period, you now have a bunch of unencumbered assets with which to make new loans.
Am I just way, way off in my mental model?