This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
I agree with this view. I don't see the need for two separate pages especially given the brevity of this one. Any objections to merge the two pages? Stanjourdan (talk) 21:33, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm late to the party, but a "narrow bank"s main difference is that narrow banks only park money with the central bank or government treasury (thus the term 'narrow') using fiduciary media. Full-reserve banks match the term length of deposits with loans, but may loan out to more than just the government or central bank, OR full-reserve banks may bank in terms of other assets than fiduciary media (the most common example being full-reserve banking in gold). The Narrow Bank of New York, and recent Custodia Bank court case show the difference between the two. I would favor not only 'unmerging' this, but furthermore removing the note that the Chicago Plan (in the Chicago Plan page) was similar to narrow banking. Fephisto (talk) 12:17, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]