Lending to the bank
"This will happen automatically when you open an interest-bearing account with a bank.   You didn't think that banks just kept all that cash in a vault somewhere, did you?  That's not the way modern banking works.   Today (and for a long, long time) banks will keep only a small fraction of their deposits on hand (called the ""reserve"") to fund daily withdrawals and other operations.  The rest they routinely lend out to other customers, which is how they pay for their operations (someone has to pay all those tellers, branch managers, loan officers) and pay interest on your deposits, as well as a profit for their owners (it's not a charity service).  The fees charged for loan origination, as well as the difference between the loan interest rate and the deposit rate, make up the profit.   Banks rarely hold their own loans.  Instead, they will sell the loans in portfolios to investors, sometimes retaining servicing rights (they continue to collect the payments and pass them on) and sometimes not (the payments are now due to someone else).  This allows them to make more loans.   Banks may sometimes not have enough capital on hand.  In this case, they can make inter-bank loans to meet their short-term needs.  In some cases, they'll take those loans from a government central bank.  In the US, this is ""The Fed"", or the Federal Reserve Bank.   In the US, back around the late 1920's, and again in the 1980's some banks experienced a ""run"", or a situation where people lost confidence in the bank and wanted to withdraw their money.  This caused the bank to have insufficient funds to support the withdrawals, so not everyone got their money.  People panicked, and others wanted to take their money out, which caused the situation to snowball.  This is how many banks failed.  (In the '80s, it was savings-and-loans that failed - still a kind of ""bank"".)  Today, we have the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) to protect depositors.  In the crashes in the early 2000's, many banks closed up one night and opened the next in a conservatorship, and then were literally doing business as a new bank without depositors (necessarily) even knowing.  This protected the consumers.  The bank (as a company) and its owners were not protected." The easiest way would be to set up a common savings account. Most of them pay some meager interest rate, and over one night it would be especially meager.  A Certificate of Deposit is another way, but you'd have to lock the funds in for an extended period of time.
Construction loans have an entirely set of rules and factors than mortgages and that's hard to reconcile into one instrument.  Also, I'm guessing the bank would be a bit shy about giving a commitment to a home loan before they have any information about how the construction process is going.  There would have to be a ton of contingencies put into mortgage and they probably can't account for everything. The bank will consider total of both parties income for the loan qualification. Provided both parties will be listed on the mortgage. I have a couple of questions regarding Bank Loans.  1.) can they ever trade above par? From my understanding, most get called due to refinancing.  2.) if a bank loan has a floor attached to it that's tied to LIBOR, say 100bps, and that floor is pierced, does the floor automatically disappear, or does that specific loan need to be refinanced before the floor can be done away with? Additionally, should an investor be more cautious when investing in a bank loan without a floor? With regard to the second half of my question, I would think an investor would demand a higher yield without the assurance of a floor. It's complicated. Really, there's no solid answer for your question. Everybody's risk tolerance and time horizon is going to be different. Those who can take on more risk can take on lower-grade C-G loans at Lending Club. Those with less risk tolerance should emphasize As and Bs. Large businesses are, in every model, considered to be less likely to default, and Lehman brothers etc notwithstanding, this is historically correct.    However, this is still stupid, since the diversification of lending money to many small businesses is way better.  This, in turn, is not mapped properly by the regulations on reserve capital.    Tl;dr:  Banks get punished by regulations if they lend money to small institutions instead of large ones. #####&amp;#009;  ######&amp;#009;  ####&amp;#009;  [**History of banking**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History%20of%20banking): [](#sfw)   ---  &gt;The __history of banking__ begins with the first prototype [banks](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank) of [merchants](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant) of the ancient world, which made [grain loans](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loan) to farmers and traders who carried goods between cities. This began around 2000 BC in [Assyria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyria) and [Babylonia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonia). Later, in [ancient Greece](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece) and during the [Roman Empire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire), lenders based in temples made loans and added two important innovations: they accepted [deposits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deposit_account) and [changed money](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_de_change). Archaeology from this period in [ancient China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_China#Ancient_China) and [India](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India) also shows evidence of [money lending](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loan) activity.  &gt;====  &gt;[**Image**](https://i.imgur.com/IWCAqkG.jpg) [^(i)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Balance_sheet_Mesopotamia_Louvre_AO6036.jpg)  ---  ^Interesting: [^Banking ^in ^India](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banking_in_India) ^| [^History ^of ^banking ^in ^China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking_in_China) ^| [^History ^of ^banking ^in ^Bangladesh](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking_in_Bangladesh) ^| [^Banking ^in ^the ^United ^States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banking_in_the_United_States)   ^Parent ^commenter ^can [^toggle ^NSFW](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&amp;subject=AutoWikibot NSFW toggle&amp;message=%2Btoggle-nsfw+cjk5935) ^or[](#or) [^delete](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&amp;subject=AutoWikibot Deletion&amp;message=%2Bdelete+cjk5935)^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| [^(FAQs)](http://www.np.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/wiki/index) ^| [^Mods](http://www.np.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/comments/1x013o/for_moderators_switches_commands_and_css/) ^| [^Magic ^Words](http://www.np.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/comments/1ux484/ask_wikibot/) When you borrow from a bank, there are secured loans, as with a mortgage, or unsecured lines of credit, usually a more reasonable amount of money, but also based on income.  You just asked about a private loan. It depends on the person and your relationship. If you need money to pay the rent, you might not be the best person to lend money to. If you ask a friend or relative, they may lend you money without asking its purpose. Your basic assumption is incorrect. You don't normally go to a bank to borrow money to invest, but brokerages do it all the time. It is called trading on margin. "Aside of ""don't lend money to friends"" a good idea is to have a written contract that states the sum, the due date, the interest (if any). Having the loan on paper makes it more real and harder to ""forget"". The third party is not necessary - anyone can have a bank loan for more than $10K by signing a contract with a bank without any third party." Banks are not your friends, they are not performing services for you because they like you. They are a business, and they make money by borrowing money from you at low interest and loaning it out at higher interest. They are trying to persuade you to deposit more money (however briefly) in their bank so they can loan out more money. They are probably also counting on the fact that most folks won't go to the trouble of setting up accounts at multiple banks with the interlocking automatic transfers, in order to meet the required deposit threshold. That lets them save on the interest payments to consumers that are individually tiny, but significant in the aggregate. You walk into the finance company with a written quote from the supplier for the equipment you want to buy. You then fill out forms and sign a promissory note. The finance company then writes out a check to the supplier for the amount of the quoted equipment. Usually you need to provide at least 3 things: They will require you to provide your social security number and sign a document allowing them to check your credit history which they will look up using the social security number. Note that banks will generally give better rates on a personal loan than a finance company. People usually only use finance companies when their credit is so bad that a bank will not loan them money. Heating and cooling companies that provide equipment will often loan the money to buy that equipment. As a point of advice, it is generally poor financial management to take out personal loans and may indicate a person that is wasting money or be in financial difficulties. For personal loan items (furniture, cars, clothing, jewelry, etc) you are far better off saving money to buy the item, not borrowing beyond your means. If you need a new furnace and it is an emergency, for example, if it were winter (which it is not) and your furnace could not be repaired, then that might justifiable. But borrowing money at a high rate to just upgrade a furnace or get a luxury like AC is unwise. My doubt is whether Govt./Reserve Bank of India gives any explicit incentives to banks to offer cheaper home loans ? Currently NO. In the past Loan against GOLD was considered priority sector lending [Loans to poor and agriculture etc]. Every Bank need to lead around 25% to priority sector. Hence quite a few Banks gave loans relatively cheaper to todays rate rather than giving it as Farm loan that almost never get recovered. It is no longer the case now as Loan against GOLD is not considered priority lending. If it were just demand/supply, I feel that gold loans should have been cheaper  It is demand and supply. There are quite a few reasons for this; In terms of operations, banks are indifferent to inflation. Short rates except right before a recession or near-recession are always lower than long rates, regardless of inflation level, assuming no quotas or price controls. Banks produce credit by borrowing short to lend long, so as long as short rates are lower than long rates, they can be expected to produce loans, again assuming no quotas or price controls. In short, from the banks' perspective, inflation does not affect their desire to produce credit. I think my main problem with this idea is that we'd be trading the boom bust lending cycle for the boom bust political cycle. The banks are pretty heavily regulated as it is, and putting all the power back in the hands of our government frightens me a little bit. i think keensian is right.  krudeman is wrong.   why was it anybody could get a loan from a bank to buy a house then during the bubble boom?  u telling me there were that much savings and reserve in the system?  m2 credit lead m1.  banks can create money out of nothing by writing loans.