The $23B Question
Alberta families pay over $18,000/year in interest – $23B province-wide – on money created from their own assets at zero marginal cost
How It Works
What It Costs Alberta
Banks create liquidity from your asset You pay interest for 25 years
Your collateral and insurance bear the risk
Banks earn 30% of all after-tax profits
The system works – but families have no alternative
Until now
Eighteen thousand dollars per family, per year. Province-wide, twenty-three billion.
One hundred ninety-seven billion in household mortgages. Two hundred three billion in business
debt. Eighty-three billion in provincial debt. All paying interest on liquidity that banks
created from Albertans' own assets.
Banks built this system, and it works. But the family provides the collateral, the insurance,
and the income stream. The bank provides the ledger. Interest is what families pay for that
ledger service.
Use the slider to see how rates change the total. Even at lower rates, the numbers are
significant.
Navigate down for the per-family breakdown , where the profits go, and why young Canadians are
leaving.
What if Alberta could give families direct access to that same ledger capability, so they
wouldn't have to pay interest for it? That's what we're here to explore.
Homeownership Crisis
Average home price: $505,000
Down payment: $125,000
Average mortgage: $380,000
First year's interest: $19,000
Over the term: $286,433 in interest
Families pay their mortgage debt 1.9x ×
Real Families, Real Burden
Here's what those numbers look like for a real family.
Average Alberta home: over five hundred thousand dollars. With a twenty-five percent down payment,
you're borrowing three hundred eighty thousand.
First year's interest alone: nineteen thousand dollars. Over the full term, you pay back almost
twice what you borrowed. That difference, every dollar of it, is pure interest.
You can adjust the home price, interest rate, and term with the sliders.
This is the burden every mortgaged Alberta family carries. Not because they made bad decisions,
but because borrowing is the only way to access the value of a home they're buying.
Young Canadians Seek Opportunity
Across Canada, young people face:
Housing: 10-15× income (their parents paid 3-5×)
Birth rate: 1.41 children/woman (34% below replacement)
Many abandoning home ownership, family formation, staying in Canada
They're not giving up – they're looking for somewhere that rewards hard work.
Alberta can be that place.
Young Canadians are now paying ten to fifteen times their annual income for a home. Their parents
paid three to five times. The math simply doesn't work anymore.
Canada's birth rate has collapsed to one point four children per woman. Thirty-four percent below
replacement. The elderly have fewer and fewer people to support them. Young people aren't having
children because they can't afford homes, because interest eats their income.
Many are leaving Canada entirely. They're not giving up. They're making rational decisions about
where hard work still leads to a real life.
Alberta can change that equation. If accessing a home doesn't require decades of interest payments,
housing becomes four to six times income again. Families form. People stay. Alberta grows.
Follow the Money
Canadian banks didn't grow by producing more. They grew by charging more for the same thing
Financial Sector Metric
Value
GDP produced
~7%
Corporate profits captured
30% of all corporate profits
Profit per unit of GDP
4.3× the economy average
Profit growth 1997-2017
4/5 from rising margins
$18,000/yr per Alberta family. $23B/yr from Alberta. $54B/yr in federal debt service. All
interest on money that didn't exist before the borrower signed.
Let that ratio sink in. Canada's financial sector produces seven percent of GDP. Seven cents of
every dollar of real economic output. Yet it captures thirty percent of all after-tax corporate
profits. Nearly a third of all the money Canadian corporations earn flows to the financial sector.
Between 1997 and 2017, finance and insurance drove a third of Canada's entire increase in corporate
profit share. And four-fifths of that increase came from rising profit margins, not from the
financial sector producing more. Banks didn't grow by doing more work. They grew by charging more
for the same thing.
In the United States, the trajectory is even starker: the financial sector's share of domestic
profits rose from ten percent in 1947 to over forty percent by 2007.
No other industry operates with this kind of margin disparity. Manufacturing, agriculture,
technology, healthcare: their profit share roughly tracks their GDP contribution. Finance is the
outlier.
Why? Because banks have a privilege no other industry has: they create money at zero cost and charge
interest as if real capital were deployed. That privilege generates over eighteen thousand
dollars per Alberta family per year. Twenty-three billion from Alberta alone. Fifty-four billion
in federal debt service.
This is the "normal cost of finance" you've been told to accept. It's not normal. It's
seigniorage.
How Banks Work: Issuing Liquidity From Wealth
Banks don't lend out existing depositor money – they create new liquidity backed by your assets:
You pledge $505,000 home as collateral
Bank creates $380,000 in your account
You pay $286,433 interest over 25 years
If you default, the bank seizes your collateral!
Banks create liquidity from your loan contract, secured by a lien on your collateral. What if
you didn't have to pay them for that?
You might be skeptical. Surely banks lend out money they already have,
just like you, and every other real lender?
For decades, textbooks taught exactly that. Banks collect deposits, lend them out, and earn the
spread.
In 2014, the Bank of England finally stated plainly: "When a bank makes a loan, it simply credits the
customer's account. At that instant, new money is created." Professor Richard Werner examined
actual bank accounting during the lifecycle of a loan. No deposits were drawn down. The liquidity
simply appeared, backed by the value of the client's loan asset, and secured by the client's collateral.
This is published central bank policy, and peer-reviewed research.
Banks create a loan contract asset and a corresponding deposit liability from your mortgage
signature, then secure it by insurance and a lien on your existing wealth. With Alberta Bucks, you
create that same liquidity directly from your own wealth. Same mechanics, without the debt contract
in the middle.
Navigate down to see the actual accounting entries, step by step. A pension fund lending real cash.
A bank creating credit. And a citizen issuing BUCKs.
Mortgage Payments: Lender Money
If banks really lent depositor money, here's what the books would look like.
On the left, your mortgage payments flow in over twenty-five years. On the right, the bank pays
depositors from those same flows. The bank's profit is the spread between what you pay and what
depositors receive.
Adjust the sliders to see the effect. At typical rates, the spread earns the bank a modest profit
on money that actually belonged to depositors. This would be a legitimate intermediation service.
But this isn't what happens. The next slide shows what the Bank of England documented.
The Reality: Money Creation
Research by Bank of England 2014, and Werner 2014:
You get a mortgage with your home as collateral
The bank does NOT lend you existing deposits
Your payment stream serves as the bank's Asset
Bank creates new money Liability in your account
Your asset backs the money; bank charges you interest for decadesIf you default, the bank seizes your collateral
Banks create liquidity from YOUR wealth and charge YOU interest for the privilege
Here's what actually happens, confirmed by the Bank of England in 2014 and documented by Professor
Richard Werner through direct observation of bank accounting.
When a bank makes a loan, no bank assets are drawn down. The bank creates a new deposit in your
account by expanding its balance sheet.
Your loan contract is an asset to the bank, backed by a lien against your asset. The amount
deposited into your bank account is a liability. Both are created simultaneously from your
signature and your collateral.
The bank's cost of creating this money is near zero. Yet you pay interest on it for decades.
The next chart shows this visually: your mortgage payments flowing to a bank that contributed no
existing capital.
Mortgage Payments: Issued Money
Now compare. Same mortgage payments on the left. But on the right, instead of depositor payments,
you see the money that was issued: created instantly, backed by your loan contract.
The bank's cost of capital is roughly one percent: overhead and a small risk premium. Everything
above that is profit on money that didn't exist before you signed.
Adjust the cost of capital slider. Even at generous estimates, the bank's profit is enormous
relative to what they contributed. The summary below the chart shows the present value of that
profit.
This is the accounting reality. The bank gained an asset (your loan) without giving up any
existing asset in return.
Three Ways to Finance a Home: Deep Accounting Analysis
Your mortgage contract IS a real asset – like a bond with a payment stream .
Banks can (and do) sell these as CLOs/MBS.
So what's really happening?
These slides are deeply technical, maybe even boring.
But actually understanding this is critical responsible
for the finances of others. So, buckle up…
For those who want the full accounting, let's compare three ways to finance a home, step by step.
First, a real lender; a pension fund with actual cash. Second, a bank creating credit. Third,
an Alberta Buck issuance.
Your mortgage contract is a real asset, like a bond. Banks sell these as collateralised loan
obligations. So what's the actual accounting difference between lending existing money and creating
new money? The next slides walk through every journal entry.
Cash Lender (Pension Fund Buys Mortgage)
First, a real cash lender. A pension fund has three hundred eighty thousand dollars and lends it
to you.
Watch the books carefully. The fund swaps one asset: cash, for another: your loan receivable.
Total assets unchanged. They had the money first. The money left their possession.
The fund has $380k cash and wants to earn interest by lending it to you.
T0: Contract signed, funds disbursed
Pension Fund Books
Debit
Credit
Loan Receivable
+$380k
Cash
-$380k
Net Asset Change
$0
The fund swapped one asset (cash) for another (your loan). Total assets unchanged.
They had to HAVE the cash first. The cash LEFT their possession.
Cash Lender (Pension Fund Buys Mortgage)
The lender receives your annual payment, recovering their deployed capital, and earning interest
income.
T1-T25: You make payments (~$24k/year)
Pension Fund Books
Debit
Credit
Cash
+$24k
Loan Receivable
-$15k (principal)
Interest Revenue
-$9k (income)
Cash Lender (Pension Fund Buys Mortgage)
Over twenty-five years they earn two hundred twenty thousand in interest. Fair compensation for
tying up real capital. This is genuine intermediation.
T25: Loan fully repaid
Summary
Amount
Total cash received
$600k
Original cash out
-$380k
Net profit $220k interest
The pension fund earned $220k by lending EXISTING money for 25 years.
Bank "Lends" You $380k (Credit Creation)
Now the bank. Watch carefully; no cash is earmarked for your loan.
Step one: the bank records your loan as an asset and an accounts payable as a liability. So far,
identical to the pension fund after signing but before paying.
The bank has no cash earmarked for your loan . Watch carefully.
T0: Contract signed: Werner's Step 1
Bank Books (Step 1)
Debit
Credit
Loan Receivable
+$380k
Accounts Payable
+$380k (bank owes you)
Balance Sheet +$380k +$380k (expands)
At this point, the bank has your IOU (asset) and owes you $380k (liability).
This is IDENTICAL to the pension fund after signing but before paying.
Bank "Lends" You $380k (Credit Creation)
Step two: the bank renames its accounts payable to customer deposit. No cash moves. It's
re-labeling. Your deposit appears from nothing.
T0: "Disbursement": Werner's Step 2: a magic trick
Bank Books (Step 2)
Debit
Credit
Accounts Payable
+$380k
Customer Deposits
+$380k (your "deposit")
Net change $0 $0 (just relabeling)
No cash moved. The bank simply RENAMED its liability from "Accounts Payable" to "Customer Deposit."
Bank "Lends" You $380k (Credit Creation)
Combined effect at T0:
Bank Books (Net)
Debit
Credit
Loan Receivable
+$380k
Customer Deposits
+$380k
Balance Sheet +$380k +$380k
Balance sheet EXPANDED by $380k on both sides. No existing asset was used.
Bank "Lends" You $380k (Credit Creation)
Eventually you spend your loan proceeds; buying a home, or paying contractors and suppliers to
build one. The money leaves your bank.
If this keeps up, your bank will need to dip into its central bank reserves.
T0+: You spend your "deposit" (write cheque to home seller at different bank)
Bank Books
Debit
Credit
Customer Deposits (yours being spent)
-$380k
Reserves (at Central Bank)
-$380k
Reserves leave when your deposit is withdrawn, and moves to another bank.
Bank "Lends" You $380k (Credit Creation)
But in a closed banking system: If all banks create credit roughly equally,
deposits flowing OUT ≈ deposits flowing IN. Net reserve movement ≈ zero .
Bank Books
Debit
Credit
Reserves (at Central Bank)
+$380k
Customer Deposits (others, deposited)
+$380k
Key insight: The pension fund needed cash BEFORE lending. The bank creates the deposit FIRST, then
"manages reserves" – which in practice means waiting for other banks' borrowers to deposit here.
But deposits drawn down at one bank eventually end up deposited at another. On average, they
balance out.
Bank One's borrower spends at Bank Two. Bank Two's borrower spends at Bank One. Net reserve
movement: approximately zero. It's a closed loop. Banks don't actually draw down reserves in
normal operations.
This matters because it explains why banks can create money at near-zero cost. The reserve
requirement isn't a meaningful constraint when the system is in balance.
Bank "Lends" You $380k (Credit Creation)
T1-T25: You make payments
Same as pension fund – bank collects $600k over 25 years, earns $220k interest.
No pre-existing capital was deployed, yet the bank collects the same two hundred twenty thousand in
interest. The same as a real lender who had to accumulate and deploy real capital.
But Wait – Isn't the Loan a "Real" Asset Being Drawn Down?
Your loan contract IS valuable – PV of $600k payments at 1% discount ≈ $500k.
Banks DO sell these. So isn't the bank "spending" this asset to create your deposit?
No. Here's why:
Account Type
Pension Fund
Bank
Loan Receivable
+$380k (asset gained)
+$380k (asset gained)
What was given up
-$380k cash (asset lost)
Nothing (liability created)
Net asset change
$0
+$380k
But wait: isn't the bank's loan asset being drawn down? A fair objection. Your loan contract is
valuable. Banks sell these. So isn't the bank spending a real asset to create your deposit?
No. Look at the accounting. The pension fund gave up cash; an asset decreased. The bank gave
up nothing. It created a liability. The loan asset and the deposit liability are separate entries.
The bank could sell the loan tomorrow and still have your deposit on its books.
But Wait – Isn't the Loan a "Real" Asset Being Drawn Down?
The bank's loan asset is NOT reduced by the deposit liability. They're separate entries. The bank
could still sell the loan (CLO) or a bundle of them (MBS) even with your deposit on their books.
The loan doesn't "back" the deposit in accounting terms – both are created simultaneously from
your signature. The bank gained an asset WITHOUT giving up an asset.
Both sides were created simultaneously from your signature. The bank's net assets increased. The
pension fund's didn't.
Alberta Buck (You Monetize Your Own Equity)
You own a home worth $505k. You want $380k liquidity without borrowing.
Before: Your Balance Sheet
Your Assets
Amount
Your Liabilities
Amount
Home
$505k
Total Assets $505k
Total Liabilities $0
Your Equity
$505k
Now the Alberta Buck. You own a home worth five hundred five thousand. You want three hundred
eighty thousand in liquidity without borrowing.
Alberta Buck (You Monetize Your Own Equity)
T0: Attest home value, issue $380k in Alberta Bucks
Your Books
Debit
Credit
BUCKs (cash asset)
+$380k
BUCKs Issued
+$380k (liability)
Net Equity Change
$0
Simultaneously: Insurer places LIEN on $380k of your home value.
You attest the home's value, an insurer places a lien, and you issue BUCKs. Your net worth is
unchanged. But the composition changes: illiquid equity becomes liquid BUCKs plus encumbered
equity.
When you issue BUCKs, it's an asset swap. Your total assets stay the same.
Alberta Buck (You Monetize Your Own Equity)
After: Your Balance Sheet
Your Assets
Amount
Your Liabilities
Amount
Home
$505k
BUCKs Issued
$380k
BUCKs (to spend)
$380k
(Lien to insurer)
($380k)
Total Assets $885k
Total Liabilities $380k
Your Equity
$505k
Your NET WORTH is unchanged ($505k). But the COMPOSITION changed:
Before: $505k illiquid home equity
After: $380k liquid BUCKs + $125k unencumbered equity + $380k encumbered equity
You converted illiquid equity into liquidity; your net worth hasn't changed, and your
accounts are in balance.
Alberta Buck (You Monetize Your Own Equity)
T0+: You spend BUCKs (buy car for $50k)
Your Assets
Amount
Your Liabilities
Amount
Home
$505k
BUCKs Issued
$380k
BUCKs remaining
$330k
Car
$50k
Total Assets $885k
Total Liabilities $380k
Your Equity
$505k
You draw down BUCKs to acquire the Car – an asset swap. Total assets unchanged at $885k.
When you spend your liquidity to buy another asset, your books still balance.
Alberta Buck (You Monetize Your Own Equity)
T1-T50: Demurrage and Jubilee
BUCK holders (whoever holds BUCKs) pay 2%/year demurrage to Jubilee Fund.
Fund accumulates and pays down liens over time.
Over time, all accounts holding balances of BUCKs pay a small demurrage fee into a fund that
eventually releases the claim on the underlying assets.
Alberta Buck (You Monetize Your Own Equity)
T25: You want to release your home (early redemption)
Redemption Calculation
Original BUCKs issued
$380k
Years elapsed
25
Demurrage rate
2%/year
Jubilee credit
$380k × 2% × 25 = $190k
Your redemption cost $380k - $190k = $190k
Your Books (Redemption)
Debit
Credit
BUCKs Issued (liability)
+$380k
Cash (your payment)
-$190k
Jubilee Fund credit
-$190k
Lien released
✓
Over the years, this account accumulates. After 25 years, it would pay off half of the claim on
collateral; if you wish to release the asset, you'd have to redeem it by paying the remainder.
Alberta Buck (You Monetize Your Own Equity)
T50: Automatic Jubilee (if you never redeem)
Jubilee Calculation
Demurrage accumulated
$380k × 2% × 50 = $380k
Your redemption cost $0 (automatic)
Lien dissolves. Home fully unencumbered. No payment required.
Even if your family makes poor financial decisions, all claims against underlying assets are
automatically released after 50 years.
The Fundamental Difference: What Existed Before?
Question
Pension Fund
Bank
Alberta Buck
What asset existed before?
Cash ($380k)
Nothing Home equity ($505k)
What was given up?
Cash
Nothing Unencumbered equity
What was created?
Loan receivable
Loan + Deposit
BUCKs (money)
From what source?
Existing wealth
Your signature Existing wealth
Who bears the cost?
Fund (opportunity)
You (interest) You (insurance)
What backs the money?
Fund's cash
Bank's IOU Your home equity
The bank creates BOTH sides from your signature – nothing existed before.
You create liquidity from EXISTING equity – your wealth backs the money.
Here's the summary. Three approaches, side by side.
The pension fund started with cash, and exchanged it for a loan. Balanced books. Real
intermediation.
The bank started with nothing. It created both sides from your signature. Your collateral backs
the money. The bank contributed an accounting entry.
The Alberta Buck starts with existing equity and converts a portion to liquid form. Your asset
backs the money. Your books remain in balance.
Put simply: the bank takes a claim on your asset, creates two new accounting entries from nothing,
and rents you the newly issued liquidity at interest.
With Alberta Bucks, you create balanced accounting entries, just like the pension fund, and
release the trapped liquidity from your own asset.
A Generational Opportunity
Canada's best and brightest are leaving – where to?
Staying in Canada
Leaving Canada
10-15× income housing
3-5× in US, elsewhere
Dual income required forever
Single income possible
Family formation impossible
Family formation viable
Debt servitude as lifestyle
Wealth building possible
Birth rate 1.4 (civilisational collapse)
Replacement possible
Young Canadians aren't lazy. They just want a life that doesn't
punish productivity with debt slavery .
The question: Can Alberta become where they go instead of away?
You've seen the numbers. Households save two hundred thousand. Farmers save eighty-five thousand
a year. The province could grow the Heritage Fund by three hundred twenty-five billion.
But this isn't just about money. It's about people.
I know young Canadians who are leaving. Smart, hardworking people. They've done the arithmetic.
Housing at ten to fifteen times income. Their parents paid three to five. Two incomes forever, just
to service debt. Family formation impossible. Birth rate at one point four: below civilizational
replacement.
These aren't quitters. They're rational people seeking opportunity. Right now that means leaving
Canada.
What if Alberta became where they go instead? Housing at four to six times income. Wealth that
transfers between generations instead of being extracted.
Navigate down for the comparison table, the virtuous cycle that lower housing costs create, and a
concrete example. A young Albertan earning sixty thousand a year. Traditional path: housing out of
reach. Alberta Buck path: eleven percent of income. Achievable.
That's what's at stake. Not just economics; whether Alberta becomes a place where the next
generation wants to build a life.
Alberta as the Beacon
Side by side. Canada's status quo versus Alberta with the Alberta Buck.
Housing drops from ten to fifteen times income to four to six times. Cost shifts from interest plus
insurance to insurance only. Family wealth is transferred between generations instead of extracted.
Young talent stops fleeing and starts arriving. Birth rates recover. Alberta becomes the
destination; not just for Albertans, but for ambitious Canadians coast to coast and talent from
around the world.
If Alberta gives citizens fiscal autonomy:
Canada (Status Quo)
Alberta (With Alberta Buck)
Housing: 10-15× income
Housing: 4-6× income
Cost: Interest + insurance
Cost: Insurance only
Family wealth: Extracted
Family wealth: Transferred
Young talent: Fleeing
Young talent: Arriving
Birth rate: Collapsing
Birth rate: Recovering
Alberta becomes the destination – not just for Albertans, but for ambitious
Canadians from coast to coast, and talent from around the world seeking opportunity.
The Virtuous Cycle
Lower housing costs lead to young families buying homes. Family formation becomes viable. Birth
rates recover. Talent is attracted. Innovation flourishes. Twenty-three billion circulates
locally instead of leaving. Success attracts more success.
Alberta doesn't just keep its youth. It attracts the best from everywhere. That's the virtuous
cycle that fiscal autonomy creates.
Fiscal autonomy creates a magnet effect:
Lower housing costs → Young families can buy homesFamily formation viable → Birth rates recoverTalent attracted → Innovation flourishesWealth circulates locally → $23B/yr grows AlbertaSuccess attracts more success → Alberta becomes Canada's engine
Alberta doesn't just keep its youth. It attracts the best from everywhere.
How Alberta Buck Enables This
A concrete example. A young Albertan earning sixty thousand a year.
Traditional path: they can afford about two hundred forty thousand in mortgage. Average home costs
far more. Housing is out of reach.
Alberta Buck path: family attestation enables two hundred thousand in BUCKs from parents' equity.
The young person issues three hundred thousand in BUCKs. Annual cost drops from over seventeen
thousand to under seven thousand. Housing goes from twenty-nine percent of income, impossible, to
eleven percent, achievable.
Family savings compound across generations. That's the generational wealth transfer that interest
currently prevents.
Young Albertan earning $60,000/year:
Can afford only ~$240K mortgage (4× income). Average home: $380,000 +. Housing out of reach.
Alberta Buck: Family accesses $200K BUCKs from parents' equity. Young couple buys home with $300K BUCKs issued. Cost: $6,760/yr vs $17,260/yr.
11% of income (achievable) vs. 29% (impossible)
Family savings compound: $221,734 over 25 years → helps next generation.
Alberta's Fiscal Option
Entity
Creates Liquidity? Pays Interest? Risks Assets?
Bank
Yes (backed by your asset) No (issues liquidity)
No (Lien on your asset)
You
No Yes Yes (home foreclosure)
When you need liquidity, you have two options: sell your assets or borrow against them.
Banks have a third option – for themselves : create liquidity directly from assets.
Alberta BUCKs give that third option to you .
You Own the Wealth. Why Must You Borrow to Use It?
The Alberta Buck gives families that third option .
Look at the table. Banks can create liquidity. Citizens cannot. That asymmetry has been the
reality for centuries.
When you need purchasing power, you have two options: sell your asset, or borrow against it.
Banks have a third: create liquidity directly from assets. No borrowing. No interest.
Historically, only banks could do this. You needed a trusted ledger, verified attestation,
enforceable insurance. That infrastructure was expensive and centralized.
Now the technology exists. Blockchain, smart contracts, parametric insurance. The infrastructure
barrier is gone. BUCKs give families that third option directly.
And this matters for Alberta's financial institutions too. Stablecoins are already drawing
deposits away from traditional banking. The question isn't whether this transition happens.
It's whether Alberta's banks, credit unions, and insurers lead it – building new revenue streams
in custody, attestation, and insurance administration – or get disrupted by external players
who move first.
Navigate down for why this transition is inevitable , and how Alberta's financial sector can
be a partner in it.
Regulation Can't Fix This
"Why not just regulate banks better?"
Every major financial crisis since 1929 happened under the existing regulatory framework.
Reform
Method
Result
More regulation
Bigger agency, more rules System adds complexity faster
Deposit insurance
Taxpayer guarantee pays for bank runs Sustains bad banking
Monitoring
Ratings agencies, auditors Collapses under free-riding
Because regulation structurally cannot keep pace with the system it monitors: Financial entities are more complex than regulators could ever be.
The first thing a policy analyst will ask: why not just regulate banks better?
Because it structurally cannot work. The regulated entity is more complex than the regulator can
ever be. Every mortgage requires verifying employment, income, debts, credit, collateral, and
insurance; for millions of mortgages, continuously, in real time. Now do the same for auto loans,
business loans, derivatives, off-balance-sheet vehicles.
This isn't a staffing problem. It's structural. A system cannot be fully inspected by a subsystem
less complex than itself. The complexity isn't deliberate, but it's self-reinforcing.
Deposit insurance? Kotlikoff proved it sustains bad banking. It eliminates the one market signal,
bank runs, that historically constrained the worst behaviour.
Private monitoring? The ratings agencies before 2008 were paid by the banks they rated, competing
for business by offering favourable ratings. Information worse than useless.
Every reform since 2008, Basel Three, Dodd-Frank, stress tests, amounts to building a bigger
monitor for a bigger system. The system always wins that race.
But there's a different approach. Consider counterfeiting. We don't hire inspectors to spot-check
every banknote. We design the notes so everyone can verify them, every transaction. Watermarks,
holograms, special paper. Millions of verifications per day, by ordinary people.
The Alberta Buck does the same thing for money creation. Navigate down for the details.
What Your Banker Doesn't Know
Kotlikoff (2020) proved formally : banking crises are structural , not just liquidity events. The
deepest issue is the system's architecture itself:
What the family provided
What the bank provided
The house ($505,000)
An accounting entry
The income stream ($600,000 over 25 years)
A regulatory exemption
The insurance (protects the bank's asset)
(Client Money Rules don't apply)
$275,000 in interest over 25 years Zero capital deployed
If a pension fund, corporation, or broker did this, it would be illegal (Client Money
Rules ). Nobody intended this regulatory exemption as exploitation. But $275,000 per
family is worth solving.
Jackson and Kotlikoff proved it formally in 2020. Banking crises are structural events, not
liquidity events. Banks fail because risks are misrepresented, not because depositors panic.
But Kotlikoff missed the deepest issue. Not bad behaviour within the system; the system's
architecture itself.
Your brother-in-law the bank manager isn't doing anything wrong. He processes mortgages as trained,
and genuinely believes he's lending the bank's money. Nobody at the bank intended this as
exploitation. The loan officer followed procedures. The compliance team checked the paperwork.
But look at the accounting. The family provided everything of value: the house, the income stream,
the insurance. The bank provided an accounting entry, made possible by a regulatory exemption. If
any other entity tried this, a pension fund, a corporation, a broker, it would be illegal under
Client Money Rules.
Two hundred seventy-five thousand dollars in interest. Over twenty-five years. Per family. Not
for capital deployed. Not for risk borne. For a regulatory privilege that nobody inside the system
has reason to question.
That's not a market price for a service. That's seigniorage: a wealth transfer from the
productive economy to the money-creation system. Twenty-three billion dollars a year, from Alberta
alone.
The good news: now that we understand the mechanics, we can build something better.
Decimation: Many Small Verifiers Beat One Big Auditor
Instead of a government agency auditing all assets held by banks (top-down), many independent
verifiers each check one asset w/ skin in the game (bottom-up):
Current System (Top-Down)
Alberta Buck (Bottom-Up)
One regulator audits all assets
Many attestors each verify one asset
Regulator has no financial stake
Attestors invest against their predictions
Information is a public good (free-riding)
Verification IS participation (market)
Fraud in one position → panic about all
Fraud in one position → irrelevant to others
Bad actors depress honest effort
Bad actors increase honest returns
The incentive gradient runs in the right direction.
Decimation. The term comes from numerical methods. The sum of many small estimates converges on the
true value far more reliably than a few large estimates.
Applied to finance: instead of one government agency trying to audit everything a bank holds, have
many independent attestors each verify one asset, with their own capital at risk.
Home insurers verify homes. Equipment insurers verify equipment. Commodity insurers verify grain.
Each puts capital at risk: if the asset is lost, the insurer pays. Multiple attestors sign each
valuation and invest against their predictions. Accurate attestors earn premiums. Inaccurate ones
suffer losses.
This defeats the free-riding problem that Kotlikoff identified. You don't verify because you're
altruistically producing public information. You verify because you're an insurer pricing risk
you're underwriting. The information is public. The incentive is private. Each participant serves
both purposes simultaneously.
And it defeats contagion. In the current system, fraud at one bank makes you distrust all banks,
because opacity links them. In the Alberta Buck system, each position is independently verifiable.
The house exists or it doesn't. The insurance is active or it isn't. A fraud in one position tells
you nothing about unrelated positions because there is no opaque institution linking them.
When some attestors prove inaccurate, the remaining accurate attestors earn higher premiums. Bad
actors increase the returns to honest participants rather than depressing them. The incentive
gradient runs in the right direction.
The Alberta Buck: Your Wealth, Your Liquidity
Access $380k liquidity from your own wealth – same asset, same insurance, no bank, no interest
Aspect
Bank Mortgage
Alberta Buck
What backs liquidity?
Bank creates it from your asset
Your actual home equity
Who creates liquidity?
Bank (from your debt's value)
You (from your asset's value)
Equity encumbered?
Yes (lien, forfeiture risk)
Yes (lien on pledged portion)
Interest?
5.00% : Compounds, persists forever No
Monthly cost / 25 yrs
$21,000 /mo $10,000 /mo
Ownership?
Yes, until default Yes, always
Same liquidity : Just no bank – and no forfeiture risk.
Same house, same value, same insurance. The table shows what changes: who creates the
liquidity, what you pay, and what happens when things go wrong.
Two features deserve attention.
First: the Jubilee mechanism. With a mortgage, one setback can mean foreclosure. Generations of
family wealth, gone. With BUCKs, the lien on your home gradually dissolves. A small annual
demurrage fee accrues to a Jubilee fund that releases liens over time. Families can recover
from bad luck without losing their homes.
Second: what happens to Alberta's financial institutions? They don't disappear. They lead.
Custody services, attestation, insurance administration, liquidity pool management. These are
high-value, fee-based services that ATB Financial, credit unions, and Alberta's insurance
industry are uniquely positioned to provide. Banks become infrastructure partners, earning
stable fees instead of interest that's increasingly at risk from fintech disruption.
Navigate down for the step-by-step mechanics , a visual model of claim money, and the full
Jubilee redemption formula.
How It Works
Attest your wealth : Verify value of asset(s) Create Alberta Bucks – Representing a portionUse the liquidity – Spend Bucks in the economy
Easily convert between BUCKs and CAD$
Pay insurance, not interest – ~0.5% annual premiums vs. 5.0% interestRetain ownership – Full control of your assetsRedeem when you sell – or let the Jubilee dissolve the lien over time
No principal payment schedule or interest!
Six steps.
First: attest what you own and what it's worth. You submit your assets, a home, farm equipment,
inventory, to an Oracle network that verifies ownership and current market value.
Second: issue Alberta Bucks representing a portion of your equity. An insurer places a lien on
that portion.
Third: spend those BUCKs in the economy. They're fungible tokens, accepted like any other
liquidity. DeFi pools convert billions daily between tokens like BUCKs and stablecoins like USDC
and CADC, which transfer easily to your bank account as Canadian dollars.
Fourth: pay insurance. Around half a percent annually, instead of five to seven percent interest.
Fifth: you retain full ownership and use of your asset.
Sixth: when you sell the asset, you redeem the BUCKs you issued and the lien releases. Or you can
simply let the Jubilee mechanism dissolve it over time. The next slides walk through exactly how.
Claim Money: Visualized
This chart shows claim money visually. Your home is the asset. The claim, whether a mortgage or
a BUCK issuance, draws down a portion of its value.
The gold bar is your unencumbered equity. The grey bar is the claim against your asset. Use the
sliders to adjust home value and claim size.
The claim can never exceed the asset value. Insurance guarantees this. And this is what makes
BUCKs fundamentally different from bank credit creation: they're backed by real, attested, insured
wealth. When a bank issues a mortgage, it creates new money from your promise to repay. When you
issue BUCKs, you're accessing liquidity that already exists in your asset. Nothing new is created.
Nothing is owed.
Your insured, attested Asset (a home) is drawn down by a Liability (BUCKs issued).
An insurer has a Lien on the portion of the Asset used. Your books balance.
Jubilee: No Permanent Liabilities
Claims against assets release automatically in 50 years
\begin{equation}
\text{Redemption} = V \times (1 - 0.02 \times Y)
\end{equation}
Years Pledged
Redemption Cost
Monthly Equivalent
0
$380,000 ---
10
$304,000 $2,533/mo
25 $190,000 $633/mo
50 $0 (automatic)
$0
Family assets are recovered by the next generation after poor decisions – no foreclosure
Here's where it all comes together. The Jubilee Fund's returns flow back to gradually dissolve
liens across all participants.
The formula is simple. Redemption cost equals the original value pledged, minus two percent for
each year elapsed. Year zero: you owe the full amount. Year twenty-five: half. Year fifty: zero.
Linear and predictable. No compounding. No surprises.
Take a home pledged for three hundred eighty thousand. At ten years, the Jubilee credit covers
twenty percent, reducing your redemption cost to about three hundred thousand. If you redeem at
that point, the effective cost averages about twenty-five hundred per month over those ten years.
Compared to a mortgage payment north of two thousand that never decreases because of compounding
interest.
At twenty-five years, the typical mortgage term, half the lien is gone. At fifty years:
automatic Jubilee. The lien dissolves entirely. No payment required.
This is fundamentally different from a mortgage. One setback, a job loss, a health crisis, a
market downturn, means foreclosure. Generations of family wealth, gone. With BUCKs, the lien
shrinks every year regardless of the owner's circumstances. A family that hits hard times doesn't
lose the family home. That's the safety net that debt-based money has never provided.
BUCKs in Circulation: Demurrage
Every BUCK transaction computes a 2% /yr demurrage fee
Built into the token itself – time-weighted average
Sends the fee to the Jubilee account
Spending is free – only idle balances accrue fees
Incentivises issuance, circulation, investment, and productive use
Replaces interest and inflation as liquidity costs
Your BUCKs are now out in the economy. Here's what makes them different from dollars sitting in a
bank account.
Every time BUCKs change hands, the token's transfer function does a small calculation. It looks at
how long the sender held those BUCKs, computes the time-weighted average balance since the last
transaction, and skims the appropriate fraction of two percent per year. That fee goes directly to
the Jubilee account.
This isn't a monthly bill or an annual charge. It's woven into the token itself. Receive BUCKs on
Monday, spend them on Friday; the demurrage is negligible. A fraction of a fraction of a percent.
Sit on a large balance for months, and the fee accumulates.
The incentive is clear. Spend, invest, lend, or use your BUCKs productively.
With BUCKs, the cost of liquidity isn't interest paid to a bank, or inflation eroding your
purchasing power. It's a small demurrage fee that flows to the Jubilee Fund, and that fund works
for everyone, as the next slide explains.
The Jubilee Fund
The Jubilee Fund doesn't sit idle – three parametric deployments
DeFi Liquidity Pool – Deep backstop for BUCK/CAD$ conversionParametric Lending – Short-term "flash" and collateralised loans (~15% APR)Parametric Insurance – Automated underwriting for attested assets (~30% APR)
All three are algorithmic backstops – not competitors
The demurrage fees from every BUCK transaction across the entire economy flow into the Jubilee Fund.
But this isn't a government account gathering dust. It's actively deployed in three ways, each
designed as an algorithmic backstop for the ecosystem.
First: a DeFi liquidity pool, providing deep reserves for BUCK-to-Canadian-dollar conversion.
Second: parametric lending, short-term collateralised loans targeting around fifteen percent annual
return. Third: parametric insurance, automated underwriting for attested assets, targeting around
thirty percent annual return. "Parametric" means rule-based and automatic. If conditions are met,
the action happens. No loan committees. No claims adjusters. No human discretion.
The key word is "backstop." None of these are designed to dominate their markets. They set a floor
on service quality and a ceiling on pricing. Private lenders, private insurers, and private
liquidity providers will compete, and they'll usually offer better rates, because they can
specialise, build relationships, and take on specific risks.
That competition is the healthy outcome. The less the Jubilee Fund needs to deploy, the more it
holds in reserve, and the more those reserves reduce demurrage fees for everyone. And every one
of these operations is fully transparent.
The Jubilee Fund: Transparency
All Jubilee fund operations are fully transparent
Oracle-underwritten, on-chain, transparent
Set floor quality and ceiling pricing for the ecosystem
Private providers offer specialised, lower-cost alternatives
More Jubilee reserves investment = lower demurrage
Every Jubilee Fund operation is a fully transparent, on-chain DeFi transaction. Each deployment is
parametric: governed by distributed Oracle networks, priced algorithmically, and auditable by
anyone. No loan committees. No claims adjusters. No discretionary decisions.
This transparency is fundamental. In traditional finance, pricing is opaque: lending rates,
insurance premiums, and investment returns are proprietary. Citizens have no way to verify whether
they're getting a fair deal. With the Jubilee Fund, every rate, every transaction, every return is
publicly visible on the blockchain.
That visibility creates a healthy dynamic. Private providers can study the Jubilee Fund's pricing
and performance, then enter the market with better, more specialised products. Citizens can compare
any private offer against the on-chain baseline. Competition is driven by genuine value, not
information asymmetry.
Use the down arrow to explore the details of each deployment.
Jubilee: DeFi Liquidity Pool
Deep liquidity backstop for BUCK ↔ CAD$ conversion
Jubilee operates a 1% fee AMM pool with deep reserves
Always available for large conversions
Private pools operate at lower fees (0.05% – 0.3%)
Handle most day-to-day conversion volume
Ecosystem benefit : confidence that BUCKs convert at fair value
Large transactions don't move the price
No liquidity crisis, even during market stress
The first deployment is the simplest to understand. If you hold BUCKs and want Canadian dollars –
or vice versa, you swap through an automated market maker pool. Private liquidity providers will
operate pools at low fees. Five basis points, ten, thirty. They'll handle most daily volume
efficiently.
But what happens during a crisis? What if a large holder needs to convert a million BUCKs at once?
Private pools might not have the depth. The price would slip.
That's where the Jubilee pool comes in. It operates at a one percent fee, much higher than the
private pools, so under normal conditions, nobody uses it. But it's always there, with deep
reserves, ready to absorb large transactions without significant slippage.
This is exactly how institutional market making works in traditional finance. A backstop of last
resort that provides confidence even when it isn't actively used. The mere existence of deep
Jubilee liquidity gives everyone confidence that BUCKs convert at fair value. That encourages
adoption and reduces the risk premium that would otherwise be priced into every BUCK transaction.
The one percent fee on large transactions that do route through the Jubilee pool generates returns
that flow back to reduce demurrage for everyone.
Jubilee: Parametric Lending
Algorithmic backstop lending – target ~15% APR
Short-term, fully collateralised loans in BUCKs
Premiums auto-computed by distributed Oracle risk assessment
Higher rates than private lenders – by design
Private lending handles most demand
Ecosystem benefit : credit is always available
Rates set by distributed Oracle networks, who share in risk/reward
The second deployment is parametric lending. The Jubilee Fund offers short-term loans denominated in
BUCKs, both "flash" loans for single-transaction use, and collateralised loans backed by tokenized
assets. Interest rates are computed automatically by distributed Oracle networks that assess
borrower risk: attested asset portfolio, repayment history, collateral quality, and each Oracle's
historical accuracy.
Individual rates vary, but the pool targets an aggregate fifteen percent APR. That's intentional.
Private lenders, credit unions, even banks operating in the BUCK ecosystem, will offer five,
eight, twelve percent to good borrowers. They'll win most of the business, because they can
specialise, assess soft factors, and build long-term relationships.
The Jubilee Fund's role is to guarantee that credit is always available. To anyone. Regardless of
market conditions. During a downturn, when private lenders tighten, the Jubilee Fund keeps lending.
During normal times, it barely lends at all because private rates are better. Sometimes an
expensive loan is better than no loan at all.
This eliminates the credit crunch dynamic that makes recessions worse. In the current system, banks
pull back lending precisely when the economy needs liquidity most. With the Jubilee backstop,
algorithmic lending continues regardless of market sentiment. And because all pricing is on-chain
and transparent, private lenders have a clear baseline to compete against. No opacity. No
surprises.
Jubilee: Parametric Insurance
Algorithmic backstop insurance – target ~30% APR
Automated parametric coverage for RWA assets
Triggers on Oracle-verified events (fire, hail, theft, price breach)
No claims adjusters, no disputes, no delays
Higher premiums than private insurers
Provides actuarial information for insurers
Ecosystem benefit : insurance is always available
New asset types can be insured from day one
The third deployment is parametric insurance, and it targets the highest returns, around thirty
percent annually. Again, the high premium is by design.
Private insurers will cover most attested assets at lower premiums. They have actuaries. They
understand local risks. They bundle portfolios. A well-known insurer offering wheat crop coverage
at one percent will beat the Jubilee Fund's two to three percent every time.
So why does the Jubilee Fund offer insurance at all?
First: new asset classes. When someone wants to attest and insure a novel asset, say a fleet of
electric vehicles, or a portfolio of renewable energy certificates, private insurers may not have a
product yet. The Jubilee Fund's parametric model can price it algorithmically from day one, based
on Oracle data.
Second: the transparent actuarial baseline. Because Jubilee pricing is on-chain and parametric,
every participant can see exactly how risk is priced. No information asymmetry. No opaque pricing.
The market becomes more efficient because the floor is visible to everyone. Private insurers study
the Jubilee fund's experience, enter the market with better products, and compete against this
baseline.
The thirty percent target return reflects the higher risk, but also generates the highest
contribution to demurrage reduction when claims are low.
Self-Tuning Rates
All rates adjust automatically via PID feedback loops
Demurrage rate
Likely: < 2% /yr (if fund returns > zero)
Lending & insurance premiums
Likely: higher than private-market rates (set by Oracle networks assessing borrower/asset risk)
BUCK_K credit issuance multiplierNo committees. No politics. Just math.
Every rate in the Alberta Buck system is governed by PID feedback loops: the same proportional,
integral, derivative controls used in industrial automation, cruise control, and thermostat systems.
Proven. Stable. Well-understood mathematics.
The demurrage rate is the one BUCK holders care about most. The maximum is two percent per year.
But that maximum only applies if the Jubilee Fund earns zero returns. In practice, the fund's
lending and insurance operations generate revenue, and that revenue reduces the effective demurrage
rate.
Here's the arithmetic. If the Jubilee Fund earns twenty percent on its deployed capital, and the
fund is large enough, those returns substantially offset the two percent collected. The demurrage
rate charged on each transaction adjusts automatically based on current fund performance. Long-term,
the effective rate could be well below two percent.
The same PID architecture governs lending premiums, insurance pricing, and the BUCKK multiplier
that controls how many BUCKs can be issued against a given asset value. Each loop has a target, a
measurement, and a correction signal. No board of directors setting rates. No political pressure.
No central bank meetings. Just transparent, auditable, on-chain mathematics that anyone can verify.
The next slide lets you see this self-tuning in action.
Demurrage in Action
Simulation Month 0 Total BUCKs 1.00B BUCKs issued 1.00B BUCKs redeemed 1.00B BUCK-Yrs avg. 0 Fund Target 20.0M Fund Bal. 20.0M Demurrage Rate 2.00%
Reset
Even modest returns on the growing Jubilee Fund reduce the Demurrage fee powerfully over time –
It could eventually eliminate the fee completely.
This chart simulates BUCK supply growing over time, and shows how the Jubilee Fund and effective
demurrage rate respond.
The blue line is BUCK supply in circulation, growing as more Albertans issue BUCKs from attested
assets. The gold line is the Jubilee Fund balance. The green line at the bottom is the effective
demurrage rate.
Use the slider to adjust the Jubilee Fund's annual return rate. At zero percent returns, the fund
needs the full two percent demurrage to maintain its target. Increase the return rate and watch the
green line drop: investment returns offset the fees, so BUCK holders pay less.
This is the self-tuning mechanism in action. The better the Jubilee Fund performs, the less it
costs to hold BUCKs.
As the fund grows over time, even modest returns reduce the effective demurrage rate substantially.
Use the sliders to experiment: adjust fund returns, issuance, and redemption rates, and watch how
the system finds its own equilibrium without any central authority setting rates.
At the defaults, five percent Jubilee fund returns with a net five percent BUCK issuance growth over
redemptions, the effective demurrage rate drops to about one point four percent after ten years.
The longer the system runs, the lower the cost of holding BUCKs.
Demurrage keeps BUCKs circulating. The next slide shows the other self-tuning mechanism: how
BUCKK maintains purchasing power stability.
BUCK_K Stabilization
This simulation shows how the BUCKK multiplier maintains price stability automatically.
On the left: the commodity basket that defines the BUCK's purchasing power; labour, energy, food,
and materials. Try dragging the price sliders. As commodity prices change, BUCKs will always
purchase the same basket. BUCKK adjusts issuance to ensure this. Zero inflation.
In the centre: the blue line tracks BUCK supply, the orange line tracks demand, and the green line
is BUCKK , the maximum percentage of your home's value you can issue as BUCKs. It's controlled
by a PID feedback loop. As the economy expands and contracts, BUCKK adjusts to provide the
appropriate supply, spread evenly across all owners who have attested wealth.
Watch what happens when you increase a commodity price. The BUCK's purchasing power is retained.
Now adjust the economy's demand for BUCKs. The PID detects the gap and increases or decreases
BUCKK , zeroing out inflation and deflation.
On the right: BUCK issuance responds. A higher BUCKK means homeowners can issue more BUCKs against
their property. Supply rises to meet demand. The system self-corrects.
The bottom controls let you adjust the portion of Alberta's economy transacting in BUCKs, and the
number of homes participating in issuance. In every case, the PID loop finds equilibrium
automatically. No committees. No politics. Just math.
Because every rate and ratio is on-chain, citizens who've issued BUCKs can see and act on
opportunities directly, exchanging wealth for BUCKs at a discount, or BUCKs for wealth at a
premium. Transparent markets let ordinary people participate in the same arbitrage that today is
reserved for institutional traders.
Commodity Basket
Basket Index: 1.00
Supply & Demand
Economy using BUCKs
50%
Month 0 BUCK_K 60.0% Supply - Demand - Ratio 1.000 Basket 1.00 PID Components P 0.0000 I 0.0000 D 0.0000
The BUCK_K multiplier uses PID feedback to maintain purchasing power against the commodity basket –
automatically adjusting how many BUCKs each homeowner can issue.
The Natural Cap on Issuance
Both systems cap issuance. The difference is how .
Limit
Commercial Banks
Alberta Bucks
Primary
Unencumbered wealth
Unencumbered wealth
Secondary
Repayment capacity
BUCK_K (adjusts automatically)
Enforcement
Bank underwriting + regulation
Algorithmic (PID controller)
Demand rises
Banks lend more (pro-cyclical)
BUCK_K falls → less issuance per asset
Overflow demand
More bank lending (more debt)
Traditional borrowing (reduces supply)
No interest does not mean no limit. As issuance grows, BUCK_K decreases, pushing marginal demand to traditional borrowing, contracting BUCK supply.
A natural objection: if there's no interest, won't everyone issue unlimited BUCKs? No.
Both banks and BUCKs are constrained by unencumbered wealth; you can't issue against an
already-encumbered asset. Banks add a second constraint: the borrower's repayment capacity,
assessed by underwriters and enforced by regulators.
BUCKs replace that human judgement with an algorithmic one: BUCK_K, the percentage of asset value
that can be issued as BUCKs. As total BUCK supply grows, BUCK_K automatically decreases. This
means each asset owner can issue fewer BUCKs per unit of wealth.
Those who need more liquidity than their BUCK_K allows must turn to traditional borrowing of BUCKs. This
carries interest and is not backed by new money creation, therefore reduces the effective money
supply. This creates a natural self-correcting cycle: more BUCKs, lower BUCK_K, more traditional
borrowing, less money supply, BUCK_K stabilizes.
The absence of interest does not lead to inflation. The system's own feedback loop prevents it,
without any regulator needing to intervene.
Constitutional Foundation
Alberta has authority under Sections 92(13), 92A
Federal Power (s. 91)
Alberta Buck
Conflict?
Currency issuance (s. 91(14))
Not issuing legal tender
No
Monetary policy (s. 91(15))
Not setting interest rates
No
Banking regulation (s. 91(15))
Using insurance, not banking
No
Legal tender laws
CAD remains legal tender
No
BUCKs aren't currency, legal tender, or monetary policy.
BUCKs are voluntary, insurance-backed private contracts – clearly provincial jurisdiction.
CAD$ remains Alberta's money. BUCKs are Alberta's liquidity .
Can Alberta actually do this? Isn't money federal jurisdiction?
Yes. Because BUCKs aren't money. They're insurance backed private contracts. Property rights,
insurance, and contracts are all under provincial authority under Section 92. Natural resources
are covered under Section 92A.
BUCKs don't compete with the dollar any more than a home equity line of credit competes with the
dollar. Both unlock value from assets. BUCKs just do it without debt. That's a private fiscal
decision, not a monetary policy decision.
"What about federal pushback?" That's exactly why provincial partnership matters. Navigate down
for the jurisdictional analysis, and why we need the province's legal framework before hostile
incumbents mobilise. Without provincial backing, insurers can't enforce liens; contracts get
challenged; and the entire system becomes vulnerable.
ATB Financial has operated outside federal Bank Act jurisdiction for eighty-seven years. The
precedent is established. The Alberta Buck is voluntary; anyone who prefers a traditional
mortgage can still get one.
Provincial Jurisdiction
Section 92(13): Property and Civil Rights
Section 92A: Natural Resources Authority
Exclusive jurisdiction over resource development
Taxation and royalty collection
Constitutional basis for monetizing resources
Precedent: ATB Financial has operated for 87 years outside federal Bank Act jurisdiction.
Section 92(13) gives provinces exclusive jurisdiction over property and civil rights. That covers
property law, contract law, and insurance regulation. All the building blocks of Alberta Bucks.
Section 92A gives Alberta exclusive authority over natural resources, including taxation and royalty
collection. Constitutional basis for accessing resource wealth as liquidity.
And the precedent: ATB Financial has operated for eighty-seven years outside the federal Bank Act.
Alberta already runs financial infrastructure under provincial authority.
Why Provincial Partnership?
"If this is private contracts and insurance, why involve the province?"
Private implementation IS possible – MakerDAO proves it. But some banks may fight back instead of evolving.
When hostile banks realise their $23B/year cash cow is threatened, they will use every legal and regulatory tool to shut it down.
If this is private contracts and insurance, why involve the province?
Because some banks will fight back. Twenty-three billion a year is an enormous cash cow. When
hostile entities realise the threat, they will use every legal and regulatory impediment to shut it
down.
With provincial partnership, the legal authority to measure, attest and underwrite private wealth
and execute private contracts is codified and secured. Albertans can be confident they are
operating within the law, and be certain they can realize the benefits.
Insurers need to recover assets after claims
Without Provincial Partnership
With Provincial Partnership
Insurance unenforceable (no lien recovery)
Liens registered with Land Titles
Contracts challenged in hostile courts
Provincial contract law backing
Regulatory attacks on "unlicensed banking"
Clearly framed as insurance (s.92)
Insurers refuse coverage (can't recover)
AIRB-supervised, enforceable claims
Time & money spent on lawfare defense
Provincial jurisdiction shields system
Without provincial partnership, asset recovery is legally uncertain – insurers won't participate, or premiums become prohibitive.
We must buttress every contract, insurance, and regulatory interface before rollout – not after hostile entities mobilise against us.
The table tells the story. Without provincial legal certainty, insurance may be unenforceable
because insurers can't recover assets after claims. Contracts could be challenged in hostile
courts. Regulatory attacks could misrepresent attestation and underwriting as unlicensed banking.
With provincial partnership, liens are securely registered with Land Titles. Provincial contract law
provides firm backing. AIRB supervision ensures transparent, enforceable claims. Provincial jurisdiction shields
the system from federal overreach.
We must work to buttress every legal, contract, insurance, and regulatory interface before rollout.
Not after hostile banks mobilise. Our citizens and our forward-thinking banks deserve the best
defense we can give them.
Not Anti-Bank. Anti-Monopoly.
This is not anti-bank rhetoric . Banks built effective systems with the technology available.
But the mechanism that requires citizens to borrow their own wealth back is a technological artifact .
Bank Expertise (Valuable)
Bank Monopoly (Replaceable)
Risk assessment
Zero-cost money creation
Local market knowledge
Interest extraction
Customer relationships
Opacity-dependent regulation
Regulatory compliance
Client Money Rules exemption
Banks' expertise is the asset. Their monopoly on money creation is the liability.
We need to be direct about this. This proposal is not anti-bank.
Banks built effective systems with the tools available: ledgers, vaults, branch networks, settlement
systems. Real infrastructure that real people depend on.
But the specific mechanism by which banks create money, the zero-cost issuance disguised as lending,
documented by Werner and confirmed by the Bank of England, is a technological artifact. It exists
because until recently there was no other way to provide the ledger, the attestation, and the
insurance infrastructure needed for citizens to access their own wealth.
Now there is. Blockchain provides the ledger. Smart contracts handle attestation. Parametric
insurance manages risk.
The bank's expertise: risk assessment, local knowledge, customer relationships, regulatory
compliance; that remains enormously valuable. That's the asset. The monopoly on money creation is
the liability.
ATB Financial has operated outside federal banking jurisdiction since 1938. Bow Valley Credit Union
is already exploring non-traditional monetary assets. These institutions can lead the transition,
earning attestation, insurance, custody, and exchange revenue instead of interest extraction.
The banks that move first capture these revenue streams. The banks that wait will find them captured
by DeFi protocols and stablecoin issuers that lack local knowledge, local trust, or local
relationships.
Works In Confederation – Or Out
The BUCK operates under existing provincial authority. It doesn't require any
constitutional change.
Scenario
BUCK Benefit
Alberta stays in confederation
$23B/yr stays in Alberta instead of flowing to Toronto
Alberta achieves independence
Proven fiscal infrastructure from day one
Federal tensions increase
Provincial economic resilience, regardless of Ottawa
The best argument for confederation is making it work for Albertans.
Delivering real economic relief – $17,000/yr per family , $85,000/yr per farm – does more to
address Albertans' frustration than any appeal to patriotism.
This point matters for everyone in the room, regardless of where you stand on Alberta's future
within confederation.
The Alberta Buck operates entirely under existing provincial jurisdiction:
It does not require independence. It does not preclude it. It works either way.
If Alberta stays in confederation, BUCKs keep twenty-three billion dollars a year circulating in
Alberta instead of flowing to Toronto bank shareholders. That alone transforms the province.
If Alberta ever achieves independence, the BUCK provides something no separatist proposal has
offered: proven, functioning fiscal infrastructure from day one. No scramble to establish a central
bank. No transition currency denominated in a foreign power's dollars. A working monetary system,
already tested, already trusted, already in use.
The Alberta Prosperity Project's Value of Freedom proposes an Alberta Dollar backed by gold, Bitcoin
and oil, but only after independence, a multi-year political process with uncertain outcome. The
BUCK delivers benefits now, under existing law, and becomes the foundation for any future Alberta
chooses.
For those who want to preserve confederation: consider that the frustration driving separatism isn't
abstract. It's concrete. Families paying two hundred seventy-five thousand in interest on their
own wealth. Farmers losing margins to debt service. Young people leaving because the arithmetic
doesn't work.
The most effective response isn't to argue against independence. It's to make confederation
deliver results. Seventeen thousand dollars a year back in a family's pocket. Eighty-five thousand
back in a farmer's operation. Three point two billion back in the provincial treasury.
That's the argument that changes minds. Not rhetoric. Results.
Is This Transition Proven?
By history, academic research, and live systems:
Precedent
Duration
Scale
Validation
Colonial Land Banks
70+ years Colonial economies
Historical success
Swiss WIR Bank
90+ years 60,000+ businesses
Ongoing operation
ATB Financial
87+ years $60B assets
Alberta capacity
MakerDAO/DAI
8+ years $5B+ RWA
Technical proof
USD Stablecoins
10+ years $180B market
Massive adoption
Alternatives to debt-backed money were used historically, and are now becoming available
again.
The technology exists. The question is whether Alberta's banks lead this transition – or get left behind.
"If this is such a good idea, why hasn't it been done?" It has. Repeatedly. At massive scale.
Colonial Land Banks: seventy years of asset-backed liquidity. Benjamin Franklin credited them with
colonial prosperity. The Swiss WIR Bank: ninety years, sixty thousand businesses. It actually
expands during recessions, providing liquidity exactly when banks contract.
ATB Financial: eighty-seven years of provincial financial infrastructure, outside federal banking
jurisdiction. Alberta already does this.
MakerDAO: five billion in real-world asset-backed tokens. Stablecoins: over one hundred eighty
billion. Tether processes more daily volume than Visa.
Navigate down for the specific technology components, all now production-ready, and the honest
answer to "why hasn't this been done?" and "is this now inevitable?"
MakerDAO: Real-World Validation
$5+ billion in real-world asset-backed stablecoins (DAI)Accepts tokenized real estate, bonds, and other assets as collateral
Users retain ownership unless liquidated for value decline
Proves the core mechanism works at scale
MakerDAO is the closest existing system to what we're proposing. Over five billion dollars in
real-world asset-backed stablecoins.
Users deposit collateral (including tokenised real estate and bonds) and issue DAI, a stablecoin
pegged to the US dollar. They retain ownership of their collateral unless its value declines below
the liquidation threshold.
This isn't a whitepaper. It's running infrastructure processing billions in transactions. The core
mechanism of asset-backed liquidity issuance by the asset owner is proven at scale.
Technology Components (All Production-Ready)
Blockchain infrastructure (Ethereum, Polygon, or Alberta-specific)
Smart contracts (insurance, minting, redemption)
Asset tokenization (NFTs for individual assets)
Fungible tokens (ERC-20 for circulation)
Oracle networks (Chainlink for prices, verification)
Parametric insurance (automated claim issuance)
DeFi pools (BUCK/CAD, BUCK/USD liquidity)
Alberta would be implementing, not inventing
Every technology component is production-ready. Blockchain infrastructure. Smart contracts. Asset
tokenisation. Fungible tokens. Oracle networks for price verification. Parametric insurance.
Decentralised liquidity pools.
Alberta wouldn't be inventing any of this. We'd be assembling proven pieces into a configuration
that gives citizens direct access to their own wealth's value.
The technical risk is integration, not invention. That's what the research phase tests.
Why Hasn't This Been Done?
Four barriers.
Bank profits: twenty-three billion a year from Alberta alone creates enormous incentive to resist
change.
Regulatory capture: financial regulation is written by and for incumbent banks. The rules assume
banks are the only entities that can create liquidity.
Technical barriers: blockchain, smart contracts, and stablecoins only matured in the last decade.
This genuinely wasn't possible before.
And government inertia: "this is how it's always been done." Until someone leads.
But some people are doing it. MakerDAO issues over five billion in asset-backed tokens.
Stablecoins exceed one hundred eighty billion. The mechanism works. The question is whether
Alberta formalises it for its citizens.
If savings are this significant, why isn't everyone doing it?
Some people ARE doing it; Most economists and bankers don't realize this is money issuance, yet:
MakerDAO: $5B+ in asset-backed tokens issued
Stablecoin market: $180B and growing rapidly
The question isn't "can this work?" – it's "will Alberta lead, or follow?"
Stablecoins: Breaking the Closed Loop
When you buy $100k USDC, your bank deposit leaves the Canadian banking system entirely .
Step
Bank System Effect
Tether Effect
You send $100k to Tether
Deposit disappears
Receives $100k
Tether buys Treasuries
$100k leaves banks
Earns yield
No offsetting deposit
Net drain: -$100k No reserve required
Stablecoins are a one-way valve: Deposits exit the banking system, never return.
Stablecoins scuttle the "closed loop" of bank reserves. When you buy one hundred thousand in
Tether, your bank deposit leaves the Canadian banking system entirely. Tether buys US Treasuries.
No offsetting Canadian dollar deposit returns.
It's a one-way valve. Deposits exit, and never come back. The closed-loop reserve system that
let banks create money without needing reserves starts to fail.
This is already happening at massive scale. Over one hundred eighty billion dollars has migrated to
stablecoins. Tether already processes more daily volume than Visa, and this trend is only going
to accelerate.
The GENIUS Act
The GENIUS Act legitimises entities that:
Drain deposits from banks (no offsetting inflow)
Don't hold reserves (unlike banks)
Earn yield on backing assets (Bonds, gold, BTC)
Compete for deposits without banking costs
CLARITY Act blocked because stablecoin issuers want to offer yields .
If stablecoins pay interest, they become strictly better than bank deposits.
Scuttles the closed-loop reserve system
that let banks create money without needing reserves.
The GENIUS Act in the US legitimises stablecoin issuers: entities that drain deposits, don't hold
traditional bank reserves, earn and pay yield on backing assets, and compete for deposits without
banking costs.
The CLARITY Act was blocked because stablecoin issuers want to offer yields. If stablecoins pay
interest, they become strictly better than bank deposits.
This is the regulatory writing on the wall. The closed-loop system that enabled bank money creation
is being dismantled, by legislation.
Alberta's banks need a strategy for this new world.
The Inevitable Transition
The transition from extractive lending to infrastructure services is inevitable.
Stablecoins, DeFi, and tokenised assets are exposing the old model.
Alberta's banks can choose their role:
Option
Action
Outcome
Lead the transition Partner on Alberta Buck development
New revenue: custody, attestation, insurance administration
Resist
Lobby against citizen liquidity
Temporary reprieve, then collapse
Ignore
Business as usual
Deposits drain to stablecoins
The transition from extractive lending to infrastructure services is inevitable. Stablecoins,
DeFi, and tokenised assets are exposing the old model.
Alberta's banks face three options.
They can lead the transition: partner on Alberta Buck development and earn new revenue from
custody, attestation, and insurance administration.
They could resist, lobby against citizen liquidity, and perhaps gain a temporary reprieve.
Or they could ignore it entirely, and watch deposits drain to stablecoins and eventually to
jurisdictions that offer something like the Alberta Buck.
The smart money is on leading.
Banks as Infrastructure Partners
ATB Financial, Bow Valley Credit Union, Servus – Alberta's community banks can become
trusted infrastructure, not extractive intermediaries:
Service
Revenue Model
Why Banks Excel
Asset attestation
Per-issuance fee
Local knowledge, trust
Custody & safekeeping
Basis points on AUM
Existing vault infrastructure
Insurance administration
Pool management fee
Regulatory compliance capacity
Jubilee operations
Per-redemption fee
Customer relationship
BUCK ↔ CAD$ exchange
Transaction spread
Existing payment rails
Banks don't disappear. They evolve.
Alberta's community banks have something stablecoins and DeFi protocols don't: local trust,
physical presence, and existing relationships with Alberta families and businesses.
ATB Financial, Bow Valley Credit Union, and Servus can become trusted infrastructure partners.
Instead of earning declining interest income from money creation, they earn growing fee income from
real services: asset custody, identity attestation, insurance pool administration, and Jubilee
management.
These aren't speculative revenue streams. Every Alberta Buck issuance needs attestation. Every
pledged asset needs custody. Every insurance pool needs administration. The volume is proportional
to adoption, and the revenue is steady and predictable.
Banks don't disappear. They evolve from extractive intermediaries into trusted local
infrastructure. The smart banks will see this coming and position themselves now.
Albertans Are Pioneers
Ottawa won't pioneer this. Alberta's provincial authority and community banking
infrastructure make it the natural leader.
Alberta can:
Pioneer wealth-backed liquidity under provincial authority
Keep $23B/year circulating in Alberta instead of flowing to Toronto
Give Alberta's banks a first-mover advantage
Build financial infrastructure that serves citizens and banks alike
Ottawa won't pioneer this. Federal banking regulation protects the existing model.
But Alberta has provincial authority over property, civil rights, and insurance. Alberta has
community banks with deep local relationships. And Alberta has the political will to challenge
the status quo when it doesn't serve Albertans.
This is Alberta's to lead. Pioneer wealth-backed liquidity under provincial authority, keep
twenty-three billion per year circulating in-province, and build financial infrastructure that
serves citizens.
Status Quo vs. Alberta Buck
Status Quo
Alberta Buck Future
$23B/year leaves Alberta
$23B/year stays in Alberta
Banks create, you pay
You create, you keep
Wealth concentrates
Wealth circulates
Ottawa controls liquidity
Alberta controls its economy
Banks face stablecoin erosion
Banks lead the transition
The question isn't whether this transition happens. It's whether Alberta leads or follows.
The table shows the contrast. Status quo: wealth concentrates, Ottawa controls liquidity, and
banks face slow erosion from stablecoins. With the Alberta Buck: wealth circulates, Alberta
controls its economy, and banks lead the transition into infrastructure services.
The question isn't whether this transition happens; that's now inevitable. Stablecoins are already
forcing it. The question is whether Alberta leads or follows.
Impact: Government, Business & Family
Eliminating $3.2B/year in public debt servicing , by issuing Alberta Bucks instead of selling CAD$
bonds:
Item
Amount
Provincial debt
$82.8 billion
Annual debt servicing
$3.2 billion
Cost per family of four
$2,800/year
Backed by Alberta's attestable public wealth : $430+ billion (Heritage Fund, Crown lands,
infrastructure, resource royalties)
Three point two billion a year. That's what Alberta pays in debt service on eighty-three billion in
provincial debt.
But Alberta owns over four hundred thirty billion in assets. The Heritage Fund. Crown lands.
Infrastructure. Resource royalties. The province is borrowing against wealth it already owns.
Navigate down for the compound analysis. A single ten billion dollar infrastructure program:
eighteen billion via bonds, versus ten point six billion via BUCKs. Savings of seven point four
billion on one program.
Over thirty years, investing those savings at four percent, the Heritage Fund could grow by three
hundred twenty-five billion. That's the difference between borrowing, and using what you own.
This is where the scale shifts from interesting to transformative. Household savings are meaningful.
Provincial savings reshape Alberta's fiscal future for generations.
Example: $10 Billion Infrastructure Program
One concrete example. A ten billion dollar infrastructure program.
Via traditional bonds at four percent: four hundred million per year in interest. Over twenty
years, total cost: eighteen billion. For a ten billion program.
Via Alberta Bucks backed by provincial assets: thirty million in insurance per year. Total cost:
ten point six billion. Savings on this single program: seven point four billion dollars.
The province owns the assets. The assets are insured. The only difference is whether the province
borrows against them, or accesses their value directly.
Metric
Traditional Bonds
Alberta Buck
Principal
$10B
$10B
Term
20 years
20 years
Annual interest/insurance
$400M (4%)
$30M (0.3%)
Total 20-year cost
$18B
$10.6B
Savings ---
$7.4B
The Compound Advantage: 30-Year Analysis
With $80B financing over 30 years :
Traditional bonds: Total cost $138.8B, end with nothing
Alberta Buck: Total cost $105.5B, invest $1.11B annual savings
Scale that up over thirty years. Eighty billion in total financing.
Traditional bonds cost one hundred thirty-nine billion. You end with nothing.
Alberta Bucks cost one hundred six billion. The annual savings of one point one billion, invested
at four percent, compound over three decades.
The Shocking Difference in Outcome
At 4% return, investment account grows to $211.8B
Metric
Traditional
Alberta Buck
Total financing cost
$138.8B
$105.5B
Investment account
$0
$211.8B
Net position -$138.8B +$106.3B
Heritage Fund could grow by $325 billion over 30 years
At four percent return, the investment account grows to two hundred twelve billion.
Traditional path: negative one hundred thirty-nine billion. Alberta Buck path: positive one hundred
six billion. A quarter-trillion dollar difference in net position.
The Heritage Fund could grow by three hundred twenty-five billion over thirty years. That's the
compound advantage of not paying interest on assets you already own.
Impact: Families & Businesses
Interest replaced by insurance across every sector:
Sector
Typical Debt
Interest
BUCK Insurance
Annual Savings
Average Home
$380K
$19K/year
$1.9K/year
$17K
Grain Farm
$2.0M
$100K/year
$15K/year
$85K
Manufacturer
$2.0M
$125K/year
$10K/year
$115K
Small Business
$333K avg
$21K/year
$2.7K/year
$18K
We have a full transition roadmap outlined – critical, whether or not Alberta seeks independence.
The savings apply everywhere Albertans currently borrow.
A young couple in Calgary saves ten thousand a year on their home. A grain farmer saves eighty-five
thousand; often the margin between surviving a bad year and losing the farm. A manufacturer frees
one hundred fifteen thousand for hiring and equipment. A small business owner keeps eighteen
thousand that would otherwise flow to a bank.
At fifty percent household adoption, plus business uptake, fourteen point two billion stays in
Alberta every year. Not extracted as interest; circulating through communities.
The Alberta Buck Transition article details what these savings look like in practice, from Jake Fehr's
grain farm to Rob Makokis's plumbing business , as adoption scales over a decade.
Navigate down for household details, business sector analysis, and the agriculture harvest cycle
that traps Alberta's farmers.
Household Savings
35.7% reduction in home ownership costs
Mortgage (5.0% )
Alberta Buck (0.5% )
Year 1 cost
$15,960 interest + ins.$760 insurance
25 -year total$221,734 interest$19,000 insurance
Total cost $620,734 $399,000
Savings ---
$221,734 (35.7% )
If 50.0% adopt: $3.3 BILLION retained annually
Five hundred eighty thousand Alberta households carry mortgages. Let's look at what that actually
costs them.
A traditional mortgage at current rates: year one interest alone exceeds nineteen thousand dollars.
Over the full twenty-five year term, interest totals almost three hundred thousand. That money leaves
the household. Leaves the community. Flows to distant bank shareholders.
Now look at the Alberta Buck column. Same house. Same ownership. Insurance at around half a
percent annually. Total cost over the same term: dramatically lower. The savings line at the
bottom tells the story: over two hundred thousand dollars per household.
Think about what nineteen thousand dollars a year means to a young couple in Calgary. A vacation with
the kids. A retirement contribution. The margin between getting ahead and falling behind.
At fifty percent adoption, over three billion stays in Alberta communities every year, instead of
flowing to distant institutions.
Would families adopt this? The savings are immediate and concrete. No ideology required. You pay
less for the same house. The choice is straightforward.
Business & Farm Savings
Businesses exist primarily to pay interest, not create owner wealth .
Sector
Debt Carried
Interest Cost
BUCK Insurance
Annual Savings
Grain Farm
$2.0M
$100K/year
$15K/year
$85K
Manufacturer
$2.0M
$125K/year
$10K/year
$115K
Entrepreneurs
Avg $333K
$21K/year
$2.7K/year
$18K
170,000 small businesses; ~120,000 carrying debt
Total business debt: $40+ billion
Aggregate annual savings: $8.4 billion/year
A grain farmer carrying two million in operating debt. Normal for Alberta. At five percent,
that's one hundred thousand a year in interest, before selling a single bushel.
With BUCKs backed by stored crops, land, and equipment, insurance costs fifteen thousand. Savings:
eighty-five thousand. For many farms, that's the entire margin between surviving a bad year and
losing an operation that's been in the family for generations.
Interest doesn't care about crop prices. During commodity downturns, a third of Alberta farms
operate at a loss. Interest compounds regardless. Insurance adjusts with asset values.
Across one hundred twenty thousand debt-carrying businesses: eight point four billion per year.
Agriculture: Harvest Cycle Options
Current cruel choice:
Sell at harvest when prices are lowest, or
Finance storage while borrowing at interest hoping for price improvement
With Alberta Buck:
Attest stored crop value → Create BUCKs for immediate needs → Redeem when selling at optimal pricesBreaks debt-driven cycle forcing poor sale prices
Restores hope to small-scale family farming
Agriculture faces a uniquely cruel cycle. At harvest, prices are lowest because everyone is
selling. To hold and sell later at better prices, you need financing. Which means borrowing at
interest.
With BUCKs, a farmer attests the value of stored grain, creates BUCK liquidity for immediate needs,
and redeems when selling at optimal prices. No interest accumulating while you wait for better
markets.
This breaks the debt-driven cycle that forces poor sale prices and restores viability to small-scale
family farming.