Commercial bank loans are in essence bluff until they are called. Create numbers on peoples account, charge fees and interest. As long as not more money than you have leaves it is fine...

Why would promoting bank runs be illegal, if it wasn't a scam. Surely they should fully held every single currency unit and be callable in seconds.

Well it's not backed by anything, so governments can just print more of it, devaluing all the existing holdings of that currency.

Its backed by a Proof-of-Stake system called politics, society, world economics.

It would take an essay to explain it fully because it's a scam in almost every aspect including in the way it uses complexity to hide the mechanics of the scam... But I can point to a few things.

For example all money is created either by government or banks. Money moves fast; on average, each unit/dollar doesn't stay in the economy very long (in terms of how far it can travel) because it is quickly taxed down to nothing and ends up back in gov coffers. Each time it hops to a different person via a transaction, it gets taxed at say 30% (e.g. avg income tax)... How far from the gov or bank money printer can any newly created money travel before it's taxed down to nearly nothing? After just 6 hops, almost 90% has been taxed away... This creates an uneven playing field as communities which are further from a 'money printer' exist in an artificially scarce monetary environment. Read up on the "Cantillon effect".

But the system also scams most asset holders. As the money supply keeps inflating and pushing up asset prices, if you sell your asset, you have to pay a capital gains tax on it... Say you bought an asset and it went up in price 50% over 10 years but during this time inflation was also 50% (over that whole 10 year period)... You have to pay CGT tax on the price increase even though your real buying power has not increased... Tax is eating into your wealth even if it flatlined when measured in terms of buying power. BTW, does it ever get mentioned that inflation compounds? This means that people's loss of buying power compounds as well. This is especially bad for long 20 or 30 year contracts. Here I could go on a rant about gov treasury bills being a scam...

Don't get me started on how inflation errodes the true value of your employment contracts... Or how it pushes you up into higher tax brackets whenever you manage to negotiate a salary 'increase' (I put it in quotation marks because your salary increase is probably not actually an increase; even language has become a scam). You pay more tax whenever the fake fiat numbers get bigger, even if your real buying power has stayed flat.

Only big VCs, investors and founders who get crazy returns of 100x on their investments can beat inflation and the tax scam enough to actually make a profit in this system.

There are also big macro issues like how wars are used to prop up fiat currencies of certain powerful countries and to fill the pockets of weapons manufacturers.

Now let's not discuss the real reason why Africa cannot escape poverty and the unbelievable hypocrisy of blaming poor citizens for 'choosing' their predicament while western governments are actively helping to install and maintain corrupt dictators over there whilst publicly preaching the virtues democracy whenever it's convenient!

Literally everything has become a scam on top of a scam. As I said, even our language has become deceptive, often used unwittingly because the big fiat scam is redefining the very meaning of words like 'profit' and 'salary' from underneath us as a way to extract as much tax from us as possible.

Yes capitalism and imperialism are bad ways to organize society in a fair and equitable manner

Yes especially when combined.

I actually think capitalism has merit but you need a strong government on top to ensure that a level playing field is guaranteed and maintained.

I think this partly explains China's relative success over the past few decades. In spite of certain inefficiencies that come from trying to control everything, it seems that China did a better job at providing a more level playing field for their market system (at least internally, within China). I still think it's probably not level enough though as they also have the same basic fiat system. I think they just did a better job as identifying and stomping our rent-seeking from their economy.