> Randolph Fritz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Could someone tell me, please, the historical background of this odd
> > use of language? If it's already been discussed, then please point me
> > to the archives.
Bill, Let me make another try to understand this. In a previous posting
you (I believe?) said that the reason terminology had become so confused
was that peoples bank statements were produced from the bank's
point of view, instead of the client's point of view. So clients
who did not understand this (i.e., most people) ended up with an exactly
reversed meaning for the words "credit" and "debit".
But you posting I am quoting below seems to completely ognore the
point-of view issue. Let me try to weave my confusion it into
the text and see if it makes sense.
Or should I just find a good book on accounting?
>
> When you make a deposit in a bank account, the bank OWES YOU money.
> You become a "creditor" and the bank is a "debtor", just as if you had
> loaned the bank money. Which you have.
So the points-of-view are that of a "creditor" and a "debtor".
>
> A "credit" is a "payment by a debtor on an amount due" by both common
> sense and accounting practice.
>
> Therefore, a withdrawal of money from the bank, which reduces the
> balance of the account and therefore the amount that the bank owes
> you, is a "credit".
Is point of view relevant here? Is this a credit from the bank's point
of view and a debit from yours? Or is it a credit from any point of view?
>
> A "debit" is etymologically a "debt", i.e. an increase in the amount
> owed by a debtor, again in both common sense and accounting practice.
>
> Therefore, a deposit of money into the bank, which is an increase in
> the balance of the account and of the amount of money that the bank
> owes you, is a "debit".
And is this a debit from the bank's point of view and a credit from yours?
Because you now have an increased assets, and the bank has reduced assets?
Or is the terminology independent of point of view?
>
> I had to have this explained to me a million times but now it makes
> perfect sense and I can't even think of a withdrawal being a "debit"
> any more (how's that? I don't owe the bank any money!)
>
> Bill Gribble
>
-- hendrik.
>
