In many of my writings (e.g., 1979) I kept warning against the permission to pay interest on checkable demand deposits and the permission of checkability of interest-earning time deposits. With overwhelming professional support (based on a different theory), the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 has been passed. All my dire predictions-and morehave been fulfilled: a. The benefits to the consumers are nil. The Act has not changed the total amount of interest that banks are able to pay. The sole difference is that before the Act the consumers had the choice of either receiving only transaction services (on demand deposits) or only interest income on their savings (time deposits). After the Act, they became able to stop wasting by fusing the two. They now receive the same amount of interest as before on a new joint product, a sickly offspring of two healthy parents. b. Private costs to the consumers are heavy. In our Condominium Association, members started, as I predicted, to waste shoeleather by paying their dues not when convenient but when least costly. The never-considered net change in demand for shoeleather is unpredictable a priori. What interest they gain on their NOW accounts is more than offset by the association's loss on our money market funds. But, even if there were no net loss, our dues have to be increased. This is equivalent to business firms' increases in prices. It would be interesting to know by how much late payments caused by the reform have fostered inflation.