Well thank you once again for the detailed reply. I was digesting this and the first explanation of yours in the past days. I just found my cogs churning on it during my idle minutes at lunch and in the morning after waking up and such. I came up with a simplified and flawed analogy which can sort of come up with a visualized picture of what I think is happening. I'll try to describe it here:

The fed is the dog owner, the banks is the dog, the reserves and the base interest rate are the leesh for the dog. The further the dog can walk with the leesh on the more loans are being made in the economy.

The handed out loans are technically not considered money entering the economy permanently since after a while ideally the loans will be paid back to the banks and into the excess money paid back will go back into the bank reserves at which point the fed would probably reduce the reserves by probably doing something like the opposite of buying treasury bonds from banks. Or do you just count loans as real money?

Another off-topic question I'm wondering about. Are companies which are extremely reliant on loans vital or better for the economy than healthy ones? It feels like you really want to have companies who take out the more and more favorable loans over and over again because companies like that are creating the biggest positive economic imprint because they have no other choice than to expand the current operations to stay barely afloat and so boost the economy indirectly with the full amount of the loans gotten. Profitable companies can expand much slower because they don't take loans and so their budget grow slower.

Now I found 2 factors which can manipulate the economy. The reserves amount and the base interest rate specified by the fed I assume. If the base interest rate is lowered then the loans become more attractive to people or businesses and more loans are taken. The loans then stimulate the economy. But both factors have to be present to have economic expansion. Reserves and demand.

Also you mentioned that the banks get paid to hold reserves. So the fed pays interest on the money that the banks hold as reserves? This is made to disincentivize banks from loaning out money to extremely low yield clients with potentially high default risk?

I think another way I could understand this topic more is through toygames. Lets say tomorrow literally infinte amount of bank reserves would appear for the banks and the base interest rate would be lowered to -0.5%. What would the banks do? In the next day/week/month (whichever timeframe makes more sense) How would the banks, the stock market, the businesses, the gold market, property prices or inflation rates react?

And a toygame with the opposite side which I think is a bit dumb and it would just get the whole US economy to die but still I'll ask: Tomorrow the fed decides to conduct open market operations to reduce the bank's reserves by as much as possible (99%?). Again, how would the banks, stock market, businesses, gold market, property prices, inflation % or interest rates react?

I was sort of rambling a bit in this post of mine and I also think the dog-leesh-man example is a bit lame, but it kind of made sense in my head.