Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 116

Thread: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

  1. #21
    Great Value Carrots Santa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,334
    Thanks
    1,223
    Thanked 1,833 Times in 999 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    Quote Originally Posted by madfranks View Post
    Question: If someone works their ass off and saves $100,000 and then loans that money to someone else at 5% interest for one year, is that usury?
    Yes, according to Aristotle.

    Aristotle, one of the fathers of Western thought, wrote in his 350 B.C. work, Politics, in Book One, Part X, that usury is the lending of money at interest:

    “The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of an modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural.“

    Today, usury has been taken to mean the lending of money at some arbitrary “exorbitant” rate of interest. Traditionally, however, it has been viewed as the lending of money at any interest rate.
    However, that doesn't mean lending can't be very advantageous. For instance, if someone had worked their ass off and saved $100,000 and lent the money to a fledgling
    company for R&D on a new type of CAD software, for instance, that cut the lenders workload in half, then, theoretically the lender would only have to work half their ass off next year. That would constitute a very nice return and plenty of incentive to lend.

    Earning money from money, however, is not work, nor is it earned. Nor does it really wind up helping anyone but the lender. It's using others labor for one's own personal gain and perpetuating indentured servitude into the future.
    "Trust those who seek the truth, but doubt those who say they found it."

  2. #22
    Moderator madfranks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    11,761
    Thanks
    7,376
    Thanked 8,034 Times in 4,008 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    Quote Originally Posted by Santa View Post
    Earning money from money, however, is not work, nor is it earned. Nor does it really wind up helping anyone but the lender. It's using others labor for one's own personal gain and perpetuating indentured servitude into the future.
    I'm not so sure. What if I was planning on spending that money on a new car, a home remodel and a nice vacation? But instead I lend it. I would be earning my 5% return by driving a junk car, living in a run down home, and postponing my trip. Giving up comfort now for something better in the future is earning it, IMO.

    And regarding it not helping anyone but the lender, again I'm not so sure. Say I inherited an empty lot in an urban setting and wanted to build a small business on it, say a parking lot. I want to provide parking to willing customers who would pay me a certain amount of money to park on my lot. But I don't have the money to build this small business. Say I project that I can save the money in five years time, but in the meantime I have no parking lot and customers don't have my parking spots. If I borrow $100,000 from a friend who saved it, I build my parking lot and start my business. I make enough profit to pay my friend back, plus interest, make a profit for myself, and I'm providing a valuable service to my customers. I'd say it helped more than just the lender.
    Last edited by madfranks; 11th March 2013 at 01:00 PM.
    "Liberty is so creative, and the government is so stupid, that I’m very optimistic about the future"
    - Lew Rockwell

  3. #23
    Dangerous Donald Neuro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Absurdistan
    Posts
    21,221
    Thanks
    8,798
    Thanked 7,785 Times in 4,994 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    Quote Originally Posted by madfranks View Post
    Question: If someone works their ass off and saves $100,000 and then loans that money to someone else at 5% interest for one year, is that usury?
    I don't think it is wrong per se to lend money at an interest, the lender takes a risk, even if the value of the money is stable and even if the borrower has securities, that could cover the amount, and is a standup person that would do his outmost to pay back what he owes. But maybe it would be better if the money lender/provider of capital takes a stake in the enterprise that the money is going to, and subsequently a part of the profit...

    It is naturally a totally different issue if the lender can conjure the amount by money creation which doesn't require an effort at all...

    If it is indeed usury to lend wealth, at a reasonable interest, accumulated by hard work, I wouldn't say it is immoral, it provides an opportunity for the borrower, and naturally the lender should be rewarded for that, and the risk he is taking, but I think it would be more natural if the lender takes a part of the potential profits the venture creates...

  4. #24
    Great Value Carrots Santa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,334
    Thanks
    1,223
    Thanked 1,833 Times in 999 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    Giving up comfort now for something better in the future is earning it, IMO.
    Hmmm. Last week I bought some cheap bottom shelf Scotch instead of the good stuff, thus depriving myself now and saving $28.
    Does that mean I earned an extra $28 last week? I don't think so.

    Usury is making money off money. Money for nothing and chicks for free.

    I think it would be more natural if the lender takes a part of the potential profits the venture creates...
    Yeah, in that case, the lender isn't making money off money, but rather from the venture itself.
    If the venture fails, no one profits. That way, there's built in incentive to make sure the venture succeeds.

    That sounds about right to me.
    "Trust those who seek the truth, but doubt those who say they found it."

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Santa For This Useful Post:

    Hillbilly (23rd March 2013)

  6. #25
    Moderator madfranks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    11,761
    Thanks
    7,376
    Thanked 8,034 Times in 4,008 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    Quote Originally Posted by Neuro View Post
    I think it would be more natural if the lender takes a part of the potential profits the venture creates...
    Quote Originally Posted by Santa View Post
    Yeah, in that case, the lender isn't making money off money, but rather from the venture itself.
    If the venture fails, no one profits. That way, there's built in incentive to make sure the venture succeeds.

    That sounds about right to me.
    The lender isn't making money off of money, but rather from the venture. Aren't we just playing semantics at this point? Since the money that will be used to repay the loan is made from the profits of the venture, what is the difference?
    "Liberty is so creative, and the government is so stupid, that I’m very optimistic about the future"
    - Lew Rockwell

  7. #26
    Chatmaster Flash vacuum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7,790
    Thanks
    2,523
    Thanked 4,385 Times in 2,415 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    Quote Originally Posted by madfranks View Post
    The lender isn't making money off of money, but rather from the venture. Aren't we just playing semantics at this point? Since the money that will be used to repay the loan is made from the profits of the venture, what is the difference?
    I think the key thing is to look at not one isolated loan being made, but a system where many such loans are made.

    For example, there is no money creation in a system with a single fractional reserve bank. Rather, it requires money to be loaned from one bank and deposited in another. Then the entire system multiplies the money.

    Likewise, when there is a class of people who make money from loans, it is in their natural best interest to collude to create inflation, then restrict the loans to create deflation and thereby end up owning all material assets. Through this cycle, the lender class milks the host society for it's assets. Any one lender does take on risk for any one loan. But as a group they have a monopoly such that any venture must be financed by them (for businesses to remain competitive with each other), and everyone who they finance is vulnerable until the loan is paid back. If it's time to change the economic climate (restrict the money supply through giving less loans), then whoever is exposed at the time to them is SOL.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to vacuum For This Useful Post:

    govcheetos (12th March 2013),Santa (11th March 2013)

  9. #27
    Dangerous Donald Neuro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Absurdistan
    Posts
    21,221
    Thanks
    8,798
    Thanked 7,785 Times in 4,994 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    Quote Originally Posted by madfranks View Post
    The lender isn't making money off of money, but rather from the venture. Aren't we just playing semantics at this point? Since the money that will be used to repay the loan is made from the profits of the venture, what is the difference?
    If the venture is a very successful one, the lender will get well more than the normal interest and the payback, if it is moderately successful he will get about his capital and the normal interest, if it is just getting by he will maybe get his money back, if it fails he will get back a small part of what he invested. With a loan he may end up owning the man, and his future incomes, if the venture is not successful. In the first circumstance the investor/lender has to be smart and active, in the second he has to be ruthless.

  10. #28
    Gold jimswift's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    885
    Thanks
    381
    Thanked 310 Times in 184 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    In a system of fractional reserve banking(legalized counterfeiting), charging interest is usury.

    The bank is "lending" you nothing but some conjured up paper, and your paying them back with your hard labor.

    Excessive interest is usury right? Well, if they lent you nothing, anything in excess of that, is excessive.
    "Is it really a crime to report that the government is committing a crime?"

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jimswift For This Useful Post:

    govcheetos (12th March 2013),madfranks (11th March 2013),messianicdruid (23rd March 2013)

  12. #29
    Hatha Sunahara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Eldorado
    Posts
    3,803
    Thanks
    1,411
    Thanked 2,367 Times in 1,125 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    If I work my ass off and save my money, perhaps I could use it to build an apartment building. I could then rent out apartments for the market rate, and make a profit. Is that usury? No. I worked for my money. I saved it. I invested it. I am entitled to the return on my investment. If I lend money to someone else who wants to build a business on an urban lot and doesn't have the money, and I charge him interest, I am engaging in usury. If I offer to be his business partner, and put up the money in exchange for a portion of the future profits of the business, that is not usury. I am offering to risk my money in exchange for a return. I am offering to become a co-owner of the business. This is the difference between equity and debt. Someone who lends you money is guaranteed repayment and a return without risking anything.

    Perhaps you can get an insight into this unnaturalness of lending money at interest by reading the following excerpt from 'The Sumerian Swindle' (pages 15-18) by 'God' aka Banjo Billy:

    The Sumerian Swindle started like this: If you are on good terms with your next-door neighbor,
    and you run short of some flour or eggs in the middle of cooking supper, a neighborly thing to do is to run next door or send your children next door to borrow what you need until you can go to the market and restock supplies. After shopping, you will repay your neighbor for the borrowed food. Such borrowing among neighbors has been going on ever since people began living together in groups – that is, for the past ten or twenty million years. Borrowing and repaying, is a way to build friendships and to sustain society. Borrowing and repaying, is a vital mechanism in every human society. But it became corrupted among the Ubaidians of Mesopotamia.

    As the people whom we call the Ubaidians first practiced irrigated cultivation of crops, something
    about this natural human relationship changed. Perhaps one neighbor got tired of constantly lending out grain to another neighbor who was slow to repay. So, it happened that at a certain time, the lending neighbor agreed to lend out a measure of grain only if the borrower agreed to repay a measure and a handful; or perhaps a basket of grain was lent out in return for a basket-and-a-half in repayment; or perhaps, sensing the reluctance of a neighbor to loan, the borrower, himself, out of charitable good will and personal need, offered to repay two baskets of grain for one loaned.

    Whatever the actual origin of the mechanism, the Ubaidians evolved a system that we today call,
    “interest on a loan”. This occurred sometime between 9,000 and 6,000 BC when they first began building their permanent mud brick towns and villages. Central grain storehouses were a part of every town. And in every town and village, individual grain storeage space was a part of every house. So, when the larder was empty, borrowing from a neighbor kept starvation from the door and promoted friendly relations among neighbors in a harmonious society of give and take.

    But something else occurred in the actual understanding of this development in the minds of
    both the borrower and the lender. A borrower who repays the loan has nothing left in his hands to contemplate. But the lender who gains back the loan plus interest has more than he started with to contemplate. The poor man is even poorer than he was and the rich man is richer than he was. The actual physical ownership of the grain plus interest enabled the lender to accumulate an ever-increasing store of goods. In addition to what he started with, both the returned loan as well as the interest could be loaned out at interest. And that interest when repaid could again be loaned out in a spiraling increase in total wealth.

    This was the beginning of the Sumerian Swindle. Two baskets of grain on loan at 50% interest
    brought back three baskets. These three could again be loaned at 50% interest to bring back four-and-ahalf.

    These four-and-a-half could again be loaned to bring back six and three-quarters. In a short time,
    those original two baskets produced an additional four and three-quarters baskets of grain for free. And 16 so on, and so on, as an increasing spiral of profits accumulated for free and for doing no work other than making loans. As the size and number of loans increased, the total wealth of the grain lender began to increase far beyond the wealth of his neighbors.

    Then, a magical and mysterious thing happened. Once a certain profit point had been reached
    where the lender was loaning out not his original grain but the grain that he had previously received as interest, then everything that he profited from that point onward was wealth given to him for free. The grain that he received as interest-on-the-loan had cost him nothing. And when he loaned out that same grain at interest, both it and its returning interest were free grain that had also cost him nothing. This free grain continued to multiply over time as it was loaned out again and again. Huge mountains of grain filling his storerooms to the rafters began to accumulate, grain that had cost him absolutely nothing more than charging interest-on-a-loan.
    In those days, a man’s wealth was measured by how much land and grain he had and by how
    many goats and sheep that he owned. Very soon, those Ubaidian grain and silver lenders were enjoying vast fortunes. Thanks to the arithmetic deception of lending-at-interest, they were loaning out at interest what they had gotten for free. Eventually, using that free grain in barter for other goods, everything that they owned actually had cost them absolutely nothing at all!
    The lender found that by loaning out a basket of grain, he got back two baskets instead. Of course, a light bulb did not go off in his head since it was still the Stone Age, seven thousand years before Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Edison, but certainly the very first loan shark had a major brainstorm! Without working under the hot sun, without lifting a single load upon his head, without walking a single step, two baskets of grain were delivered to his door. And the one who delivered the grain was glad to do it since the loan had helped him through a difficult time. After all, they were all fellow villagers and all on good relations with one another. The hatreds would come much later.

    The Sumerian Swindle has twenty-one secret frauds. The Twenty-One Secret Frauds of the
    Sumerian Swindle are:
    #1 All interest on the loan of money is a swindle.
    #2 Collateral that is worth more than the loan, is the banker’s greatest asset.
    #3 Loans rely on the honesty of the borrower but not the honesty of the lender.
    #4 Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral.
    #5 The debtor is the slave of the lender.
    #6 High morals impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the
    moneylender who there-by masters them and bends them to his will.
    #7 Monopoly gives wealth and power but monopoly of money gives the greatest wealth and power.
    #8 Large crime families are more successful than lone criminals or gangs; international crime families are
    the most successful of all.
    #9 Only the most ruthless and greedy moneylenders survive; only the most corrupt bankers triumph.
    #10 Time benefits the banker and betrays the borrower.
    #11 Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers
    when the people are impoverished.
    #12 All private individuals who control the public’s money supply are swindling traitors to both people
    and country.
    #13 All banking is a criminal enterprise; all bankers are international criminals, so secrecy is essential.
    #14 Anyone who is allowed to lend-at-interest eventually owns the entire world.
    #15 Loans to friends are power; loans to enemies are weapons.
    #16 Labor is the source of wealth; control the source and you control the wealth, raise up labor and you
    can pull down kings.
    #17 Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be
    sacrificed.
    #18 When the source of goods is distant from the customers, profits are increased both by import and
    export.
    #19 Prestige is a glittering robe for ennobling treason and blinding fools; the more it is used, the more it
    profits he who dresses in it.
    #20 Champion the Minority in order to dispossess the Majority of their wealth and power, then swindle
    the Minority out of that wealth and power.
    #21 Control the choke points and master the body; strangle the choke points and kill the body.

    Grain could be bartered for goats, and goats for woven cloth and boats; and boats and goats and
    grain could be exchanged for houses and irrigated land, etc. By loaning grain out at interest and using the interest-income to barter for other goods, a clever trader could leverage his way to more wealth than any of his neighbors even though all of them had started off at the same level in society. Like the modern bankers who pile up their swindled wealth into skyscrapers, yachts and Lear Jets, investments in war and cornering the commodities market, the Ubaidian moneylenders began to pile up wealth in grain, silver and land. By getting something for nothing simply by charging interest-on-a-loan, they had discovered Secret Fraud #1 of the Sumerian Swindle: “All interest on the loan of money is a swindle.”

    It might seem odd, but the fact is that all of the excessive wealth of modern day bankers,
    financiers, loan sharks, Jews, and related swindlers, is based upon nothing more than two baskets of barley creating three. Secret Fraud #1 of the Sumerian Swindle was based upon what people all over the world had been doing for millions of years. If one member of a village or tribe was short of supplies, other members would give or loan him what he needed. And when he was able, he would return the borrowed goods or else return goods of equal value. But to insist that he return more than he had borrowed was the swindle. In all farming communities where drought, insects, fire, rain, flooding and a myriad of woes plague farmers, there are always farmers who need a loan to get through the bad spell. Lending and paying back, borrowing and returning, have always been a part of normal human society.

    At first, this normal and natural system was used in Mesopotamia. If a farmer needed a basket of
    grain for his family, he would borrow it from a neighbor. And when the harvest came in, he would repay what he had borrowed. This was a natural and a balanced exchange system; no one profited and no one lost. Yet, the entire community benefited. Goods were distributed in an equitable way which was good and natural and fair to everybody.


    However, once a lender asked for more in return than what he had lent, an unnatural imbalance
    was introduced into society. No longer were men equal and dependant upon their work for their material rewards in Life. Interest-on-a-loan created the inequality of those who became rich without actually working for their wealth and those who became poor in spite of incessant labor. In other words, charging interest-on-a-loan automatically created a diseased situation in society where the rich sucked the life out of the poor. It created two social classes of financial vampires living off of the blood and sweat of the permanently impoverished.
    A good deal of the remainder of the book explains the 21 Frauds involved in usurious lending. Usurers take no risks. And they do no work to earn money.

    You can download this book here:

    http://www.bamboo-delight.com/downlo...Swindle_v1.pdf


    Hatha
    Cosmic justice is getting what you deserve.

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hatha Sunahara For This Useful Post:

    govcheetos (12th March 2013),jimswift (30th August 2013),Santa (12th March 2013)

  14. #30
    Moderator madfranks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    11,761
    Thanks
    7,376
    Thanked 8,034 Times in 4,008 Posts

    Re: Usury in Christendom - Michael Hoffman

    Quote Originally Posted by jimswift View Post
    In a system of fractional reserve banking(legalized counterfeiting), charging interest is usury.

    The bank is "lending" you nothing but some conjured up paper, and your paying them back with your hard labor.

    Excessive interest is usury right? Well, if they lent you nothing, anything in excess of that, is excessive.
    I think you and I are on the same page. This, is fraud, and lending out money you don't have or are legally allowed to make from nothing is cheating, and usury. I don't think loaning real money that you really earned and getting a return out of that is usury at all. Let's look at it another way, if you loaned your friend 10 young chickens for five years on the basis that he will breed them and give you 12 chickens in return, is that usury? You're giving up the ability to use those chickens to produce wealth for you (eggs, meat, etc) for a period of time. Why is it wrong to be paid for this?
    "Liberty is so creative, and the government is so stupid, that I’m very optimistic about the future"
    - Lew Rockwell

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to madfranks For This Useful Post:

    jimswift (30th August 2013)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •