USURY is it good or bad or neutral ?

[reg]

Usury (the practice of charging interest on lending money) was illegal almost everywhere and morally frowned upon until the middle ages (see a play by a little known English author  "William Shakespere!" called The Merchant of Venice) . I would argue that the fundamentals of our current economic malaise rest in it being legalised and bought into general use. Whilst not suggesting it be banned again-wishing to avoid legal and contractual problems at least in relation to bitcoin (a new economic approach) should it not be discouraged and considered morally reprehensable again? discuss. reg.

[1714176140]

1714176140

[cypherdoc]

Its "usury".

[reg]

thank you-spelling was also much frowned upon

[hazek]

should it not be discouraged and considered morally reprehensable again? discuss. reg.

Absolutely not. Interest is the price of money. How is the market suppose to work efficiently without knowing this price? Such a suggestion could only be made by someone economically illiterate so please go and first read a few books and get your knowledge up to par before attempting to reshape the way a whole market works. You'll find a lot of free stuff here: www.mises.org and an excellent low level of understanding required piece you should read (watch) is here: How an Economy Grows and Why It Doesn't (by Irwin Schiff)

[cypherdoc]

Aside from a couple other misspellings, your English is very good and the topic spot on. I agree, this is another valid way to look at the problem.

Assuming of course, manipulation of interest rates by interested parties.

[reg]

Re: USURY
Today at 10:17:18 AM
   
Reply with quote  #4
Quote from: reg on Today at 09:51:45 AM
should it not be discouraged and considered morally reprehensible again? discuss. reg.

Absolutely not. Interest is the price of money. How is the market suppose to work efficiently without knowing this price? Such a suggestion could only be made by someone economically illiterate so please go and first read a few books and get your knowledge up to par before attempting to reshape the way a whole market works. You'll find a lot of free stuff here: www.mises.org and an excellent low level of understanding required piece you should read (watch) is here: How an Economy Grows and Why It Doesn't (by Irwin Schiff)

Thank you for raising the point I was hoping would come to the fore. I accept I may be economically illiterate but I have read Mises (who I consider to be plain wrong). My point- continual growth at any level (currently wanted to be 3% p/a per economy) is fundamentally incompatible with finite resources. Why because at the basic level stuff is the asset you barter and exchange with others. When the last grain of sand has been used as an asset -what then? refering to another comment about middle age morals (not religious but social) a mans word was his bond- not any more -what a great shame!. reg.

[hazek]

but I have read Mises (who I consider to be plain wrong).

Well then, there's your mistake.

[Gabi]

Usury (the practice of charging interest on lending money) was illegal almost everywhere and morally frowned upon until the middle ages (see a play by a little known English author  "William Shakespere!" called The Merchant of Venice) . I would argue that the fundamentals of our current economic malaise rest in it being legalised and bought into general use. Whilst not suggesting it be banned again-wishing to avoid legal and contractual problems at least in relation to bitcoin (a new economic approach) should it not be discouraged and considered morally reprehensable again? discuss. reg.

Because, well known fact, middle age morals and ethics are
absolutely something we want to take inspiration from.

+1

and

Usury let us exit from middle ages? Well then it isn't so bad!

Also on wiki i read money lending exist since the Roman Empire

Banking during Roman times was different from modern banking. During the Principate, most banking activities were conducted by private individuals, not by such large banking firms as exist today; almost all moneylenders in the Empire were private individuals because anybody that had any additional capital and wished to lend it out could easily do so.[6]

The rate of interest on loans varied in the range of 4–12 percent; but when the interest rate was higher, it typically was not 15–16 percent but either 24 percent or 48 percent. The apparent absence of intermediary rates suggests that the Romans may have had difficulty calculating the interest due on anything other than mathematically convenient rates. They quoted them on a monthly basis, as in the loan described here, and the most common rates were multiples of twelve. Monthly rates tended to range from simple fractions to 3–4 percent, perhaps because lenders used Roman numerals.

[reg]

We should all become monks, take away womens right, give all our freedom to our overlrds cuz we are now all serfs (or slaves).
Thank you for your comment. Firstly it seems to me slightly sarcastic- I was hoping to discuss the point that sprinkling words like liberty and freedom through economic policies that have bought us to the position we are now is an obvious dichotomy (to me) where the mises school still advocates usury and private ownership of property! Secondly I only mentioned the lack of trust today is a pity. All the other abhorences of the middle ages (words that you have applied to me by association) are well rid of.  Thirdy I am through the first two stages of Ghandis proposition- first they ignore you- then they ridicule you etc. reg

[kiba]

Thank you for raising the point I was hoping would come to the fore. I accept I may be economically illiterate but I have read Mises (who I consider to be plain wrong). My point- continual growth at any level (currently wanted to be 3% p/a per economy) is fundamentally incompatible with finite resources. Why because at the basic level stuff is the asset you barter and exchange with others. When the last grain of sand has been used as an asset -what then? refering to another comment about middle age morals (not religious but social) a mans word was his bond- not any more -what a great shame!. reg.

Did you know that the earth receive more energy from the sun then we receive in one year?

Did you know that some asteroid in outer space contains at least 1 trillion dollars worth of precious metals?

Also, economic growth isn't always about using more resource. It can be that we get more out of the current resource we have.

[reg]

Gabi
Also on wiki i read money lending exist since the Roman Empire

Yes thank you for that. Again my point is (to coin a phrase) "money is the root of all evil". as we know all empires have so far fallen. The attempt in the early middle ages to curb usury may well have been in reaction to the devastation caused by the fall of the roman empire.  I know money lending will not stop because if you have a little more than you need right now why go and earn more by your own labor when you can lend at interest and get someone else to labor for you? I just can't see it as being morally justifiable! reg.

[reg]

kiba
Also, economic growth isn't always about using more resource. It can be that we get more out of the current resource we have.
thank you kiba. yes I am aware of the truisms you have laid out. There is nothing in existence that has not always existed. Harnessing solar energy and gathering asteroids I would hope humans live long enough to see (as a species) I have my doubts but the above comment is a direction we should be thinking more about- in my opinion. reg

[reg]

ghaang noi

the love of money is the root of all evil..... money is not evil but to lust for it is where the fail is...

well this is more positive- perhaps I could  press you a little further and suggest whilst you are right that money itself (however it is denominated) is not good or bad it's what you can do with it that is sought. Satisfying wants over and above needs is the objective and i want to really know if we are trapped in a system where its always going to be a free for all of who can gain domination over another or is there some hope that enough people can see further and be perhaps more altruistic- after all I read recently that the good vibes from that help you live longer anyway? what do you think? reg

[ElectricMucus]

Did you know that the earth receive more energy from the sun then we receive in one year?

Did you know that some asteroid in outer space contains at least 1 trillion dollars worth of precious metals?

Also, economic growth isn't always about using more resource. It can be that we get more out of the current resource we have.

This is irrelevant.

It is no possible to have exponential growth for a infinite amount of time if the universe is finite. It may be infinite we don't know that for certain (anyone who does mistakes scientific theory for a fact.)
But the Earth is finite that's a fact.

So till we know how to prosper of our planet we should not use any means to unnecessary inflate resource usage that goes well together with charging interest.

[unclescrooge]

Usury (the practice of charging interest on lending money) was illegal almost everywhere and morally frowned upon until the middle ages (see a play by a little known English author  "William Shakespere!" called The Merchant of Venice) . I would argue that the fundamentals of our current economic malaise rest in it being legalised and bought into general use. Whilst not suggesting it be banned again-wishing to avoid legal and contractual problems at least in relation to bitcoin (a new economic approach) should it not be discouraged and considered morally reprehensable again? discuss. reg.

Yes because before the dark ages people were so rich, now we're all starving on the streets. Arf life is hard.

[unclescrooge]

Re: USURY
Today at 10:17:18 AM
   
Reply with quote  #4
Quote from: reg on Today at 09:51:45 AM
should it not be discouraged and considered morally reprehensible again? discuss. reg.

Absolutely not. Interest is the price of money. How is the market suppose to work efficiently without knowing this price? Such a suggestion could only be made by someone economically illiterate so please go and first read a few books and get your knowledge up to par before attempting to reshape the way a whole market works. You'll find a lot of free stuff here: www.mises.org and an excellent low level of understanding required piece you should read (watch) is here: How an Economy Grows and Why It Doesn't (by Irwin Schiff)

Thank you for raising the point I was hoping would come to the fore. I accept I may be economically illiterate but I have read Mises (who I consider to be plain wrong). My point- continual growth at any level (currently wanted to be 3% p/a per economy) is fundamentally incompatible with finite resources. Why because at the basic level stuff is the asset you barter and exchange with others. When the last grain of sand has been used as an asset -what then? refering to another comment about middle age morals (not religious but social) a mans word was his bond- not any more -what a great shame!. reg.

You clearly don't understand the concept of subjective value, or why a infinite growth is possible within a finite world.

Ok enough already.

[ElectricMucus]

Explain why it is possible then.

I say it's not, at least not real growth. (What would yield an increase in population)
Number games... there can be plenty, but even technological progress does not constitute growth.

[reg]

electricMucus

So till we know how to prosper of our planet we should not use any means to unnecessary inflate resource usage that goes well together with charging interest.

yes. but to get from here where its almost blasphemy to suggest usury is harmful to convincing those who  live and prosper by it is not easy. suggesting "to desire is to suffer" is not a rallying call to most. a later point that subjectively you can have infinite growth is true because subjectively you can have anything you want - father christmas, fairies, utopia to name few but for pragmatists its harder. reg

[kiba]

Did you know that the earth receive more energy from the sun then we receive in one year?

I meant that the earth receive more energy from the sun then we use in one year.

[reg]

We should all become monks, take away womens right, give all our freedom to our overlrds cuz we are now all serfs (or slaves).
Thank you for your comment. Firstly it seems to me slightly sarcastic- I was hoping to discuss the point that sprinkling words like liberty and freedom through economic policies that have bought us to the position we are now is an obvious dichotomy (to me) where the mises school still advocates usury and private ownership of property! Secondly I only mentioned the lack of trust today is a pity. All the other abhorences of the middle ages (words that you have applied to me by association) are well rid of.  Thirdy I am through the first two stages of Ghandis proposition- first they ignore you- then they ridicule you etc. reg

Talking about being sarcastic ... have you maybe noticed the "quote" button
in the upper right corner of each post ? Wonder what it does ? Why not try ?

thank you- that's not sarcastic its a constructive comment. reg