Started by LaramieHirsch, November 30, 2014, 02:39:03 AM
QuoteAdditionally, seemingly contrary to james03, he feels that government debt is not usurious in and of itself.
Quote from: james03 on December 13, 2014, 06:52:49 PMQuoteFor the record: Completely useless. Usury is charging for the use, and only the use, of money. It is evil. A modern description would be a non-self liquidating loan, or a non-productive loan. Prime examples are government debt and credit card debt.When someone gets into financial trouble and asks for advice, what is the first thing they tell you? Tear up the credit card. What is causing the destruction of Greece, Spain, Argentina, Japan, etc.... Government debt.Usury is evil.Receiving interest on a productive loan, e.g. a corporate bond, is not usury and is perfectly fine.
QuoteFor the record:
Quote from: Catholic Economist on December 14, 2014, 04:15:31 AMSince there is an active discussion on usury taking place, I thought I might leave this link from Zippy Catholic's blog on subject: http://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2014/11/10/usury-faq-or-money-on-the-pill/I think it might provide some excellent food for thought. For example, contrary to the opinion of several of the commentators on this thread Zippy posits that is immoral to charge interest to recoup opportunity costs since they are not ontologically real objects.
QuoteIt is based solely on the fact that modern economic conditions are such that tying up one person's money is depriving that person of the opportunity to use that money to make more money. Economic conditions in the past were generally not characterized by widespread opportunity for profitable investments.
Quote from: Greg on December 14, 2014, 10:30:34 PMWhy is it the lender's business whether the loan is profitable or not?They still lose the utility of the money regardless.If you don't believe the loan is going to be profitable, then don't borrow. I don't see why the lender is to blame here.
QuoteWhy is it the lender's business whether the loan is profitable or not?
Quote from: Greg on December 14, 2014, 10:52:37 PMLike many other things there is amount of risk. You can drive a car badly or drive it well, you can maintain it or neglect it. If you come off a mountain bend however I would assume it is your fault not the car makers.Why is usury any more immoral than insurance premiums? One takes a calculated risk. The insurance company spreads the risk and adds a fat premium. Often it re-insures the risks and only has the premium on its books or net profit. How is that any different than a lender?
Quote from: Greg on December 14, 2014, 11:20:45 PMSome young male drivers are super safe. Why is it fair to charge them high premiums when they have not had a crash yet?
QuoteAnswer: because an unknown risk is still a risk.Many borrowers don't have realizable assets. By the time you've paid the repo man there is zero profit in repossessing their junk.