I enjoy reading western books and watching old western movies. And, the casino/gambling is usually a part of that genre. As a result, along with a lack of depth in my opinion concerning morality/doctrine from the church on the matter, I think about the morality of gambling. And, what the real crux of the issue is. And, I think the real crux of the issue is fiat currency.
On the one hand, you have the miser, who counts his coins, and is miserable, because those coins have no real lasting worth. In a man's world, they are in essence merely fiat currency. They are worth something because a man says they are. That is the fiat element. Then, on the other end of the spectrum, you have the people who refuse to be misers, yet also refuse the modesty that comes with being a Christian, so they inevitably gravitate to the end of the spectrum opposite the miser by abusing/gambling with money, as opposed to idolizing/coveting money.
Yet, currency, whether it be fiat or not, serves a purpose, and is therefore not entirely worthless. So, these abuses in themselves are not/never enough. The gambling man/casino boss needs to double down, and create a fiat currency for that fiat currency. This we know as the "casino token". And, this crafty device is precisely what enables casinos to grow out of control in wealth and influence. The same is said of the usurer who finds the practice of jewelry inadequate, and needs to progress all the way to reasoning that "debt" is ultimately money/value. Both of these extremes will devour one in short time, until you either lose all of your physical wealth, or on the other extreme all of your spiritual wealth. These two evils are flip sides of the same coin.
The problem with it all is fiat currency. If you want to get rid of casino's and their by-products like "The Don"/donald trump for example, and banks with their puppet politicians from ruining the world, outlaw illicit fiat currency. And, this is to be defined as all money that is not explicitly issued by the lawgiver, who in this case in the USA is the legislative branch of government. Outlaw casino tokens, and outlaw banks from lending. Notice I did not say lending at interest. I said lending, because banks should not have a right to lend money that is not theirs, which is also a form of illicit "fiat currency", and that is what we ultimately after. Casinos do not have the right to issue currency/"a token", and banks should not have a right to issue a "loan". This is the crux of the matter in my opinion.
You cannot stamp out all evil, and you certainly cannot do it overnight. With that said, sure gambling can be culturally tolerated, and banks can be tolerated. But, gamblers can only gamble with usa legal tender. And, banks can only loan money that is entirely theirs. And note, it is quite an oxy moron for a miser who counts his coins(the scrooge old fashioned banker/usurer caricature) to lend out their same coins the way that modern banks do. It is not reasonable. The fiat "token" is the vehicle for the particularly destructive vice that is gambling. And, the fiat "loan" is the vehicle of the particularly destructive vice that is usury. Jesus said "give without expecting return". Without these vehicles, I doubt we would care much about the activity.
I'll still play Texas hold 'em for petty cash with my buddies over drinks ever time they come out. Like anything that isn't explicitly sinful in nature, gambling is fine in moderation. As long as you're not betting your mortgage away, I think it's fine to gamble.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino_token
"Furthermore, it is observed that consumers gamble more freely with replacement currencies than with cash."
On the flipside, who would have thought that people might max out their credit cards?
Quote from: Melkor on September 07, 2021, 02:50:26 PM
I'll still play Texas hold 'em for petty cash with my buddies over drinks ever time they come out. Like anything that isn't explicitly sinful in nature, gambling is fine in moderation. As long as you're not betting your mortgage away, I think it's fine to gamble.
If you have a sitting "death pledge", French for mortgage, you really are in no position to be gambling at all. Hence, the implicitly sinful nature of the act(gambling) to any degree given your particular's scenario.
The old timers here bring a bag of change for their sheephead games, that way you get the element of gambling without losing the farm.
Quote from: Philip G. on September 07, 2021, 10:02:01 PM
Quote from: Melkor on September 07, 2021, 02:50:26 PM
I'll still play Texas hold 'em for petty cash with my buddies over drinks ever time they come out. Like anything that isn't explicitly sinful in nature, gambling is fine in moderation. As long as you're not betting your mortgage away, I think it's fine to gamble.
If you have a sitting "death pledge", French for mortgage, you really are in no position to be gambling at all. Hence, the implicitly sinful nature of the act(gambling) to any degree given your particular's scenario.
I'm having a party, you should come. No gambling I promise
The only reason catholics entertain gambling "lite" is because heavy gambling is such a major part of the culture we live in, that we easily gravitate to such perceived cultural fun. If our culture was actually not anti-catholic, honestly not a tall order in reality, only in the times we live as a result of indoctrination, we wouldn't be stuck with such lousy pass times, but instead find our entertainment elsewhere. We might even be blessed as catholics to lead the way when it comes to culture/entertainment, as opposed to sticking with such tailings.
Gambling and usury are twin sisters. I don't know about you, but even at the others insistence, I am not going to accept a 5% increase upon return when I loan someone two bucks. I am not going to accept in on principle, as opposed to not accepting it because its such a petty small amount that few would actually care about. It is the principle of the thing.
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ2MHo-8sfeuuGfxMLVNTOHfJlNjnq0Y0mizQ&usqp=CAU)
Quote from: Philip G. on September 23, 2021, 09:40:31 PM
Gambling and usury are twin sisters. I don't know about you, but even at the others insistence, I am not going to accept a 5% increase upon return when I loan someone two bucks. I am not going to accept in on principle, as opposed to not accepting it because its such a petty small amount that few would actually care about. It is the principle of the thing.
I couldn't disagree more. Gambling and Usury have nothing in common.
It is not and never has been the position of the Church that gambling is inherently sinful. Only IF gambling causes other problems that become serious enough to be sins, can it be condemned as an activity. But the Church has always believed that like alcohol, it can be used or abused. The same is not true with usury. Usury is
ipso facto sinful. Usury is demonic because it conveys fecundity to the barren, and it concentrates wealth against the people and the people's money. Christ only condemned gambling when it took place in the Temple. The Apostles cast lots to choose Matthias.
Quote from: Santantonio on December 03, 2021, 06:14:57 PM
Usury is ipso facto sinful. Usury is demonic because it conveys fecundity to the barren, and it concentrates wealth against the people and the people's money.
I thought that the Fifth Lateran Council in 1517 reversed earlier prohibitions against charging interest on loans ?
Quote from: Santantonio on December 03, 2021, 06:14:57 PM
Usury is ipso facto sinful. Usury is demonic because it conveys fecundity to the barren, and it concentrates wealth against the people and the people's money.
You mean charging usury? It's not sinful for the borrower, is it? What about people who engage in usurious lines of work, such as bank employees?
Have you ever heard of a "hard-earned dollar", or perhaps its opposite which we might describe as "easy money"? Gambling and usury are the two principal culprits for a currency taking on such traits. Money, in whatever form it takes on, is a societal good. When it falls into the hands of the wrong person, or is removed from the hands of the right person, that society will suffer.
In gambling, ultimately, the house always wins/comes out ahead. In usury, the lender always has and retains the upper hand, because the issuance of new money devalues the money received, making it more difficult for the borrower to one, make use of the loan, and two repay the loan, and three get ahead in any ways shape or form as a result. The borrower always loses.
Just as in gambling there is a "poker face". Well, when you borrow money at interest, a proportional like "poker face/mentality" becomes a reality whether you are cognizant or ignorant of it. Such a disposition is not even a virtue, and few even have it.
These two vices, gambling and usury, always win out when they are permitted. The church not condemning gambling as such is part of the reason we have not been able to break free from the shackles of the banks.
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 10:58:44 PM
In gambling, ultimately, the house always wins/comes out ahead. In usury, the lender always has and retains the upper hand, because the issuance of new money devalues the money received, making it more difficult for the borrower to one, make use of the loan, and two repay the loan, and three get ahead in any ways shape or form as a result. The borrower always loses.
Wrong. With inflation, lenders lose. I am a proud debtor because loans have greatly benefitted me.
Quote from: GiftOfGod on December 03, 2021, 11:02:40 PM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 10:58:44 PM
In gambling, ultimately, the house always wins/comes out ahead. In usury, the lender always has and retains the upper hand, because the issuance of new money devalues the money received, making it more difficult for the borrower to one, make use of the loan, and two repay the loan, and three get ahead in any ways shape or form as a result. The borrower always loses.
Wrong. With inflation, lenders lose. I am a proud debtor because loans have greatly benefitted me.
Lenders never loan out money without collateral.
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 11:08:44 PM
Quote from: GiftOfGod on December 03, 2021, 11:02:40 PM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 10:58:44 PM
In gambling, ultimately, the house always wins/comes out ahead. In usury, the lender always has and retains the upper hand, because the issuance of new money devalues the money received, making it more difficult for the borrower to one, make use of the loan, and two repay the loan, and three get ahead in any ways shape or form as a result. The borrower always loses.
Wrong. With inflation, lenders lose. I am a proud debtor because loans have greatly benefitted me.
Lenders never loan out money without collateral.
Wrong again and that's irrelevant because I didn't mention collateral.
Quote from: GiftOfGod on December 03, 2021, 11:18:12 PM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 11:08:44 PM
Quote from: GiftOfGod on December 03, 2021, 11:02:40 PM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 10:58:44 PM
In gambling, ultimately, the house always wins/comes out ahead. In usury, the lender always has and retains the upper hand, because the issuance of new money devalues the money received, making it more difficult for the borrower to one, make use of the loan, and two repay the loan, and three get ahead in any ways shape or form as a result. The borrower always loses.
Wrong. With inflation, lenders lose. I am a proud debtor because loans have greatly benefitted me.
Lenders never loan out money without collateral.
Wrong again and that's irrelevant because I didn't mention collateral.
Good luck convincing anyone on this forum that your wealth is benefitting you.
"And every one that heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be
like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand." Now that society has become totally corrupted, and all the markets in the hands of the bankers, sure they can lend out money at low interest to judaics/masons like yourself and in the short term lose academically. But, I am not arguing from a modern point of societal failure/a foundation of sand. Usury in its basic form always has collateral, and its issuance at the very least slowly but surely results in defaults on the loan. When it doesn't the money generated is always funneled into vicious ventures.
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 11:42:48 PM
Quote from: GiftOfGod on December 03, 2021, 11:18:12 PM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 11:08:44 PM
Quote from: GiftOfGod on December 03, 2021, 11:02:40 PM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 10:58:44 PM
In gambling, ultimately, the house always wins/comes out ahead. In usury, the lender always has and retains the upper hand, because the issuance of new money devalues the money received, making it more difficult for the borrower to one, make use of the loan, and two repay the loan, and three get ahead in any ways shape or form as a result. The borrower always loses.
Wrong. With inflation, lenders lose. I am a proud debtor because loans have greatly benefitted me.
Lenders never loan out money without collateral.
Wrong again and that's irrelevant because I didn't mention collateral.
Good luck convincing anyone on this forum that your wealth is benefitting you.
I just refi'd my mortgage to a 2.975% APR 30 year. The year-over-year inflation rate is 6.22%. The difference is a decrease in my very large mortgage balance. I lowered my monthly payment by almost $500 and now have that much extra money in my pocket every month.
I'd say it's benefitting me.
Quote from: GiftOfGod on December 03, 2021, 11:52:27 PM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 11:42:48 PM
Quote from: GiftOfGod on December 03, 2021, 11:18:12 PM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 11:08:44 PM
Quote from: GiftOfGod on December 03, 2021, 11:02:40 PM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 03, 2021, 10:58:44 PM
In gambling, ultimately, the house always wins/comes out ahead. In usury, the lender always has and retains the upper hand, because the issuance of new money devalues the money received, making it more difficult for the borrower to one, make use of the loan, and two repay the loan, and three get ahead in any ways shape or form as a result. The borrower always loses.
Wrong. With inflation, lenders lose. I am a proud debtor because loans have greatly benefitted me.
Lenders never loan out money without collateral.
Wrong again and that's irrelevant because I didn't mention collateral.
Good luck convincing anyone on this forum that your wealth is benefitting you.
I just refi'd my mortgage to a 2.975% APR 30 year. The year-over-year inflation rate is 6.22%. The difference is a decrease in my very large mortgage balance. I lowered my monthly payment by almost $500 and now have that much extra money in my pocket every month.
I'd say it's benefitting me.
"When thou art invited to a wedding, sit not down in the first place, lest perhaps one more honourable than thou be invited by him. And he that invited thee and him, come and say to thee, Give this man place,
and then thou begin with shame to take the lowest place."