Sig 170: Money for nothing - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about and show off personal signature and avatar images.
#15332571
Image

Everyone has questions about usury!

1. Do you like Usury?

2. Do you want usury to be legal or illegal?

3. What do you think of (know of) the History of Usury?

4. Why do we speak so seldom of usury?

5. Is usury related to what Michel Foucault euphemistically called "vascular power?"
(circulating usury profits)





Image

soundtrack
#15332599
Mexico usury? Outrageous shit.

Look at this?

https://www.gob.mx/condusef/prensa/tarj ... eguros%20(

Coppel is Canadian usury. Their interest rates are super high. In that chart above. A lot of credit card and credit loan industries in Mexico charge 89% interest rates. You never get out of debt. Only one bank is owned by Mexico. Every other bank in Mexico is owned by foreign interest people.
#15332735
Tainari88 wrote:Mexico usury? Outrageous shit.

Look at this?

...Only one bank is owned by Mexico. Every other bank in Mexico is owned by foreign interest people.

Even the bank that is "owned by Mexica" practices Usury.

Usury is our religion.

Usury is what the Europeans brought to the Americas.

Usury is why we will definitely fail as a civilization.

Usury is the "slaughterhouse" of the human animal farm.

And it was considered immoral for centuries by Catholics... until they got modern and decided to embrace it.

Catholic.com wrote:...Usury is condemned by Fathers of the Church—including St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and Pope St. Leo the Great—characteristically in the context of taking advantage of the poor. Usury was also condemned at the Council of Elvira, the Council of Arles, and the First Council of Nicea, all in the fourth century. The Second Lateran Council declared in 1139:

"We condemn that practice accounted despicable and blameworthy by divine and human laws, denounced by Scripture in the Old and New Testaments, namely, the ferocious greed of usurers; and we sever them from every comfort of the Church, forbidding any archbishop or bishop, or an abbot of any order whatever or anyone in clerical orders, to dare to receive usurers, unless they do so with extreme caution; but let them be held infamous throughout their whole lives and, unless they repent, be deprived of a Christian burial." ...


Usury is the destroyer of civilizations the Europeans have lived under for many centuries. But Europeans also believe in "Santa Claus" so there are limits to what slaves are capable of imagining because of the propaganda and pre-propaganda they are exposed to their entire lives.

Tainari88 wrote:...Coppel is Canadian usury. ...


"Canadian?" Hmmm... Is there really a nation, culture or "race", in your opinion, that we should identify with Usury? Is it "Canadian?"

If so, Canadians are probably the richest and most politically powerful members of the societies they live among... Because of all that "money for nothing."
#15332763
QatzelOk wrote:Even the bank that is "owned by Mexica" practices Usury.

Usury is our religion.

Usury is what the Europeans brought to the Americas.

Usury is why we will definitely fail as a civilization.

Usury is the "slaughterhouse" of the human animal farm.

And it was considered immoral for centuries by Catholics... until they got modern and decided to embrace it.



Usury is the destroyer of civilizations the Europeans have lived under for many centuries. But Europeans also believe in "Santa Claus" so there are limits to what slaves are capable of imagining because of the propaganda and pre-propaganda they are exposed to their entire lives.



"Canadian?" Hmmm... Is there really a nation, culture or "race", in your opinion, that we should identify with Usury? Is it "Canadian?"

If so, Canadians are probably the richest and most politically powerful members of the societies they live among... Because of all that "money for nothing."


Let us think the way this dual natured world is set up for once Q? What is the opposite of usury?



So how to get rid of usury?

Pool the resources and money into the opposite....resources put in to help those who need it. Without a single interest rate of any sort. And all people constantly working in cooperative units to support others. In need, in tragedy and in hard times. It works in many past communities.

Credit Unions. But not modeled on capitalist models but on expanding support and using the extreme power of a group of human beings laboring together for mutual benefit.

The banks hate it really. But instead of punishing others. Wealth should be about pretecting others. One is about punishment. The other is about protection.

So how does that work for all of the bad capitalist concepts that have existed in the past? You turn it on its head. For the truth is again. Human beings are the source of all power. And of all wealth.

What is strange is how the passing false narratives are the ones being believed, and the permanent true ones are never used or utilized to end what is wrong with the false ones.

It will change though Q. No matter what it will change.
#15332767
QatzelOk wrote:1. Do you like Usury?

2. Do you want usury to be legal or illegal?

3. What do you think of (know of) the History of Usury?

4. Why do we speak so seldom of usury?

Your use of the term, "usury" -- for which you have offered no definition -- is question begging, and your source completely misunderstands the economic history of ancient Rome. I have explained many times how Marxists/socialists completely misunderstand capitalism, blaming factory owners for what landowners do to workers, but not one person in 1000 is intelligent enough to understand it. Similarly, people like your source who rail against "usury" completely misunderstand money and interest, and blame lending at interest for what governments, landowners, and other privileged interests do to workers.

When I explain it to you, will you be intelligent enough to understand it?

The video radically misrepresents what actually happened in ancient Rome because like Marx's "analysis" of capitalism, it looks only at the surface, and does not attempt to identify or understand the underlying economic relationships. The video bewails the fact that interest rates were ruinously high by modern standards, but shows no interest in inquiring why they were so high. I will now explain it to you.

Interest rates are determined by the relationship between available funds, the demand for current purchasing power, and the perceived risk of default. In ancient Rome, the supply of money was controlled by the patrician elite, many people were desperate for funds, and the risk of default was high. Why were so many people desperate for funds? In most cases, they faced arbitrary and unpayable tax liabilities, and borrowing was the only way to stave off destitution and enslavement for themselves and their families. Why was the risk of default so high? Same reason people were so desperate for funds in the first place: the arbitrary and unpayable taxes were not a one-time event. They were levied again the following year when the borrower had not only the original loan plus interest to pay, but more of the same arbitrary and unpayable taxes.

Why were taxes arbitrary and unpayable? Before the reforms of Augustus, the most common system of public revenue was tax "farming," whereby wealthy individuals would bid for the legal right to "tax" the people of a certain area in return for a payment to the state. How the high bidder then extracted revenue from the local populace, and how much, was entirely up to him. Normally, the tax farmer would just forcibly steal or extort as much wealth from the population as he thought was consistent with being able to take at least as much again the next year. Anyone who couldn't pay could have their property confiscated and be sold into slavery. Borrowing, even at ruinous interest, was a more attractive alternative.

Moreover, from the founding of the Roman republic, the noble senatorial landowning families were exempt from taxation on the grounds that they would supply the army (they would later contrive to shirk that responsibility -- without, needless to say, giving up the tax exemption). In particular, they were exempt from the tax on land. Over the centuries, that land tax exemption drove all the good land into their hands: because they would not have to pay tax on it, any time land came up for sale, it was worth more to a noble than to any other bidder.

At the same time, as the taxable land base shrank, the republic and later the empire had to get revenue from somewhere else, so arbitrary taxes were levied on all manner of economic activity and wealth: slaves, manumissions of slaves, artisans' tools, imports and exports, luxury goods, transport of grain, production equipment such as bakers' ovens, farmers' livestock, etc. Even the tax on the shrinking taxable land base became an engine of economic destruction because it was not limited to the land's unimproved rental value: as small non-noble landholders realized they could not pay the land tax out of what they could reasonably expect to produce on the land, they simply abandoned it, reducing agricultural output until the land could be sold to a noble, who would be exempt from the tax. It would then be permanently untaxable, but at least a noble would put some slaves to work on it producing food. (This practice of abandoning land to avoid an unpayable tax liability later gave rise to the legal prohibition on leaving the land, which became the basis of medieval European serfdom.)

Similar relationships characterize effectively all the historical horror stories commonly trotted out to calumniate lending at interest:
1. People are saddled with arbitrary, unjust, and unpayable liabilities, especially taxes.
2. To escape the consequences of failure to meet those liabilities, they borrow.
3. Because many people are in the same situation; there are limited funds available for them to borrow; and the nature of the liability makes default very likely, interest rates are ruinously high.
4. Borrowers cannot meet the ruinous interest payments and default, falling into destitution.
5. The moneylender is blamed for the borrower's predicament because he lent to them at the market interest rate.
6. The government or privileged private agent that originally imposed the arbitrary, unjust, and unpayable liability on the destitute borrower is not blamed for the end result it caused, because people are too stupid to understand what happened.
5. Is usury related to what Michel Foucault euphemistically called "vascular power?"
(circulating usury profits)

To the extent that Foucault ever said anything that could be understood as referring to reality, it was wrong.
#15332780
Truth to Power, so now you say @QatzelOk is too dense to understand what it really is about now?

Why did the Ancient Romans have to come up with usury anyway? To stave off becoming slaves...who thought of enslaving people? Who thinks of taking over land to force people to work it and give the benefits to those who never work the land? Hmmm. Landed gentry....but who?

Why don't humans figure out a way to not fuck each other over so much? And instead deal with a just concept in terms of economics? Oh, because they lack the intelligence to do it eh? :p
#15332828
Tainari88 wrote:Truth to Power, so now you say @QatzelOk is too dense to understand what it really is about now?


All tricksters use sleight-of-hand to distract their dupes. In this case, it was "words" that were spun around at high speed to distract with bullshit. A pickpocket would probably try to distract by explaining the "engineering" involved in picking other people's pockets. "The Science." :lol:

Why don't humans figure out a way to not fuck each other over so much?

We have. But over the course of history, some tribes learned that "fucking over other tribes" was the fastest, easiest route to riches and power.

So here we are now, society after soceity destroyed by usury (and the gansters who enforce usury), ready to go extinct because "Lies and Theft" have become the religion of the most powerful.

Truth To Power wrote:...To the extent that Foucault ever said anything that could be understood as referring to reality, it was wrong.

Was Foucault "too stupid" to understand usury? If so, I'm in good company. :lol:

***

Imageproduct placement aimed at normalizing consumption of alcohol - a product that the church sells

CATHOLIC CHURCH AND USURY

Although the Roman Catholic church has often condemned usury because it is a way of stealing from the poor and less savvy... it has a long history of racketeering itself.

Starting with the tithe, where "believers who don't want to burn in hell" are forced to give 10% of their weekly earnings to their church. Likewise, Catholic nations and cities are expected to give 15% of their land areas to the Catholic Church in Rome.

Today, many skyscrapers in Catholic cities (including Montreal) are built on land that still belongs to the Vatican.

Rather than practicing usury, the Catholic Church used (and continues to use) terrorism to "scare" its believers into handing over their cash and their lands. Is this better than usury? I would say that is morally equivalent to usury.

Likewise, the early Christian church made money by selling beer and wine, often to societies that hadn't yet normalized alchohol consumption.

Thus, the Roman Catholic and early Christian churches made their money through lies-based-terrorism and drug dealing- bootlegging.

Not much better than today's "priests of Western culture" in mass media and finance.
#15332839
Trump proposed limiting credit card interest ratees to 10 percent, but I expect him to back off that. How can banks and lenders make money with 5 or 6 percent interest rate loans but credit card companies (or the banks behind them) can only make money with a 28 percent interest rate?
#15332845
Tainari88 wrote:Truth to Power, so now you say @QatzelOk is too dense to understand what it really is about now?

That's up to him, now that I have informed him of the relevant facts of objective physical reality and their inescapable logical implications.
Why did the Ancient Romans have to come up with usury anyway?

Lending at interest was not a Roman innovation (though unrestricted private property in land was).
To stave off becoming slaves...who thought of enslaving people?

Pretty much everyone before the 18th century. Even Aristotle concocted a justification for it. Abolition of slavery was a product of the Enlightenment, and had never really been seriously considered before that.
Who thinks of taking over land to force people to work it and give the benefits to those who never work the land? Hmmm. Landed gentry....but who?

Pretty much everyone who realizes that by owning the land, they will be legally entitled to steal everything from everyone else, and is not troubled overmuch by inconvenient scruples. Greed -- unfortunately mistranslated as "love of money" -- is indeed the root of all manner of evil.
Why don't humans figure out a way to not fuck each other over so much?

Oh, some of us have. Even the ancients knew enough to establish legal prohibitions on certain ways people <f^k> each other over, like theft and murder. But laws can also create ways for people to <f^k> each other over -- like slave deeds, land deeds, IP monopolies and bank licenses -- and those who are keen to <f^k> other people over have arranged for such laws to be enacted and enforced. This is all obvious to anyone who devotes a few seconds' honest thought to the matter, and I have explained it all on this forum ad nauseam.

But...

"Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." -- Schiller
And instead deal with a just concept in terms of economics? Oh, because they lack the intelligence to do it eh? :p

The relevant facts of economics have been known for only a few centuries (in some cases only a few decades), whereas the legal institutions have often been in place for millennia, and have taken on a life of their own. Compare how long it took to abolish slavery, and why:

“When the emancipation of the African was spoken of, and when the nation of Britain appeared to be taking into serious consideration the rightfulness of abolishing slavery, what tremendous evils were to follow! Trade was to be ruined, commerce was almost to cease, and manufacturers were to be bankrupt. Worse than all, private property was to be invaded (property in human flesh), the rights of planters sacrificed to the speculative notions of fanatics, and the British government was to commit an act that would forever deprive it of the confidence of British subjects.”
– Patrick Edward Dove, The Theory of Human Progression, 1850
#15332847
QatzelOk wrote:All tricksters use sleight-of-hand to distract their dupes. In this case, it was "words" that were spun around at high speed to distract with bullshit. A pickpocket would probably try to distract by explaining the "engineering" involved in picking other people's pockets. "The Science." :lol:

You are at liberty to continue refusing to know facts.
We have. But over the course of history, some tribes learned that "fucking over other tribes" was the fastest, easiest route to riches and power.

"The most comfortable, but also the most unproductive, way for a capitalist to increase his fortune is to put all his monies in sites and await that point in time when a society, hungering for land, has to pay his price." -- Andrew Carnegie
So here we are now, society after soceity destroyed by usury (and the gansters who enforce usury), ready to go extinct because "Lies and Theft" have become the religion of the most powerful.

Then what explains the tyranny and misery of all the majority-Muslim societies -- and the poverty of all that are not floating on oil -- where lending at interest is prohibited?
Was Foucault "too stupid" to understand usury? If so, I'm in good company. :lol:

Foucault was even too stupid to understand that there is a difference between the power to make someone else better off and the power to make them worse off.

How about you?
Likewise, Catholic nations and cities are expected to give 15% of their land areas to the Catholic Church in Rome.

Today, many skyscrapers in Catholic cities (including Montreal) are built on land that still belongs to the Vatican.

Rather than practicing usury, the Catholic Church used (and continues to use) terrorism to "scare" its believers into handing over their cash and their lands. Is this better than usury? I would say that is morally equivalent to usury.

Yes, intransigent opposition from the Roman Catholic church was one reason the Georgist Single Tax (on land) campaign of the late 19th century failed.
User avatar
By QatzelOk
#15332968
Don't mess with Usury !

Ecologist wrote:In 2001, dissatisfied with the shrinking value of the dollars that OPEC was getting for its oil, Iraq's Saddam Hussein broke the pact and sold oil in euros. Regime change swiftly followed, accompanied by widespread destruction of the country....

US dollar usury goes to US usurers. They were not amused that European usurers would get all the profits, so they destroyed Iraq "because 911." (really, because usury)

Image He died for Western Bankster usury (photo source)

***

For decades, Libya and other African countries had been attempting to create a pan-African gold standard. Libya's al-Qadhafi and other heads of African States had wanted an independent, pan-African, 'hard currency...

...Libya's Qadhafi (African Union 2009 Chair) conceived and financed a plan to unify the sovereign States of Africa with one gold currency (United States of Africa). In 2004, a pan-African Parliament (53 nations) laid plans for the African Economic Community - with a single gold currency by 2023.

...African oil-producing nations were planning to abandon the petro-dollar, and demand gold payment for oil/gas....

Qaddafi's government holds 143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver ... This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA)...

So Qaddafi's "main sin" against the West was that he had a well-conceived and funded plan to get much of Africa from out from under the boot of Western usury.

Here is why France wanted Obama to destroy Libya, the most developed nation in Africa, according to the same article:

1. A desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production,
2. Increase French influence in North Africa,
3. Improve his internal political situation in France,
4. Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world,
5. Address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi's long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa."


In other words, all the reasons for destroying Libya were about... money for nothing. Usury.

Image He died for French bankster usury(photo source)

***

How many other wars "for liberation" were really about opening up markets to western usury?
All of them since the Peloponnesian War?
#15332969
Robert Urbanek wrote:Trump proposed limiting credit card interest ratees to 10 percent, but I expect him to back off that. How can banks and lenders make money with 5 or 6 percent interest rate loans but credit card companies (or the banks behind them) can only make money with a 28 percent interest rate?

Was Trump shot the day after he made this promise?

Or did he reassure his usurious friends... that this was just a lie to get votes?

***
After calling Michel Foucault dumb, Truth To Power wrote:...Then what explains the tyranny and misery of all the majority-Muslim societies -- and the poverty of all that are not floating on oil -- where lending at interest is prohibited?...


Image
Jared Kushner is MBS's primary "real estate portfolio manager."

MBS is as good an example of "Islam" as Bill Clinton is a good example of "Christianity." Usury was originally considered a horrible sin by Christians. Ask Nancy Pelosi how she feels about usury (or inside trading).

Armstrong Economics wrote:...
“Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.”

This popular quote is often attributed to Mayer Rothschild. However, it is most likely a fake, despite being directly quoted in “The Creature from Jekyll Island”, further demonstrating my point that this book is way too biased and not indicative of what really took place. It is this quote that has convinced so many that he and his family are evil and are still in control of the world...

While it is probably true that no Rothschild ever officially spoke the words above... they are nonetheless true words that could have been uttered at some point by a bankster tyrant.
#15332978
QatzelOk wrote:Don't mess with Usury !


US dollar usury goes to US usurers. They were not amused that European usurers would get all the profits, so they destroyed Iraq "because 911." (really, because usury)

Image He died for Western Bankster usury (photo source)

There is a difference between lending money you have saved at interest and being privileged to issue money to lend out at interest.
So Qaddafi's "main sin" against the West was that he had a well-conceived and funded plan to get much of Africa from out from under the boot of Western usury.

He was a threat to what de Gaulle rightly called the US's "exorbitant privilege" of issuing the world's reserve currency, not savers' liberty to lend their savings at interest.
Here is why France wanted Obama to destroy Libya, the most developed nation in Africa, according to the same article:

In other words, all the reasons for destroying Libya were about... money for nothing. Usury.

The reasons you quote have no relation to lending at interest.
How many other wars "for liberation" were really about opening up markets to western usury?
All of them since the Peloponnesian War?

It's true that many wars have been financed with money borrowed at interest; but it is absurd to think they were fought merely in order to provide the lenders with interest income. Lending to belligerents in war is inherently risky -- if your debtor is defeated, you are unlikely to get your money back -- so it is hardly surprising that those financing wars charge interest on such loans.
#15332981
QatzelOk wrote:Jared Kushner is MBS's primary "real estate portfolio manager."

Evidence for that extraordinary claim? And what does it have to do with the tyranny and backwardness of Saudi Arabia, or the tyranny and backwardness of all the other "usury"-free Muslim countries that only avoid poverty by having oil, or the tyranny, backwardness, poverty and stagnation of all the "usury"-free Muslim countries that don't have oil?
MBS is as good an example of "Islam" as Bill Clinton is a good example of "Christianity."

What does that have to do with the tyranny, backwardness, poverty and stagnation of all the other "usury"-free Muslim countries?
Usury was originally considered a horrible sin by Christians. Ask Nancy Pelosi how she feels about usury (or inside trading).

The economies of Christendom were stagnant for 1000 years when lending at interest was illegal. And can't you even tell the difference between insider trading and lending out one's savings at interest?
While it is probably true that no Rothschild ever officially spoke the words above... they are nonetheless true words that could have been uttered at some point by a bankster tyrant.

<sigh> I explained that Michel Foucault was so stupid, he could not tell the difference between the power to make others better off and the power to make them worse off. Now you are demonstrating that you can't tell the difference between lending money one has saved at interest and being privileged to issue money to lend at interest.

Do you have any evidence or "arguments" for your claims, other than your refusals to make the relevant distinctions?
#15332999
Truth To Power wrote:There is a difference between lending money you have saved at interest and being privileged to issue money to lend out at interest.

Yes, Fractional Reserve banking means that even if you don't have money yourself, you can STILL practice usury.

Do you like usury, Truth To Power? Do you think it is a healthy part of any society?

Of the two last presidential candidates, which one was pro-usury, and which one was more against usury?

***

If it is possible to make money by handing out I.O.U.s for a billion dollars:

...and then demanding that the creditee repay you two billion dollars

... and having the police, the army and the entire state apparatus back you up in your racketeering...

Why would you ever work a day in your life?

You can just live off of the stolen labor capital of your dupes.
(Though you might have to erase their minds with terror and lies every once in a while...)

***

About Jared Kushner's relationship with MBS, Truth to Power wrote:...Evidence for that extraordinary claim? And what does it have to do with the tyranny and backwardness of Saudi Arabia...

Jared Kushner is "usury" in this story, and so is MBS. They are brothers in usury.

CBS wrote:After Kushner left the White House, he started a private equity firm that received a reported $2 billion investment from the sovereign wealth fund controlled by Prince Mohammed, drawing scrutiny from Democrats...


That you found this "extraordinary" means that you don't read much international news, I presume. MBS is a product of Western usury, and so is the state of Israel. That was my point here - that usury is probably the most important aspect of the civilization we call "Western."

It is the closest thing I can find to a Western cosmology.
#15333005
QatzelOk wrote:Yes, Fractional Reserve banking means that even if you don't have money yourself, you can STILL practice usury.

But only if you have a commercial bank license privilege.

You still have not defined usury, and you still refuse to know the difference between lending one's savings at interest and being privileged to issue money to lend at interest.
Do you like usury, Truth To Power? Do you think it is a healthy part of any society?

Define it. Lending one's savings at interest is a healthy part of the economy and society because it does not violate anyone's rights, and helps to allocate purchasing power more productively.
Of the two last presidential candidates, which one was pro-usury, and which one was more against usury?

Neither of them had any interest in challenging the debt-money system, which seems to be the real problem you are concerned about.
If it is possible to make money by handing out I.O.U.s for a billion dollars:

...and then demanding that the creditee repay you two billion dollars

... and having the police, the army and the entire state apparatus back you up in your racketeering...

Why would you ever work a day in your life?

You can just live off of the stolen labor capital of your dupes.

It's true that fungible privileges such as slave deeds, land deeds, IP monopolies and commercial bank licenses enable their holders to extract wealth from the productive by force without making any contribution to wealth production. But lending out one's savings at interest is a voluntary contract that violates no one's rights and involves no such element of force or privilege.
(Though you might have to erase their minds with terror and lies every once in a while...)

Just as Marxists do whenever they hold power...?
Jared Kushner is "usury" in this story, and so is MBS. They are brothers in usury.

That is literally nonsense, and does not constitute evidence for your claim -- so at this point, it has become quite certain that you can offer no evidence for it.
That you found this "extraordinary" means that you don't read much international news, I presume.

No, I read a fair amount of international news; it's extraordinary because there is no credible international news source that offers any evidence to support it.
MBS is a product of Western usury, and so is the state of Israel.

More absurd claims without evidence.
That was my point here - that usury is probably the most important aspect of the civilization we call "Western."

It is the closest thing I can find to a Western cosmology.

More nonsensical claims without evidence -- and still lacking a definition. If you can't define your terms, you are in the unfortunate position of not knowing what you are talking about.
#15333048
Mirriam Webster wrote:USURY (noun)

1 : the lending of money with an interest charge for its use


(Some of the defintions add "exorbitant" or "high interest"... but these are attempts to judge which interest charges are too high, which dictionaries aren't qualified to do as their definitions are static.)

In the West, we are used to usury being the MO of the controlling classes, much like farm animals see the use of the dog and surrounding fencing as a sign that the farmer has full control over his cattle.

To see what "interest payments on loans" have done to the West, you can look at the other meaning of "interest" - as in "I would be very interested in helping you."

Qaddafi was putting a Bank of Africa that would have charged NO INTEREST on loans. This is the model of traditional Islamic Banking.

Rather than charging interest, the creditee is actually INTERESTED in the success of the person he lends to. Perhaps in exchange for the loan, the creditor will share profits until the loan is paid back, or the bank will retain a certain percentage control of the created entity.. until the loan is paid back.

This means that, while the loan is being repaid, the bank HAS AN INTEREST in the loan-created entity's success. The bank want the creditee to be successful. He has an interest.

So the idea that "interest" is re-defined into "profits taken by mandatory tip"... means that the bank has no real interest in the success of the creditee.

In a world where only strangers from another culture have money or power to share with you.... the only interest this usury-exploiting group has in you is the money they will extort from you when you are desperate.

The powerful institutions will only HELP YOU if they can rake in some unearned money in the process.

Usury defines the Western banking system, and the Western banking system DECIDES how everyone lives their lives.

USURY DEFINES MODERN EXISTENCE

* Housing: suburban mortgage
* Transportation: suburban Car loans
* Education: Student Loans (USA)
* Health Care: End of life bankruptcy (USA)
* Defense: Trillions and trillions of debt (USA)

So usury is a lot more than an accounting trick to rip off illiterate people who don't understand math. It's the foundation of Western society, and it continues to warp the way we live - forcing us into car payments and suburban bungalows, and flooding trapped suburbanites with Usury-funded propaganda.

***

Truth To Power wrote:...More absurd claims without evidence...


Usury is so powerful, Truth, that it prevents you from seeing all the evidence on this page of this thread. By funding most of our media, USURY has made us unable to see the world around us for how it really is. Instead, we just want to spend all our money on magic beans.

Imagine knowing the power of media to manipulate and brainwash, and then watching it anyways. Usury has done quite a job on some people's heads with their captured media.
#15333078
QatzelOk wrote:(Some of the defintions add "exorbitant" or "high interest"... but these are attempts to judge which interest charges are too high, which dictionaries aren't qualified to do as their definitions are static.)

OK, so as I surmised, you are talking about any lending at interest, and decline to distinguish between saving money and issuing money to lend, or between consensual private borrowing and compulsory, tax-based public borrowing, or between loans undertaken to fund productive investment and loans undertaken to meet arbitrary and unjustly imposed liabilities, or to make any other relevant distinctions -- i.e., the usual Marxist evasions of the relevant facts.
In the West, we are used to usury being the MO of the controlling classes, much like farm animals see the use of the dog and surrounding fencing as a sign that the farmer has full control over his cattle.

No, the MO of the controlling class, in the West as everywhere else, is privilege, especially private ownership of land. You don't have to borrow from anyone if you would rather not pay interest; but you have no choice but to pay landowners for permission to exist on the earth's surface.
To see what "interest payments on loans" have done to the West, you can look at the other meaning of "interest" - as in "I would be very interested in helping you."

Which loans? Unlike you, I am willing to make the relevant distinctions.
Qaddafi was putting a Bank of Africa that would have charged NO INTEREST on loans. This is the model of traditional Islamic Banking.

Which results in the uniform poverty and stagnation seen in all majority-Muslim countries that are not floating on oil.
Rather than charging interest, the creditee is actually INTERESTED in the success of the person he lends to. Perhaps in exchange for the loan, the creditor will share profits until the loan is paid back, or the bank will retain a certain percentage control of the created entity.. until the loan is paid back.

It's true that equity financing has certain advantages over debt financing, but it also has disadvantages, like making the funder more dependent on the fundee's success. People have perfectly sound reasons for preferring one or the other.
This means that, while the loan is being repaid, the bank HAS AN INTEREST in the loan-created entity's success. The bank want the creditee to be successful. He has an interest.

And likewise has an interest in preventing the success of his competitors...
So the idea that "interest" is re-defined into "profits taken by mandatory tip"... means that the bank has no real interest in the success of the creditee.

Wrong. Defaulted loans are costly to the lender even if the collateral is adequate.
In a world where only strangers from another culture have money or power to share with you.... the only interest this usury-exploiting group has in you is the money they will extort from you when you are desperate.

If you don't want to pay interest, don't borrow. Simple.
The powerful institutions will only HELP YOU if they can rake in some unearned money in the process.

Someone who lends their savings earns interest (part of which is compensation for risk) by allocating their purchasing power to someone who thinks they have a better use for it. That is quite different from a commercial bank exercising a privilege of creating purchasing power de novo -- i.e., increasing the money supply -- in order to charge interest on it.
Usury defines the Western banking system, and the Western banking system DECIDES how everyone lives their lives.

Garbage. It is privilege -- of which private bankster privilege is only one (and not the most important) form -- that determines how everyone lives their lives, because it forcibly removes their rights and makes them into others' private property. You can choose -- as I have -- not to be a debtor. You can't choose not to use land, except by dying.
USURY DEFINES MODERN EXISTENCE

Garbage. You can simply choose not to go into debt. You can't choose not to use land, and if you want to participate in society, you can't choose not to use IP. Try to find a willingness to know that fact.
* Housing: suburban mortgage

The only reason people have to get mortgages to buy houses is to pay for the land, and the only reason land is so expensive is the subsidy to its ownership. In some US cities, land is so cheap that any intelligent working person can buy a livable house for a few months' median after-tax wages, in cash.
* Transportation: suburban Car loans

Buy a used car for cash, like I do, or use public transit, like I have often done. Problem solved.
* Education: Student Loans (USA)
* Health Care: End of life bankruptcy (USA)
* Defense: Trillions and trillions of debt (USA)

Those are all specifically American, and result from imposition of arbitrary and unjust liabilities. The fact that money is borrowed to meet those liabilities is not the source of the liabilities. Try to find a willingness to know that fact.
So usury is a lot more than an accounting trick to rip off illiterate people who don't understand math.

But as a factor in ordinary working people's lives, it's largely that. Millions of Americans are carrying astronomical amounts of credit card debt at ruinous interest. No one forced them to buy all that stuff on credit. They were just stupid.
It's the foundation of Western society, and it continues to warp the way we live - forcing us into car payments and suburban bungalows, and flooding trapped suburbanites with Usury-funded propaganda.

More garbage. I've owned half a dozen cars, and never paid interest to buy any of them. What I've had to pay interest for was land, because I need to live on the earth's surface.
Usury is so powerful, Truth, that it prevents you from seeing all the evidence on this page of this thread.

You have only made claims, not offered evidence.
By funding most of our media, USURY has made us unable to see the world around us for how it really is.

It is privilege -- especially copyright monopolies and broadcast spectrum allocations -- that funds the corporate-owned media, not interest, and I will thank you to remember it.
Instead, we just want to spend all our money on magic beans.

Speak for yourself.
Imagine knowing the power of media to manipulate and brainwash, and then watching it anyways. Usury has done quite a job on some people's heads with their captured media.

For many years, I did not have a TV in the house, didn't listen to the radio, etc. That was a choice. But I had no choice about whether to pay someone for their permission to live on the earth's surface.
User avatar
By QatzelOk
#15333322
Truth To Power wrote:OK, so as I surmised, you are talking about any lending at interest..

That is correct.

In an alienated society of races competing with one another for dominance, the only "Interest" one has in his fellow man is what you can squeeze out of him in desperate times.

The "lack of interest" in helping other people... is a product of socially-constructed societies (usually built out of killing particular races for some king) and their need for lower classes to do shit labor for the rich.

....especially private ownership of land....

It's true that "land ownership" is similar to usury in that they both create an upper class of people who can extract surplus labor from other people without providing any of their own labor to these exploited misérables.

Usury is like the Pepsi, while land-ownership is the original Coca Cola. (this is an analogy)

...You don't have to borrow from anyone if you would rather not pay interest; but you have no choice but to pay landowners for permission to exist on the earth's surface...

If you don't want to pay interest, don't borrow...

The National Debts of many countries are enought to bankrupt all of their citizens, and the regular joes didn't "borrow" this money, though they have to pay off the interest and, eventually, these debts. So your claim is false. I have ZERO personal debt, but I must pay thousands of dollars in interest each year because our government has "an association" with the banskters. (So does yours)

***

TIM'S USURY-CASINO DREAM

Image(photo source)

Tim knew he would finally win big at the Usury Casino.

He went to expensive seminars given by experts explaining how to "break the code" of the casino gambling machines and roulette wheels.

He and his wife also spent thousands of dollars on Lucky Amulets, meeting with casino gurus, professional poker players, and former groupiers.

The instruction manual that came with their most expensive diamond-encrusted amulets suggested meditating with them for an hour before going to the Casino. Tim and his wife wore them for five hours the morning of their Surefire Casino Win and meditated like their lives depended on it. They had always been taught that hard work and perparedness would guarantee a win at the casino.

They mortgaged their house and their summer cottage, cashed in their three children's education funds, and now had $3 million dollars to make their Great Fortune at the Casino. Three million dollars - which they were sure to turn into a billion or more with their amulet-induced luck and skills they had gleaned at those expensive conferences.

Their Actual Casino Experience: They lost everything. Their kids were taken away from them and had their memories erased (with colored lights and free drinks) so that they would eventually attempt the same kind of casino win that their parents had before them.

They were never allowed to learn from History. They were never allowed to learn that the House always Wins at this casino.

soundtrack

@Verv : All my life I've been a believer in[…]

What he wanted and what he needed to do are two d[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

My God the drivel that comes out of these Libera[…]

Good corporations and CEOs make money by contribu[…]