It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Usury still a Sin?

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by 23432
 


Now think it one step further and examine why.

In a fiat money system, those who control the ability to CREATE money will eventually own all of it. Interest -- in a Fiat money system -- is at its core -- a systematic way to reduce the value of every kind of transaction except one, and that particular transaction is subject to increasing liability for everyone who isn't a money creator.

Most people understand this intuitively, but have we have been trained since birth to believe a myth: That if we are fast enough, we can become a money creator too, and over the short to mid term, this works pretty well. Over the long term -- everything becomes more expensive until even the underlying money has little value, in comparison to the value of the debt on it. This is the world we live in now.

Good luck!




posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Usury is a sin against logic, unless you are aware of and actively playing this game of deception.

Like others have already pointed out, expecting money to simply "grow" is a bit ridiculous. It's also the reason I'm against the idea of savings accounts and will not use one. Where does all that interest come from? The more you have in the account the more interest you get... but for accomplishing what? And where does it come from? Was it taken from someone else?

Material wealth is finite. Problem is, more money keeps getting printed and our wallets don't grow when that happens. Somebody's getting what's siphoned off. I want names and nooses.



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by circlemaker
 


That is one of the saddest posts I have ever seen!!

Where does the money come from? It comes from other people seeking to borrow it to their own benefit, and paying you so that they can do so.

A company that borrows to buy more machinery so it can make more goods, or a person who borrows to buy a house to stop paying rent - they do so because they believe they are going to get a better return for their own money - and to so so they are willing to pay you for the "rent" of your money.

There is nothing mystical or strange about it, and your questions show a sad degree of ignorance about basic economics



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by BlackSatinDancer

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by doctornamtab
Its also a sin if you're Muslim. Its a basic tenet of cohesive, functional society to not lend money at interest.


rofl....palpably false!


Do you lend money to your mother at interest? Of course not.


I pay interest to my parents - we agreed before hand how much and what terms - less than I would if I borrowed from a bank, more than they could get if they invested in a bank.

Why would I want to deprive them of income??




you wouldn't... but money does create more money. the concept of interest is flawed. if they helped you, you should compensate them for their service but the system of making money on top of money is fundamentally flawed at the very base of it's logic.


Neither of us is creating more money from money - we each have a limited amount of money and income, and the money I pay as intgerest is paid to me for othe work I do.

Money "creation" is an entirely different matter to paying interest.



I understand your situation.

...but interest can create an illusion of more money. if not, why are some loans more valuable percentage wise than others? two people walk into a bank and borrow the same amount of money and their credit is pretty even but one winds up with a higher interest rate... because some money is more valuable than other money? that's crazy. it's decided by a lot of factors... like factors within the economy that are already bad and highly debatable factors. it's kinda strange when politicians are able to effect the value of money.

how often do you think they get it right? it's all so debatable there really can hardly be a right answer.... but the actual value of the money that is in your pocket is constantly changing andit is because of this screwball, dicey system of holding other people's money for them. started reading a good page about the rothchilds the orther day.

y'all should check it out if you haven't already. I haven't cross referenced for truth or anything yet... i haven't even finished reading it actually but its interesting.

www.iamthewitness.com...



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by circlemaker
 


That is one of the saddest posts I have ever seen!!

Where does the money come from? It comes from other people seeking to borrow it to their own benefit, and paying you so that they can do so.

A company that borrows to buy more machinery so it can make more goods, or a person who borrows to buy a house to stop paying rent - they do so because they believe they are going to get a better return for their own money - and to so so they are willing to pay you for the "rent" of your money.

There is nothing mystical or strange about it, and your questions show a sad degree of ignorance about basic economics


the concept is silly to think you should just be able to put your money in the bank and watch it grow. you are told that it's from interest from other people borrowing money, which is true... but this whole complex system is merely a veil to facilitate corruption of those concepts. Any money borrowed that interest is paid on, shouldn't it go to the people who are doing the paperwork?.... not the people who just stick their money in the bank.... but someone started the idea and so the other banks had to follow suit because if only one bank let your money accumulate interest, that is the bank everyone would go to.

you are not really getting it from other people who are borrowing money. did you lend it to them? no. did you do the paperwork? no. do you own the bank? no. it's just a marketing concept that has NO value.... none... at all. when someone gets something for nothing, others have to give up more of what they shouldn't. people who borrow money lots of time don't have savings.... unless they borrow BIG money, for houses and stuff. hell, many home owners have no savings. people who have enough money to just sit and collect interest... they don't even NEED loans!.... they aren't paying high interest, they can just buy things.... and yet still their money grows.

now do you see?

the person who borrows money and has no savings... he's strapped down.... he'll probably never get out either.

they say it takes money to make money... because in this system, yeah... money simply grows. the rich get richer and the poor get poorer as the economy starts suffering from a simple concept that people need to be aware of.

in this economy, yes... you can simply "grow" your money. crazy.
edit on 14-9-2011 by BlackSatinDancer because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackSatinDancer

the concept is silly to think you should just be able to put your money in the bank and watch it grow. you are told that it's from interest from other people borrowing money, which is true...

....snip....

you are not really getting it from other people who are borrowing money. did you lend it to them? no. did you do the paperwork? no. do you own the bank? no. it's just a marketing concept that has NO value.... none... at all.


Which is it? Is it true that you ar getting het interst from other people borrowing the money, or is it that yuo did not lend them the money at all??


In fact yuo ahve lent eth money to an intermediary - the bank - they then lend the accumulated money to otehrs, because often borrowers require sums larger than individual lenders can supply, and/or it is easier and cheaper for everyone involved for there to be a limited number of such intermediaries rather than trying to go around getting money from a large number of small lenders.


when someone gets something for nothing, others have to give up more of what they shouldn't. people who borrow money lots of time don't have savings.... unless they borrow BIG money, for houses and stuff. hell, many home owners have no savings. people who have enough money to just sit and collect interest... they don't even NEED loans!.... they aren't paying high interest, they can just buy things.... and yet still their money grows.

now do you see?


Yes - I see that you ahve little or no understanding of economics or even basic finance.

Like I said - your inituial post is a very sad case of lack of knowledge.


the person who borrows money and has no savings... he's strapped down.... he'll probably never get out either.


Utter rubbish - I have borrowed and paid back large amounts of money several times over my lifetime. I have considerable accumulated wealth as well as having considerable borrowings right now - depending on how much I could sell my assets for I am potentially "worth" a substantial amount of money.


in this economy, yes... you can simply "grow" your money. crazy.


Crazy that anyone thinks in such simplistic terms and with so little understanding of reality - crazy...and very, very sad



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Wealth is funny. We have a lot of golden cows in America when it comes to making it, and for good reasons too. After all -- we made a LOT of it over the last 50 years or so. It is because of this that a new kind of economy has sprung up, and replaced the old one with itself. In this economy, all of the money generated within a geographical border belongs to the super-state. This super-state gives the appearance of being both the thing we are referring to in the absolute sense, and thing which has declared itself legitimately oppositional to the actual "thing" under consideration. That's why no one can decide if a particular oligarch is a legitimate businessmen, a war-profiteering gangster, a government stooge or TPTB. We keep getting the correlations confused with the cause, and our brains fill in the blanks completely so that soon enough -- the only thing that matters are the colors on the team jerseys.

TPTB call it "redistribution of wealth" when -- in reality -- they have taken all of the wealth for themselves, before ceding back a fraction to us from which we are to pay our bills and grow our dreams with. We can't redistribute what is already ours. That is insanity. Still, the game continues because everyone is expected to know their part, and there is nothing worse for a modern cog then to be out of place during the count.

Start thinking about a post money economy -- at least in the sense that we have come to know it -- because the long term over / under on the current paradigm is headed to zero given the relentless march of automation and information technology. The end of the current system is a lot closer then most people think. At that point the top 5% will own the value of 100% of the whole enchilada, and the rest of us will be stuck fighting for the money-makers table scraps.



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by BlackSatinDancer

the concept is silly to think you should just be able to put your money in the bank and watch it grow. you are told that it's from interest from other people borrowing money, which is true...

....snip....

you are not really getting it from other people who are borrowing money. did you lend it to them? no. did you do the paperwork? no. do you own the bank? no. it's just a marketing concept that has NO value.... none... at all.


Which is it? Is it true that you ar getting het interst from other people borrowing the money, or is it that yuo did not lend them the money at all??


In fact yuo ahve lent eth money to an intermediary - the bank - they then lend the accumulated money to otehrs, because often borrowers require sums larger than individual lenders can supply, and/or it is easier and cheaper for everyone involved for there to be a limited number of such intermediaries rather than trying to go around getting money from a large number of small lenders.


when someone gets something for nothing, others have to give up more of what they shouldn't. people who borrow money lots of time don't have savings.... unless they borrow BIG money, for houses and stuff. hell, many home owners have no savings. people who have enough money to just sit and collect interest... they don't even NEED loans!.... they aren't paying high interest, they can just buy things.... and yet still their money grows.

now do you see?


Yes - I see that you ahve little or no understanding of economics or even basic finance.

Like I said - your inituial post is a very sad case of lack of knowledge.


the person who borrows money and has no savings... he's strapped down.... he'll probably never get out either.


Utter rubbish - I have borrowed and paid back large amounts of money several times over my lifetime. I have considerable accumulated wealth as well as having considerable borrowings right now - depending on how much I could sell my assets for I am potentially "worth" a substantial amount of money.


in this economy, yes... you can simply "grow" your money. crazy.


Crazy that anyone thinks in such simplistic terms and with so little understanding of reality - crazy...and very, very sad


lol... economics.

Ok, so you think that when you put your money in the bank in a savings account that they are actually taking YOUR money and lending it to other people? That would be completely illegal, because if you needed to walk back in the bank TOMORROW and get your money, the bank had better hope that number has not changed... and it's not even actual bills... it's just a number. No one is "borrowing" that money. You are thinking of accounts where there is a penalty for early withdrawal because it is serving as collateral on a different loan because THOSE funds are factors in to the system immediately when you start the account, such as a CD account or something with an accompanying loan. The bank already knows EXACTLY what it's going to get from your pocket on any given day that you try to pull it out early and pay off the loan...so it can safely screw around with that money, but savings account...no.

people who create systems like this were the first ones to say AND YOU CAN HAVE A SAVINGS ACCOUNT TOO! and who do you think has the most money to put in that savings account. They invented savings accounts for themselves!

there's a very good chance that the biggest savings accounts belong to people like bankers and that money is doing NOTHING.

That is just one example of money paid out for nothing. We are not talking about CD accounts and the like or any other types of accumulating interest. that's why savings accounts accumulate less, because you will always be able to get that... that's no one elses money. no one can borrow against that without your permission and that permission is not implied by putting it in the bank... no way.


Savings accounts are different.
not only do I have somewhat of an understanding, but i also have common sense.



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Gaul... in my opinion you are drinking and I'd rather not try to debate very simple concepts with anyone who is drinking. I really think that seems to be your case.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlackSatinDancer
[for the bankers who have done dirty deals, it will certainly be a sin for them in my opinion...


There have been bankers and money lenders throughout history. Banks will continue to exist in our western society, whether we like it or not. The recent focus on banking bad practice and risk has demonstrated that certain activities should be curtailed, but on the whole the banking system works. I am sure that if there is a Heaven and a Hell then Satan will have a few bankers at his heels and God will also be in debt!

If the Muslims want to follow a credo that makes usury a sin, then that’s their choice. However, as has been pointed out and implied in this discussion, Islam carries quite a lot of “medieval” baggage and could do with a bit of an evolution, as has happened across mainstream Christianity where certain parts of the Bible are reinterpreted for a modern world and read in the context of the time.

You do not have to take a loan and pay interest if you don’t want to and most banks in the West offer alternatives.

Regards



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Usury is wrong...not because the 'bible tells me so', or because it is a 'sin'. Usury is immoral because it is dishonest and harmful to the party receiving the 'short end of the stick'. Again, NOT because it is in the bible. Some people think morality started with religion, and that it comes from the Bible or other texts. No. Religious authors millennia ago appropriated morality and packaged it as "Commandments" from an imaginary god to keep ignorant people controlled and in fear. Moral codes were around long before the bible was compiled...'else how did they make it into the bible in the first place? Moral standards arise from our biological, natural responses, e.g. Do you like being harmed, cheated on, or stolen from? No? Then don't do it to someone else! Very simple. No Bible, Talmud, Koran needed. Usury is theft which ultimately leads to debt slavery, and because our monetary system is COMPLETELY usury based, it cannot last. They are getting very desperate to maintain it. Hence, the engineered conflict and false flag terrorism to keep the economy moving along for the sake of the bankers and their criminal friends. But the bubble will burst and all will fall. Those who have placed faith in the corrupt system will suffer the most. Any social construct with a dishonest foundation is bound to fail over time.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Like my mama said, "If everybody wanted to go and jump off a cliff, would that make it right?"

Likewise, if everyone is involved in usuary...businesses, banks, government, people...does that make it right....?

NO...usuary is still a sin.

One of the defining characteristics of sin is it hurts other people....usuary is a sin.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
NO...usuary is still a sin.
One of the defining characteristics of sin is it hurts other people....usuary is a sin.


How does charging interest on a loan hurt people? A loan is a commercial transaction and given when someone needs or wants it. The interest covers the risk, profit and inflation of the lender. You are free not to take a loan if you do not want one or to shop around if you think the interest is too high. There’s no sin in taking a loan or offering one. It’s called free will.



Regards



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by audiopackrat
Usury is wrong...not because the 'bible tells me so', or because it is a 'sin'. Usury is immoral because it is dishonest and harmful to the party receiving the 'short end of the stick'...


If a person is openly willing to pay a fee (in the form of interest) in return for getting a loan, then what is the problem?

If a bank is openly willing to give you money in return for allowing them to use your money for loans and investments, then what's the problem?



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by circlemaker
 


......

Where does the money come from? It comes from other people seeking to borrow it to their own benefit, and paying you so that they can do so.

A company that borrows to buy more machinery so it can make more goods, or a person who borrows to buy a house to stop paying rent - they do so because they believe they are going to get a better return for their own money - and to so so they are willing to pay you for the "rent" of your money.

There is nothing mystical or strange about it, and your questions show a sad degree of ignorance about basic economics


Your approach to the discussion is also somewhat sad.

If you are intending to educate on the subject of economics please expand some of your statements because they seem incorrect to my non-professional judgement.

I believe that "money" does not come " from other people seeking to borrow it to their own benefit, and paying you so that they can do so." .. that's where "Credit" comes from. Credit is not money; although the banking paradigm profits by that doctrine.

Money is a symbolic representation of the value of labor. Money comes from people, not banks. "Reserve Notes" come from banks... which explains why there is no "turn in value" for them... if you want to exchange them for something it's value is based upon the monetary policy of the ruling reserve bank, not anything real.

I also disagree that a person borrows money to stop paying rent. They usually borrow so they can "own" a thing... which is to say, that thing's value will be their asset, not that of another. Credit enables the lender to "own" it "for" you, until they've satisfied the terms of their loan agreement.

And to comment on your post there, actually there IS something strange and mystical about it. Why do you think there is no consensus on how to establish and manage an economy? It is because it is based upon "notional" value of fiat currency. The mystery can be demonstrated each time three or more economist are in a room. Fortunately for those who are dominant they can pick and choose who they will believe on behalf of the rest of the subjugated populace... a part of the economic system which is patently broken.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by BlackSatinDancer
 


I think I understand what you are saying, but you must account for the fact that in order to continue the banking model, for the benefit of the bankers, fractional reserve lending had to be controlled. Banks lend money they do not have. They are "allowed" to lend, for example, 9 dollars for every 1 dollar they have in reserve.

As a result the bank cycles 'credit' as if it were currency. What's more, if you borrow 100 dollars, the bank get to call that hundred dollars part of it's reserve since it legally has that money coming to it. They then lend out money based on a reserve they don't have. This is why money grows.

Banks offer interest on savings because it is an incentive to get your money that they may 'cycle' it through as more wealth for themselves. They don't do it for you, the customer.

In the end, Fractional reserve lending is the actual 'offense' that has us in the grips of their control; because we 'agree' that their process is the 'standard' by which we as a planet will conduct commerce.

Economists like to render it differently, and I am sure those who love the model will defend it. But at the end of logic, it is as 'faith-based' (or confidence-driven) as any religion because it is a matter of non-competing financial institutions that 'decree' monetary policy and intra-bank loan credit rates... with no input form the actual creators of wealth... the people.... rendering them into debt serfs.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by BlackSatinDancer
[for the bankers who have done dirty deals, it will certainly be a sin for them in my opinion...


There have been bankers and money lenders throughout history. Banks will continue to exist in our western society, whether we like it or not. The recent focus on banking bad practice and risk has demonstrated that certain activities should be curtailed, but on the whole the banking system works. I am sure that if there is a Heaven and a Hell then Satan will have a few bankers at his heels and God will also be in debt!

If the Muslims want to follow a credo that makes usury a sin, then that’s their choice. However, as has been pointed out and implied in this discussion, Islam carries quite a lot of “medieval” baggage and could do with a bit of an evolution, as has happened across mainstream Christianity where certain parts of the Bible are reinterpreted for a modern world and read in the context of the time.

You do not have to take a loan and pay interest if you don’t want to and most banks in the West offer alternatives.

Regards


It is not that banks and lender exist that causes the problems of usury. It is the practice and policy of those banks and lenders that causes the problem. Loaning with interest CAN harm people, it does not have to.

This isn't about any specific religion, it is about the application of a moral value to the practice of profiteering. Many loan with interest; but when the object is to systemically control economies based upon credit, it most definitely does not work for everybody... it only works for the lenders - most of which have no solidarity with the nations in which they operate, nor are interested in any concept outside of the corporate profit model - all else being 'externalities' which detract from profit.

Next I am expecting to hear the perennial refuge of "a few bad apples" to surface.... the system is the problem, the players are just using it to their advantage. If you will not concede that such an advantage, available only to the few is contrary to the common good, then we disagree.

Usury does not cease to be usury because we call it something else. Usury similarly does not cease to be usury because the borrower 'agreed' to the terms. Usury is about not making a living off of lending strangers money, but instead making a killing off of their need. It's about the latitude to create hardship and duress because of the desire to amass wealth. The idea of loaning money to "help" someone does not coincide with the willingness to allow, or even encourage, people to borrow themselves into destitution.

I know banks would not get very far if they told people, "No, you don't really need to buy a new car, your old one runs fine." And people would scream bloody murder if hey were denied their desires (programmed consumerism, materialistic self-image, and ego-gratifications aside) so they are not fully responsible for the problems some borrowers are prone to create. But responsible banks, as purported "members of communities" and "here to help 'you' our valued customer - like family" should probably be slapped around a bit for misleading people into thinking they are "looking out for you."

Alternatives to banking? Difficult to say, that depends on whether people are willing to grow up and not want everything they see. But I wouldn't hesitate to explore the possibility of a graduated capital gains tax.... because returns such as banks generate, no matter how well concealed - are rarely anything but obscene... and the reason since ancient times that many philosophers and thinkers have noted the perils of usury.... unless of course they were part of the gambit... and yes, money buys that too it appears.
edit on 15-9-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 


Yes you can say usury is a sin, and it has lead to the downfall of many a civilization and peoples. But like gambling or following the asshole in front of you, it is something that is written in the human mind and even there genome.


Basically it is all just another form of loansharking, and parasitism. But the funny thing is it has been done for so long and has been embedded into the human being/animal so deep, that they would not even notice it or know what it is all about or be even able to think beyond its means, and they would even gladly go into its jaws for mere trinkets of which they can get those trinkets without all the hassle that would come with the path of usury.

Its just another thing in the cave that they will never even fathom of how it could be different, not only by one or two other ways, but by thousands of other ways.

Its just another thing that is put before there faces with all the other shapes and shadows that they must stare at because they cant turn there head to look elsewhere or go out of the cave, or even think of going out of the cave, down there in there whole world they call there cave, that mythical allegorical cave indeed.

They say a sucker is born a minute, but what they don't tell you is that those suckers is what keeps this whole system running and without them it would crumble fast, and so not only do they rely on them to keep the others floating above the water on others backs. But the system is set up that it produces those suckers for the machine to chew and spit up.

And so is usury still a sin? Only if you don't get anything of worth from it. And most times you don't and wont. But however it all depends on the price they are willing to pay, and the carrots thrust in front of there faces. And most importantly, that they would be so unused to real freedom that they would literally not know what to do with themselves.


And so its not when usury actually causes them to cave in, but when there cave reaches its max and there is no more room to fill with objects and other junk that then the whole cave, caves in. Then do they all want to be saved and call on the name of all the gods that they know to save them. So usury is something people like and everybody is looking for something that they will be more then willing to pay way above what its worth, so who am I to disagree with what they agree upon.



The allegory of the cave
edit on 15-9-2011 by galadofwarthethird because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by circlemaker
 


That is one of the saddest posts I have ever seen!!

Where does the money come from? It comes from other people seeking to borrow it to their own benefit, and paying you so that they can do so.

A company that borrows to buy more machinery so it can make more goods, or a person who borrows to buy a house to stop paying rent - they do so because they believe they are going to get a better return for their own money - and to so so they are willing to pay you for the "rent" of your money.

There is nothing mystical or strange about it, and your questions show a sad degree of ignorance about basic economics


Actually its quite simple. The money for the interest on your savings account (say, 4%) comes from the people who borrow money on a higher percent, mostly credit cards (say, 18%). 18% minus 4% = the banks profits = usury.

PS - This may sound mean but I thought your post was the saddest one I've ever read. Parents lending money to their child at interest? What an awful, awful thing to do for family. How does that even help you? It helps your parents. You're either very irresponsible and your parents are sick of loaning you money they never see back or your parents are amatuer bankers who turned you into their cash cow. You know what they call it when individuals lend money to other individuals at interest? Loan sharking. Its illegal and your parents are sharkin you. What a crazy world.

Yeah that did sound mean. Sorry. I just cant believe it though
edit on 15-9-2011 by doctornamtab because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Usury is sin not because its just 'stealing' from people, but because almost always, the people doing the borrowing are in need. And usury is taking advantage of a needy persons weakness. Its how the rich get richer and poor get poorer.

Great food for thought from someone who isn't a Muslim. S&F!



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join