Usury

[Totalitarian]

Do you guys (commies/socialists/anarchists) think that it should be illegal to lend money at interest?

This is one of the most exploitative aspects of capitalism, IMO.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Well its against solidarity, and for example what the IMF does to some poor country (like this one where i live) is really stupid and it's robbery.

The ones who ask some others to lend them money is because they dont have it, so the poor one wont get many chances of giving the money back to the richer one. That's capitalism, that's explotiation.

[synthesis]

Bankers are bed-pals with the bourgeoisie and therefore should be abolished along with the capitalist ruling class.

I believe that under Socialism there should be a socialized, proletarian-state-controlled banking system; under Communism, money and any use for it should be completely abolished and therefore the question of the banking system is a void one.

[Totalitarian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2003, 04:12 AM


I believe that under Socialism there should be a socialized, proletarian-state-controlled banking system

...under Communism, money and any use for it should be completely abolished
I do not see how these two claims are compatible. If there is a state-ruled banking system how can that be the same as abolishment of money?

[Saint-Just]

Of course we do not think societies should practice money lending. Even in the first stages of socialism I think usury would come to an end quite quickly.

[Desert Fox]

Well abolishing it would make that banks can't try to make money on stocks by using other people's money but that also means that they can't be taxed about their income of stocks and that means also that those taxes don't go to help organisations for the third world. If you abolish that, that would make that the banks would have to lower their intrest to even a lower lv and only the normal citizen will feel that change. Finally their would be a loss of jobs since certain people will lose their work when loans don't have any intrests. It is up to you, what you think is best ...

[Dhul Fiqar]

Interestingly, usury is against Islamic law and is considered a grave sin.

--- G.

[Saint-Just]

I think in the Torah it says that Jews should lend money but to not put any interest on the loan.

[Desert Fox]

Well don't direct refer jews with capitalists or you will get flamed around here. But it may be unethical to ask money for loans, but so are many things that we take for granted. There should be changes done, but why start first with those pitty little things, think big and go for big changes first ...

[Saint-Just]

Well don't direct refer jews with capitalists or you will get flamed around here.

That is why he is restricted.

I knows its a fairly small issue and not really relevant. Totalitarian suggested it because usury is as you noticed something that Jews are often in.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2003, 03:58 AM
Do you guys (commies/socialists/anarchists) think that it should be illegal to lend money at interest?

This is one of the most exploitative aspects of capitalism, IMO.
In a moneyless socioty I dont see much point to it.

[synthesis]

Originally posted by Totalitarian+Oct 30 2003, 10:22 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Totalitarian @ Oct 30 2003, 10:22 AM)
[email protected] 30 2003, 04:12 AM


I believe that under Socialism there should be a socialized, proletarian-state-controlled banking system

...under Communism, money and any use for it should be completely abolished
I do not see how these two claims are compatible. If there is a state-ruled banking system how can that be the same as abolishment of money? [/b]
Socialism and Communism are two different things. Socialism precedes Communism and is marked by the presence of a state utilized to suppress counter-revolutionaries. Since Socialism is &#39;from each according to their ability, to each according to their deeds&#39; which suggests that there would only be a very progressive income tax instead of completely equal distribution of wealth, I see no reason why there couldn&#39;t be a state bank helping proletarians afford cars, houses, and any other useful item necessary for the betterment of society.

[Totalitarian]

Originally posted by Chairman [email protected] 30 2003, 04:42 PM
I think in the Torah it says that Jews should lend money but to not put any interest on the loan.
Jews are prohibited from practising usury amongst themselves, but may charge interest to gentiles. Israel Shahak noted this in his book Jewish history, jewish religion.

I think Karl Marx also mentioned something about this.

[Totalitarian]

Originally posted by DyerMaker+Oct 31 2003, 05:09 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (DyerMaker @ Oct 31 2003, 05:09 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2003, 10:22 AM

[email protected] 30 2003, 04:12 AM


I believe that under Socialism there should be a socialized, proletarian-state-controlled banking system

...under Communism, money and any use for it should be completely abolished
I do not see how these two claims are compatible. If there is a state-ruled banking system how can that be the same as abolishment of money?
Socialism and Communism are two different things. Socialism precedes Communism and is marked by the presence of a state utilized to suppress counter-revolutionaries. Since Socialism is &#39;from each according to their ability, to each according to their deeds&#39; which suggests that there would only be a very progressive income tax instead of completely equal distribution of wealth, I see no reason why there couldn&#39;t be a state bank helping proletarians afford cars, houses, and any other useful item necessary for the betterment of society. [/b]
So you support a state monopoly banking system, which would exist indefinitely until its abolishment under communism.

[synthesis]

Originally posted by Totalitarian+Oct 31 2003, 09:24 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Totalitarian @ Oct 31 2003, 09:24 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2003, 05:09 AM

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2003, 10:22 AM

[email protected] 30 2003, 04:12 AM


I believe that under Socialism there should be a socialized, proletarian-state-controlled banking system

...under Communism, money and any use for it should be completely abolished
I do not see how these two claims are compatible. If there is a state-ruled banking system how can that be the same as abolishment of money?
Socialism and Communism are two different things. Socialism precedes Communism and is marked by the presence of a state utilized to suppress counter-revolutionaries. Since Socialism is &#39;from each according to their ability, to each according to their deeds&#39; which suggests that there would only be a very progressive income tax instead of completely equal distribution of wealth, I see no reason why there couldn&#39;t be a state bank helping proletarians afford cars, houses, and any other useful item necessary for the betterment of society.
So you support a state monopoly banking system, which would exist indefinitely until its abolishment under communism. [/b]
Is this leading somewhere?

[Totalitarian]

Just thinking about the logic of it. You want private usury banned, but then replaced by a state monopoly. That would be even worse than what we already have.

[synthesis]

I don&#39;t see a problem with the government loaning money to people if the banking system is not exploitative (interest, repossession, et cetera).

[Totalitarian]

Oh, right. So the government would only be able to provide interest-free loans.

[synthesis]

Yes. I do not believe that the state should be a parasitical organ.

[Bolschewik]

Lending money with interest ... "one of the most exploitive aspects of capitalism". There are other things in capitalism that are much worse than interest rates.

Someone needs to do their econ homework.

Interest rates are used to keep the lender from losing money through inflation. They have been used in every society in history, in every economic system in history for that reason.

Let&#39;s say inflation is 5%. A 10 year, &#036;25,000 loan in today&#39;s money would be worth less than &#036;15,000 in 10 years. Otherwise, money would actually be lost. Of course, in a capitalist society in order to stay in business and profit, interest rates must be higher than the inflation. The concept of interest rates, however, is fundamental to any loan made in any economic system. Interest rates must be controlled,so they do not exceed the inflation rate.

[Totalitarian]

Unfortunately, the worker&#39;s wages usually do not keep up with inflation.

[Bolschewik]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2003, 08:51 AM
Unfortunately, the worker&#39;s wages usually do not keep up with inflation.
Of course they do not.

Adjusted for inflation, the US minimum wage should be over &#036;8.00/hour, it is &#036;5.15/hour right now. That&#39;s a fundamental problem with the capitalist system. Don&#39;t mistake me for an apologist for capitalism.

[Totalitarian]

Did you know that the Federal Reserve is privately owned by a cabal of bankers?