Usury (i.e. the charging of interest on money)
January 15, 2008
First, I'll state my prejudices up front. The practice of usury or charging of interest on money is one of the primary methods of controlling a population. It is unacceptable and more importantly unnecessary to the natural evolution of human society. It's true purpose is a method of wealth extraction from the general population to the controlling elite. It is necessary for them to support their parasitic existence. It is nothing more than a sophisticated form of slavery that can be enforced if enough of the people can be convinced to believe/accept it.
That said it is a tough subject since it is such a culturally accepted practice. It is so obvious that most people simply accept that of course someone, some bank or other entity should earn interest on the money they loan you. But should they really? And how is this in fact done? And what, if any, are the alternatives? And let's not forget that the word itself 'usury' has been culturally associated in such a way that if you oppose usury you are anti-semitic.
Should the Charging of Interest be a Culturally Acceptable Norm?
No it shouldn't. It is counter to releasing the creative and cultural potential of a society. By creating a situation where a person is forced to pay approximately double for a house what it is worth, what we are in fact doing is transferring the potential future gains in appreciation of that house and your current income to the monied class and ultimately those that control the banking system. Simply stated, the charging of interest is a wealth transfer tax from yourself to the elite that control the wealth of the nation.
How are Loans Created and How Much Does It Really Cost Them?
Sadly, loans are created by accounting entries - debits and credits - and as such are created out of nothing. The loans themselves are not backed by the deposits of others as we've been taught to believe. As such, Canadian financial institutions risk nothing when loaning you money. There was a time when we had what is called fraction reserve requirements when the banks had to hold 10% of their loans in reserve (bad enough). This is no longer the case (thanks Brian Mulroney). In any event the creation of a contract without equal consideration is a fraud. And even worse our entire national debt could be financed by the Bank of Canada at little or no interest but is instead financed by private banks at interest.
What are the Alternatives to Charging Interest
There are probably many other alternatives to the charging of interest regarding loans. Here is one. Instead of charging interest, you could be charged a fee on each payment amounting to 9-10% of the loans value over its entire term. For example, on a loan of 300,000 you could be charged a total of 30,000 in fees. These fees would be more than enough to compensate the lender for adminstrative fees and the risk from defaults based on real world actuarial experience. This means you could pay for your house in 15 years instead of 25 or 30 and at a fraction of the cost that would leave with ample money left over to live your life as you see fit. And this is just one alernative. Furthermore, this would leave the accumulated wealth from property appreciation in your hands.
Opposition to Usury = Anti-Semitism
This is too absurd for words really. It is a simple recognition that the cultural meme you have been given that is false. The correlation between the two really is false. Recognize it as such and you'll be free of it forever. Simply separate the two in your mind and you'll see it is a ridiculous correlation. As such, it smells of brain washing. Ask yourself why when you think you think of usury you think of anti-semitism. We have been brainwashed/manipulated into associating the two concepts but they are in fact separate.
Usury is a practice we simply do not need, is easily eliminated and would result in incredible personal and social benefits.