Usury and Politics

[Traveler]

Both Ocasio-Cortex and Bernie Sanders are introducing bills to limit high interest rates loans attempting to quote scripture to gain support.  I would like to agree with them in principle but their ignorance is showing too much.  They claim that Christianity, Judaism and Islam all denounce usury but what they do not understand is that anciently it was believe that usury was not just exorbitant interest rates but specific interest of a certain kind.  The modern term is “compound interest”. 

Anciently when loans were made there was an agreement to pay back the loan plus an additional amount.  The amount to be paid back was given a time limit.  The time limit could be days, months or years.  It was all part of the original agreement.  Usury was considered the effort to charge “additional fees” or hidden costs.  In Islam this idea of hiding interest rates is believed to be a undeniable sign of Satan holding the hearts of men.  It is not the idea of interest but the concept of deceiving the borrower as to fees and charges to force the unwitting into slavery or bondage.

I will skip the history of how compound interest grew out of algebra becoming a hidden or misunderstood fee for borrowing except to point out that compound interest was developed in the 17^th century (1600’s) and was the main source of individuals being sold into slavery.  One of my ancestors was a slave in the Americas  in the late 1600’s.   A lot of people do not know that the early American colonies involved a lot of such slaves and that the vast majority were white – until the advent of cotton.  But let us not divert – the means of slavery was compound interest. 

Today it is almost impossible to borrow money avoiding compound interest.  Of all things in modern society there is no other means of separating the rich from the poor greater than compound interest.  I am glad that at least someone in government realizes there is a “evil” problem even if with most other things I find little to agree with them on.  The other problem with politics is what I call "The hidden agenda" - that is (in my mind) basically the same type of hidden evil with intent to deceive and bring free people into bongage. 

 

The Traveler

[Vort]

Though I happen to agree with the idea of prohibiting excessive interest, what today is called "usury" (though as you note, that's not historically accurate), I consider both Occasionally Coherent and InSane-ders to be opportunistic liars and intellectual lightweights. I would hesitate to believe them if they told me at noon that the sun was shining, unless I could double-check them.

Did anyone else check out Bernie's web site during the 2016 election cycle, where he bragged that he gave actual numbers to support his socialistic plans? It was absolutely unbefrickinlievable. I saw literally nothing—not a single word in print—about it, so I assume he made that site for me and me alone. To establish his tax plans for his socialistic paradise, he linked to research WHERE THE AUTHORS OPENLY CONCEDED IN THEIR OPENING PARAGRAPH THAT THEIR WORK WAS SPECULATIVE AND NOT TO BE ACCEPTED AT FACE VALUE. I am not joking. All you had to do was to follow the link. After spending 30 minutes with the web archive site, I can't find the example I had in mind, so you'll have to take (or reject) my word for it.

In any case, the point is I would not trust either of those politicians to give me the correct time.

[Traveler]

24 minutes ago, Vort said:

Though I happen to agree with the idea of prohibiting excessive interest, what today is called "usury" (though as you note, that's not historically accurate), I consider both Occasionally Coherent and InSane-ders to be opportunistic liars and intellectual lightweights. I would hesitate to believe them if they told me at noon that the sun was shining, unless I could double-check them.

Did anyone else check out Bernie's web site during the 2016 election cycle, where he bragged that he gave actual numbers to support his socialistic plans? It was absolutely unbefrickinlievable. I saw literally nothing—not a single word in print—about it, so I assume he made that site for me and me alone. To establish his tax plans for his socialistic paradise, he linked to research WHERE THE AUTHORS OPENLY CONCEDED IN THEIR OPENING PARAGRAPH THAT THEIR WORK WAS SPECULATIVE AND NOT TO BE ACCEPTED AT FACE VALUE. I am not joking. All you had to do was to follow the link. After spending 30 minutes with the web archive site, I can't find the example I had in mind, so you'll have to take (or reject) my word for it.

In any case, the point is I would not trust either of those politicians to give me the correct time.

I do agree.  A broken clock is right two times a day.  I did not say earlier but states have the power to limit interest rates rates but those familiar with banking or if you are willing to spend the time reading the reams of paper involved in a mortgage - you will realize that everyone (state) copies New York law when it comes to banking and insurance.  What then is the point of having states if they are not different?

 

The Traveler

[The Folk Prophet]

16 hours ago, Traveler said:

A broken clock is right two times a day. 

Except this one:

[Just_A_Guy]

The economic ignorance here is staggering.  Subprime loans have huge interest rates because many of them just plain don’t get paid back—the debtors who do pay, subsidize the ones who don’t.  If you tell a subprime lender that he can’t charge an interest rate high enough to cover his losses, then either he goes out of business (and would-be subprime borrowers just won’t get any financing at all), or they’ll screech for a government bailout and government will wind up holding these loans.  And as anyone who has had a tough time paying back federally subsidized student loans knows—the feds will do whatever it takes to get their money, including some strategies that aren’t available to private lenders.  

[askandanswer]

7 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Except this one:

Behold, the fulfillment of prophecy!

And Satan is bound and time is no longer.

(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 84:100)