"If banks can borrow money from the federal reserve at 3%, why cant we? Why do we have to go through a money changer to get access to capital? In all honesty for profit banking should be outlawed like for profit hospitals were before Nixon. Usury is the problem in our society. Not capitalism."

submitted by Orangutan from old.reddit.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]magnora7 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I agree. Usury is the main cause of debt slavery, because the high rates makes the debts almost impossible to repay.

Debt can be used to help grow societies, but not when they charge you 15% for it, of which you must pay the interest first before the principal is touched, and furthermore wages never go up.

If all debt was suddenly forgiven once, it would be one of the greatest gifts to humanity we could imagine. Think of all the stress it would relieve.

[–]Jesus 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All debt annulation at least property and argriculture debt has been a reoccurring happening throughout intquity. This was done in order to stabilize the economy and relase the citizens from predatory creditor bondage. This provides a stable economy, strong army and the right to hold land and property. Now we see the exact opposite. Creditor jubilees, debt bondage, usury like never before. We follow primarily the Roman model of law and credit and after the assassination of some anti-usury tyrants, the debt bondage only became worse. Some say Rome fell due in part to debt bondage.

EDIT: Tyrants back in intiquity were known for annuling public and private debts for the people, where predatory aristocracies indebted them. Tyrants in Rome for many years were, indeed, seen as appropreaite rulers to relase corizens from debt bondage. The term tyrant today to us means something entirely different.

This is because words and terms have been changed to mean their opposites to confuse people. Neoliberals say they are for a free market but only if that free market is deregulation by regulation. Meaning a free market for us and not you! This confuses people and thusly they compare thr classical liberal ideals of Adam Smith's fdree markets and even Libertariams principles with austerity measures and neoliberal agendas.