This is a good example of how one dimensional thinking won't get you very far. Let's add a dimension and see what happens. We'll divide "we" into "usurers" (U)

This is a good example of how one dimensional thinking won't get you very far. Let's add a dimension and see what happens. We'll divide "we" into "usurers" (U) and "exploited" (E) where the former are defined to receive net positive interest income and the latter are defined as those who bear that net negative cost. By definition we know these sets of persons must exist and together with nonparticipants in the ledger game, who we can ignore, they are exhaustive. Now if membership in U and E is randomly distributed and ergodic then an argument can be made that there is no cause for concern and the system is basically "fair." On the other hand if membership in U is restricted to a tiny and mostly hereditary minority one can see why members of E might not be quite so pleased with the arrangement. Which of these scenarios more closely approximates reality and who the typical members of U and E are is something folks should draw their own conclusions on.