3 ms·
> Is there a difference? Or do you think both are unacceptable? Loans by themselves are acceptable; loans with interest are not, because you're making a profit
by heartbeats 5y ago
> Is there a difference? Or do you think both are unacceptable?
Loans by themselves are acceptable; loans with interest are not, because you're making a profit from what could potentially be slavery.
A licit way to do it would be to have a purchase-repurchase agreement. I pay $5000 to "buy" a car, and I'm guaranteed to be able to sell it back for let's say $4000 a week later. That way, if I default on it, I can never end up in debt.
Loans backed by people's ability to earn income are a form of slavery, and earning interest off this is not licit.
- Dylan16807 5y agoWell if you think any loan with interest is unacceptable then I don't think there's any way to solve this. If you want it to be easy to get the loan payments reduced or even cancelled when you're having money problems, then you need to make a profit off the people that do have plenty of money. And isn't that even better than returning what you got? > Loans backed by people's ability to earn income are a form of slavery, and earning interest off this is not licit. To my mind, the whole point of the minimum threshold for the type of loan I'm describing is so it can't be slavery. If you don't have lots of money, the debt just disappears. If you're wealthy... then you're wealthy, not a debt slave.