5 ms·

... eh ... you lend money to someone for example if they need to buy food, and don't have the money, because you don't want them to starve? You take the risk be

by rijoja 3y ago

... eh ... you lend money to someone for example if they need to buy food, and don't have the money, because you don't want them to starve? You take the risk because it might hurt their pride if you where to give them the money? Charging for interests means that you are making profit of others poverty want want. This gives you incentive to promote desperation and desire. If you lend w/o [edit]interest[/edit], you won't encourage lavish spending, but encourage a solution to the root cause of the poverty, so that you won't have to do it again? Instead you'll be promoting good, which a lot of people like doing just for the sake of it. This is why Christianity and Islam forbade usury. Sorry if this comes across as facetious, but do I really have to spell this out, are you human or an AI? [edit spelling]

MichaelRo 3y ago
>> you lend money to someone for example if they need to buy food Well go ahead and lend them poor people your money to buy food. There's no shortage of such people in every area of the globe, including where you live. Do you do that? How much money do you give consistently, on a regular basis, to someone in need? I'd wager zero, but of course, it's easy to preach. For your information I do give regularly quite a consistent amount by myself on top of the =~ 50% the state rips of from me in taxes, most of which go to social security. There's never enough supply of free give as there's demand for it. >> This is why Christianity and Islam forbade usury. >> Sorry if this comes across as facetious, but do I really have to spell this out, are you human or an AI? Well that was before capitalism was a thing. Again, I urge YOU, not "the rich" or "others" to practice what you preach.
- rijoja 3y ago
  Did I touch a nerve? Sorry, I didn't mean to upset you! You said you where intrigued with why people lend without interest, and I answered, why are you being so offensive, or shall I say defensive, when I'm literately delivering what you asked for? >> Do you do that? I also happen to believe that if you do good deeds it's better to keep it to yourself. As to not promote inflated egos. My point isn't that me personally would be a fantastic person who is a saint, which I'm not but rather that usury has negative effects, which doesn't really have anything to do with whether I'm a person that reaches your standards or not. >> How much money do you give consistently, on a regular basis, to someone in need? I'd wager zero, but of course, it's easy to preach. Are you misrepresenting my argument on purpose? I was talking about the drawbacks of usury here, not about the benefits of giving gifts. Isn't that obvious? Regardless, wouldn't it be better to teach a man how to fish, so to speak? My aim with helping people wouldn't be to put them into perpetual dependency upon, me to give others the impression, that I'm a very generous man, but rather to _actually_ help them out of their situation, does that make sense to you? >> For your information I do give regularly quite a consistent amount by myself .. Good on you, I'm happy to hear that! >> on top of the =~ 50% the state rips of from me in taxes, most of which go to social security. There's never enough supply of free give as there's demand for it. As far as your views on taxes, we're probably more or less in agreement on that subject! I mentioned something tangential to that here "...but encourage a solution to the root cause of the poverty...". If I lend money to someone, w/o benefiting or being able to take something in return, it would be in my interest, to steer him away from bad decisions, thus making life better for him or her, given that he or she wants to do that. If you let me elaborate, I see one of the benefit of donations from individuals and organisations as being that it would encourage a solution to the root cause of the poverty, (through the individual being grateful to an individual instead of seeing themselves entitled to income), rather than having a socialist government opening up an infinite poverty hole, that'll only grow the more you feed it. >> Again, I urge YOU, not "the rich" or "others" to practice what you preach. What I was "preaching" in this instance was not to commit usury, not giving to the poor, which you seem to be a bit confused about, and I do not do that, so you don't have to worry about that. A lot of muslim countries have 0% APR by law, so the statement that that was before capitalism isn't really true? "Lends at interest, and takes profit; shall he then live? He shall not live. He has done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon himself.." -- Ezekiel 18:13 “If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you shall not be like a moneylender to him, and you shall not exact interest from him. -- Exodus 22:25 "You shall not charge interest on loans to your brother, interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything that is lent for interest."__ -- Deuteronomy 23:19 Did they change the bible when capitalism was introduced? I'm not a theologian, perhaps you have studied the bible more carefully than me, and can tell me if there is a broader context that would give a different view that I'm missing here, if that's the case please enlighten me, but this seems quite clearly against usury to me. many more here: https://www.openbible.info/topics/usury https://www.openbible.info/topics/usury Can I go out on a limb here and assume that you see yourself as a christian? ) If this habit was generally frowned upon, we wouldn't have as many self-appointed saviors who'll for instance rip you off in the form of taxes
- kderbyma 3y ago
  Hey....you don't give anything then .... if all you do is pay taxes....you benefit from that...don't even pretend you don't. are you ignorant and selfish? you need people...society needs people.... ..you need what money does....you are so wounded.....by having so much money...that you cannot even fathom the good that money is better off not in your hands.....you really need millions of dollars every year? why....are you so unhappy you busy but your happiness??? seriously...you are out of touch of reality and humanity...money has enslaved you and others...that is why you should get rid of it....
  - MichaelRo 3y ago
    >> money has enslaved you and others...that is why you should get rid of them.... You forgot: "... and give them to me!" LOL :)
    - rijoja 3y ago
      I'm not saying that this is your opinion, but how can there be money without a state to protect it? The people protecting the value of money would need to be fed and given resources somehow. Meaning that without the US taxpayer paying money to the US government, the US dollar would be absolutely worthless, since there's no army, police and so forth, there to protect it, right? Bitcoin and the like might be a possible exception of course.
m-i-l 3y ago
> "you lend money to someone for example if they need to buy food, and don't have the money, because you don't want them to starve? ... Charging for interests means that you are making profit of others poverty" Let's not confuse commerce and charity, and within commerce let's not confuse lending with usury. Charity is gifting money with no expectation of anything in return, lending is temporarily transferring money for a mutually beneficial purpose, while usury is extortionate and exploitative. I would have thought your example of a starving person would come under old fashioned charity, but if not then lending isn't necessarily unreasonable.
- bluGill 3y ago
  Giving to the starving person could be lending if you expect that person to eventually pay you back. Maybe it didn't rain on the other side of town so you give food to the families farming there so that they live - expecting that eventually it won't rain on your side of town and they will give you food so you can live.
- rijoja 3y ago
  I see where you're coming from, what you've failed to address however is the point I'm making about lending by interest, would give an incentive to create both want and lacking. If you're not allowed to profit from lending, very few people would lend money for luxury goods, for instance.
yazantapuz 3y ago
But charity and lending are two different things. I might be no poor, but I need a loan to build a house.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
  because no one ever borrowed money for food.
- rijoja 3y ago
  Yes of course they are different things. It's one example of when someone would want to lend w/o interest. Yes you might not be poor and want to build a house, what does that have to with whether there is a point for anyone anywhere to lend without taking interest?
cosmojg 3y ago
If someone's starving, I'll just gift them the money/food they need. I'm not going to set the expectation that they must return it to me. If I need to lie about the nature of the gift to ensure they'll accept it, so be it, but a gift's a gift, not a loan. On the other hand, if I'm loaning someone money, it's almost certainly related to some commercial venture, and I reasonably expect to be paid for the risk I'm taking with that person.
- rijoja 3y ago
  Maybe you feel like lending them the money so that they don't have to feel like a beggar, and so that you don't have to feel superior to them. I wouldn't say it's lying, it's more like accepting the risk that you won't get it back. > On the other hand, if I'm loaning someone money, it's almost certainly related to some commercial venture Would you loan maybe family or friends money for something that would be good for them lets say an education? Or would you support the government doing the same?
- rijoja 3y ago
  > If someone's starving, I'll just gift them the money/food they need. I'm not going to set the expectation that they must return it to me. If I need to lie about the nature of the gift to ensure they'll accept it, so be it, but a gift's a gift, not a loan. Some people would refuse that out of pride, so you might as well spare their honor and lend it to them in some cases, but yeah sure. > On the other hand, if I'm loaning someone money, it's almost certainly related to some commercial venture, and I reasonably expect to be paid for the risk I'm taking with that person. Wouldn't a more appropriate instrument for investing in a commercial venture be to buy shares in their company?
TwitBar 3y ago
I don’t really buy it. Even a little bit of interest is 100% necessary for the creditor to break even. Statistically a debtor defaults. That loss is subsidized by the debtors who honor their agreement. Also: defining what “breaking even” actually means (and how to get there) is not a straightforward task. Currency inflation/deflation (past, present, and future), laws, penalties, enforcement, repossession, tax, fees, middlemen, statistics, “acts of God”, and general operating costs. Creditors DO provide a service and interest rates exist on a sliding spectrum. This is just a debate over math and magnitude.
- MichaelRo 3y ago
  If you read the glorified "islamic zero-interest finance" here's how it works: you wanna buy a house so you borrow the money from the bank but the bank buys the house in your place and then sells it to you in periodic installments ... at a higher price of course. The house is yours after you finish paying the price that the bank asks for it. "No interest" though. How is this different from interest? It's precisely what interest is. So phony. Reminds me the old story about ultra-orthodox Jews who are prohibited by the Talmud from working or traveling during Shabbat (Sunday), except travel on water. So what they did when they needed to take the train on this day? They'd carry a basin and a bottle of water with them, seat down, take their shoes and socks off and put their feet into the basin then pour the water from the bottle in it. Voilà, commandment obeyed, traveling on water! No interest!
  - rijoja 3y ago
    That is really interesting, thank you for the information, I've been curious about this as well. In mathematical terms I suppose that would be the equivalent of fixed-interest loan with a fixed length more or less. Also see special jew-elevators with a Shabbat-mode so that they always go up and down by every level so that you can use them without operating them, meaning that you can take the elevator on a Shabbat without tricking a gentile into pushing the button for you (1). I was under the impression that Shabbat was on a Friday or Saturday. (nitpicking of course). (1) So that they can go to hell instead of the jew, or whatever?

by rijoja 3y ago

MichaelRo 3y ago

>> you lend money to someone for example if they need to buy food Well go ahead and lend them poor people your money to buy food. There's no shortage of such people in every area of the globe, including where you live. Do you do that? How much money do you give consistently, on a regular basis, to someone in need? I'd wager zero, but of course, it's easy to preach. For your information I do give regularly quite a consistent amount by myself on top of the =~ 50% the state rips of from me in taxes, most of which go to social security. There's never enough supply of free give as there's demand for it. >> This is why Christianity and Islam forbade usury. >> Sorry if this comes across as facetious, but do I really have to spell this out, are you human or an AI? Well that was before capitalism was a thing. Again, I urge YOU, not "the rich" or "others" to practice what you preach.

rijoja 3y ago
Did I touch a nerve? Sorry, I didn't mean to upset you! You said you where intrigued with why people lend without interest, and I answered, why are you being so offensive, or shall I say defensive, when I'm literately delivering what you asked for? >> Do you do that? I also happen to believe that if you do good deeds it's better to keep it to yourself. As to not promote inflated egos. My point isn't that me personally would be a fantastic person who is a saint, which I'm not but rather that usury has negative effects, which doesn't really have anything to do with whether I'm a person that reaches your standards or not. >> How much money do you give consistently, on a regular basis, to someone in need? I'd wager zero, but of course, it's easy to preach. Are you misrepresenting my argument on purpose? I was talking about the drawbacks of usury here, not about the benefits of giving gifts. Isn't that obvious? Regardless, wouldn't it be better to teach a man how to fish, so to speak? My aim with helping people wouldn't be to put them into perpetual dependency upon, me to give others the impression, that I'm a very generous man, but rather to _actually_ help them out of their situation, does that make sense to you? >> For your information I do give regularly quite a consistent amount by myself .. Good on you, I'm happy to hear that! >> on top of the =~ 50% the state rips of from me in taxes, most of which go to social security. There's never enough supply of free give as there's demand for it. As far as your views on taxes, we're probably more or less in agreement on that subject! I mentioned something tangential to that here "...but encourage a solution to the root cause of the poverty...". If I lend money to someone, w/o benefiting or being able to take something in return, it would be in my interest, to steer him away from bad decisions, thus making life better for him or her, given that he or she wants to do that. If you let me elaborate, I see one of the benefit of donations from individuals and organisations as being that it would encourage a solution to the root cause of the poverty, (through the individual being grateful to an individual instead of seeing themselves entitled to income), rather than having a socialist government opening up an infinite poverty hole, that'll only grow the more you feed it. >> Again, I urge YOU, not "the rich" or "others" to practice what you preach. What I was "preaching" in this instance was not to commit usury, not giving to the poor, which you seem to be a bit confused about, and I do not do that, so you don't have to worry about that. A lot of muslim countries have 0% APR by law, so the statement that that was before capitalism isn't really true? "Lends at interest, and takes profit; shall he then live? He shall not live. He has done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon himself.." -- Ezekiel 18:13 “If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you shall not be like a moneylender to him, and you shall not exact interest from him. -- Exodus 22:25 "You shall not charge interest on loans to your brother, interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything that is lent for interest."__ -- Deuteronomy 23:19 Did they change the bible when capitalism was introduced? I'm not a theologian, perhaps you have studied the bible more carefully than me, and can tell me if there is a broader context that would give a different view that I'm missing here, if that's the case please enlighten me, but this seems quite clearly against usury to me. many more here: https://www.openbible.info/topics/usury https://www.openbible.info/topics/usury Can I go out on a limb here and assume that you see yourself as a christian? ) If this habit was generally frowned upon, we wouldn't have as many self-appointed saviors who'll for instance rip you off in the form of taxes
kderbyma 3y ago
Hey....you don't give anything then .... if all you do is pay taxes....you benefit from that...don't even pretend you don't. are you ignorant and selfish? you need people...society needs people.... ..you need what money does....you are so wounded.....by having so much money...that you cannot even fathom the good that money is better off not in your hands.....you really need millions of dollars every year? why....are you so unhappy you busy but your happiness??? seriously...you are out of touch of reality and humanity...money has enslaved you and others...that is why you should get rid of it....
- MichaelRo 3y ago
  >> money has enslaved you and others...that is why you should get rid of them.... You forgot: "... and give them to me!" LOL :)
  - rijoja 3y ago
    I'm not saying that this is your opinion, but how can there be money without a state to protect it? The people protecting the value of money would need to be fed and given resources somehow. Meaning that without the US taxpayer paying money to the US government, the US dollar would be absolutely worthless, since there's no army, police and so forth, there to protect it, right? Bitcoin and the like might be a possible exception of course.

m-i-l 3y ago

> "you lend money to someone for example if they need to buy food, and don't have the money, because you don't want them to starve? ... Charging for interests means that you are making profit of others poverty" Let's not confuse commerce and charity, and within commerce let's not confuse lending with usury. Charity is gifting money with no expectation of anything in return, lending is temporarily transferring money for a mutually beneficial purpose, while usury is extortionate and exploitative. I would have thought your example of a starving person would come under old fashioned charity, but if not then lending isn't necessarily unreasonable.

bluGill 3y ago
Giving to the starving person could be lending if you expect that person to eventually pay you back. Maybe it didn't rain on the other side of town so you give food to the families farming there so that they live - expecting that eventually it won't rain on your side of town and they will give you food so you can live.
rijoja 3y ago
I see where you're coming from, what you've failed to address however is the point I'm making about lending by interest, would give an incentive to create both want and lacking. If you're not allowed to profit from lending, very few people would lend money for luxury goods, for instance.

yazantapuz 3y ago

But charity and lending are two different things. I might be no poor, but I need a loan to build a house.

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
because no one ever borrowed money for food.
rijoja 3y ago
Yes of course they are different things. It's one example of when someone would want to lend w/o interest. Yes you might not be poor and want to build a house, what does that have to with whether there is a point for anyone anywhere to lend without taking interest?

cosmojg 3y ago

If someone's starving, I'll just gift them the money/food they need. I'm not going to set the expectation that they must return it to me. If I need to lie about the nature of the gift to ensure they'll accept it, so be it, but a gift's a gift, not a loan. On the other hand, if I'm loaning someone money, it's almost certainly related to some commercial venture, and I reasonably expect to be paid for the risk I'm taking with that person.

rijoja 3y ago
Maybe you feel like lending them the money so that they don't have to feel like a beggar, and so that you don't have to feel superior to them. I wouldn't say it's lying, it's more like accepting the risk that you won't get it back. > On the other hand, if I'm loaning someone money, it's almost certainly related to some commercial venture Would you loan maybe family or friends money for something that would be good for them lets say an education? Or would you support the government doing the same?
rijoja 3y ago
> If someone's starving, I'll just gift them the money/food they need. I'm not going to set the expectation that they must return it to me. If I need to lie about the nature of the gift to ensure they'll accept it, so be it, but a gift's a gift, not a loan. Some people would refuse that out of pride, so you might as well spare their honor and lend it to them in some cases, but yeah sure. > On the other hand, if I'm loaning someone money, it's almost certainly related to some commercial venture, and I reasonably expect to be paid for the risk I'm taking with that person. Wouldn't a more appropriate instrument for investing in a commercial venture be to buy shares in their company?

TwitBar 3y ago

I don’t really buy it. Even a little bit of interest is 100% necessary for the creditor to break even. Statistically a debtor defaults. That loss is subsidized by the debtors who honor their agreement. Also: defining what “breaking even” actually means (and how to get there) is not a straightforward task. Currency inflation/deflation (past, present, and future), laws, penalties, enforcement, repossession, tax, fees, middlemen, statistics, “acts of God”, and general operating costs. Creditors DO provide a service and interest rates exist on a sliding spectrum. This is just a debate over math and magnitude.

MichaelRo 3y ago
If you read the glorified "islamic zero-interest finance" here's how it works: you wanna buy a house so you borrow the money from the bank but the bank buys the house in your place and then sells it to you in periodic installments ... at a higher price of course. The house is yours after you finish paying the price that the bank asks for it. "No interest" though. How is this different from interest? It's precisely what interest is. So phony. Reminds me the old story about ultra-orthodox Jews who are prohibited by the Talmud from working or traveling during Shabbat (Sunday), except travel on water. So what they did when they needed to take the train on this day? They'd carry a basin and a bottle of water with them, seat down, take their shoes and socks off and put their feet into the basin then pour the water from the bottle in it. Voilà, commandment obeyed, traveling on water! No interest!
- rijoja 3y ago
  That is really interesting, thank you for the information, I've been curious about this as well. In mathematical terms I suppose that would be the equivalent of fixed-interest loan with a fixed length more or less. Also see special jew-elevators with a Shabbat-mode so that they always go up and down by every level so that you can use them without operating them, meaning that you can take the elevator on a Shabbat without tricking a gentile into pushing the button for you (1). I was under the impression that Shabbat was on a Friday or Saturday. (nitpicking of course). (1) So that they can go to hell instead of the jew, or whatever?