3 ms·

It’s not about the interest rate. It’s the availability of loans for unproductive purposes on a societal level. It raises the price even if you choose not to pa

It’s not about the interest rate. It’s the availability of loans for unproductive purposes on a societal level. It raises the price even if you choose not to partake in said loans. When the money being lended is digital and not backed by anything it’s even worse.

kelnos 6mo ago
You said "usury", which is a word that describes loaning money at an exorbitant interest rate. So it's no surprise GP thought you were talking about interest rates. (Yes, I know "usury" has had other meanings, but this is the current, common definition, and if you're going to use a word in a way that's uncommon, you should be prepared for confusion.)
- ButlerianJihad 5mo ago
  Okay then! What shall be our working definition of "exorbitant"?
  - triceratops 5mo ago
    Above the legal maximum. If you're asking how lawyers or lawmakers define that, read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interest_rate_ceiling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interest_rate_ceiling
    - ButlerianJihad 5mo ago
      So in the USA in 2026, any interest rates or fees that are not illegal, are not exorbitant? And any loan or credit that is not illegal is not usury? That is obviously not the working definition for other commenters here. If illegal loans have financed our cars, education, and homes, then where are all the criminal prosecutions? Where are the lawsuits to recover the exorbitant rates? Was it consumers taking these illegal loans? Or was it the established banks, negotiating illegal and exorbitant rates with criminals? Is that why banks fail, or are "too big to fail", because we are reluctant to expose their criminal activity? We heard of people "walking away" from their home loans during the 2008 recession; it's difficult to walk with broken kneecaps! We heard that their loans were "underwater", but we didn't realize they were "sleeping with the fishes"!
      - triceratops 5mo ago
        > That is obviously not the working definition for other commenters here. If you've read the other comments I don't understand why you're still confused. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47882360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47882360 pointed the finger at the general practice of moneylending, known for most of history as "usury", for high housing prices. This is broadly true - lower interest rates equal high prices. Others thought they meant modern usury, which is lending money at higher than the legal maximum interest rate.
- triceratops 5mo ago
  They said "usury" in the context of ancient societies. I understood their meaning perfectly well. More money lent out = higher asset prices.
- snikeris 5mo ago
  I know that it is now commonly defined that way, so I explicitly called out that I was referring back to an the older definition: > usury (loans made for unproductive purposes)

kelnos 6mo ago

You said "usury", which is a word that describes loaning money at an exorbitant interest rate. So it's no surprise GP thought you were talking about interest rates. (Yes, I know "usury" has had other meanings, but this is the current, common definition, and if you're going to use a word in a way that's uncommon, you should be prepared for confusion.)

ButlerianJihad 5mo ago
Okay then! What shall be our working definition of "exorbitant"?
- triceratops 5mo ago
  Above the legal maximum. If you're asking how lawyers or lawmakers define that, read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interest_rate_ceiling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interest_rate_ceiling
  - ButlerianJihad 5mo ago
    So in the USA in 2026, any interest rates or fees that are not illegal, are not exorbitant? And any loan or credit that is not illegal is not usury? That is obviously not the working definition for other commenters here. If illegal loans have financed our cars, education, and homes, then where are all the criminal prosecutions? Where are the lawsuits to recover the exorbitant rates? Was it consumers taking these illegal loans? Or was it the established banks, negotiating illegal and exorbitant rates with criminals? Is that why banks fail, or are "too big to fail", because we are reluctant to expose their criminal activity? We heard of people "walking away" from their home loans during the 2008 recession; it's difficult to walk with broken kneecaps! We heard that their loans were "underwater", but we didn't realize they were "sleeping with the fishes"!
    - triceratops 5mo ago
      > That is obviously not the working definition for other commenters here. If you've read the other comments I don't understand why you're still confused. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47882360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47882360 pointed the finger at the general practice of moneylending, known for most of history as "usury", for high housing prices. This is broadly true - lower interest rates equal high prices. Others thought they meant modern usury, which is lending money at higher than the legal maximum interest rate.
triceratops 5mo ago
They said "usury" in the context of ancient societies. I understood their meaning perfectly well. More money lent out = higher asset prices.
snikeris 5mo ago
I know that it is now commonly defined that way, so I explicitly called out that I was referring back to an the older definition: > usury (loans made for unproductive purposes)