|Subject:||Re: [socialcredit] Regarding "interest" and "usury"|
|Date:||Sunday, January 27, 2008 12:58:07 (-0700)|
|From:||Martin Hattersley <jmartinh @....ca>
In my view, the way that Banks treat interest income and capital repayment
are two quite separate things.
Banks have operating expenses (staff wages, interest to depositors,
equipment and accommodation expenses, bad debt write-offs, etc.), and pay
these out of the various fees, including interest, that they charge.
Hopefully, that leaves some room also for profits and so to dividends to
Making loans and receiving repayment is different. The bank loan creates new
credit, used as currency. Repayment of the loan cancels this credit, and so
reduces the overall quantity of currency (money) in the community. Hence the
"boom and bust" economy that we have at the present time. Creating new
credit dilutes the value of the dollar, leading to inflation - but also
economic expansion. Repayment of that credit, unless new borrowing is taking
place, leads to deflation, unemployment, business failures, and bankruptcy
To prevent this deflation, orthodox finance does everything possible to
"prime the pump", by making credit cheaper, by government programs financed
by state borrowing - war expenses being the most politically acceptable way
of doing this - and by extending credit to ever less creditworthy borrowers.
All of which works until the roof falls in, which it seems to be doing in
the US at the present time.
It is to cure this problem of deflation that Douglas advanced his proposals
for a National Dividend and/or a Just Price discount. Essentially, what
these would do would be to refund to the general public the buying power
previously robbed from them through the inflation caused by bank credit
I wrote a letter to the Edmonton Journal on this subject recently, and
attach this in case you are interested.
All the best -
Martin Hattersley, 5929-189 St.,
EDMONTON AB CANADA T6M 2J1
Phone (780) 483-5442
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jamie Walton" <email@example.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 5:54 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Regarding "interest" and "usury"
1.. Does anyone know whether the money that banks use to pay their expenses
roughly equates with the money collected as interest? I suppose there is
collated data available from statistics agencies and central banks, has
anyone looked at this? [If no-one has done this, I suppose I can add it to
my list of things to do]
2. Is calling Calvin a humanist a bit of tongue-in-cheek? I think the
arbitrariness of expecting interest regardless of the use outcome of the
lent money is unjustifiable, why can't lending be treated like an
investment, with an agreed and linked share of the use outcome as the
On 17/01/2008, John G Rawson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Thanks Myro, for your first point. I have been trying to get it over
> However, if you take the Douglas analysis as a scientific model and test
> it scientifically against fact, it soon becomes obvious that it is by far
> the best explanantion for perceived economic facts and problems. For
> the ledar lack of worldwide prosoerith last century except in times of
> preparation for it or recovery from it.
> The answer seems clear. Banks also reinvest and pass repayments to
> reserves. There is a deficiency in purchasing power unless very active new
> borrowing continues. There is a tendency towards a "gap", but it is by no
> means as big as many social Crediters project.
> John R.
> > Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:13:04 -0800
> > From: email@example.com
> > To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Subject: [socialcredit] Regarding "interest" and "usury"
> > Unfortunately, Peter, there are some whoppers from
> > both Shakespeare and Yaseen in the first half of the
> > program that will turn off educated and open minded
> > people to the proposed solutions.
> > For example, Shakespeare's assertion that "one of the
> > problems of creating out of nothing is that it creates
> > enough money for the principal of the loan but not
> > enough for the interest."
> > And Yaseen's assertion that "the Quran condemns
> > categorically usury, or interest."
> > First, to address Shakespeare's assertion:
> > We say that banks create money because they credit
> > deposit accounts when they create loans. The ability
> > and propensity to transfer deposit balances from
> > person to person in transactions is what makes deposit
> > accounts effectively money in today's economy. So,
> > when loans are granted, money is being created. And,
> > when loans are repaid, together with interest, money
> > is being canceled.
> > But there is a reciprocal monetary flow from the banks
> > when they make payments for ordinary business
> > expenses, salaries and wages to their employees,
> > dividends to their stockholders, etc., where they also
> > credit deposit account balances, which is additional
> > to loans in the creation of money. This puts money
> > into circulation not deriving from loans that is
> > available to pay interest to the banks in payment for
> > financial services rendered.
> > Now, to Yaseen's assertion:
> > The ancient scriptures originally written in Semitic
> > languages used two words that were erroneously
> > translated or interpreted as "usury."
> > A modern Islamic scholar in the United States writes
> > this:
> > http://www.submission.org/islam/interest-usury.html
> > "The Quran forbids usury, not interest. Quite a few
> > states in USA have laws against usury. Usury is
> > defined as excessive interest. A Dictionary defines
> > usury as 'an excessive or inordinate premium for the
> > use of money borrowed', 'extortionate interest', or
> > 'the practice of taking exorbitant or excessive
> > interest.' The Arabic language also makes distinction
> > between interest (Fa'eda) and usury (Reba). The Quran
> > forbids Reba or usury."
> > Which is perfectly consistent with the modern Jewish
> > and Christian perspectives on the matter:
> > http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/jones.usury
> > "John Calvin's letter on usury of 1545 made it clear
> > that when Christ said 'lend hoping for nothing in
> > return,' He meant that we should help the poor freely.
> > Following the rule of equity, we should judge people
> > by their circumstances, not by legal definitions.
> > Humanist that he was, Calvin knew there were two
> > Hebrew words translated as 'usury.' One, neshek, meant
> > 'to bite'; the other, tarbit, meant 'to take
> > legitimate increase.' Based on these distinctions,
> > Calvin argued that only 'biting' loans were forbidden.
> > Thus, one could lend at interest to business people
> > who would make a profit using the money. To the
> > working poor one could lend without interest, but
> > expect the loan to be repaid. To the impoverished one
> > should give without expecting repayment."
> > -
> > Myro
> > ---------------original message-----------------
> > Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:23:12 +0000
> > From: "Peter Challen" <email@example.com>
> > To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Subject: Re: [GJM] An excellent programme
> > I've reached the half-way stage of the programme
> > recommended below and use the 'break' to add my
> > recommendation to this sanguine critique of a complex
> > situation - a remarkable bit of broadcasting.
> > Peter
> > On 10/01/2008, Rodney Shakespeare
> > <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Dear All.
> > Alright, I know I should not say this (because I am
> > one of the speakers with Moeen Yaseen of
> > Globalvision2000) but Global Money Crisis: Just Where
> > Does the Buck Stop? is an excellent programme. Moeen
> > is tremendous!!
> > At last we have managed to put across on television
> > some analysis of what is wrong with the global economy
> > and also put across some idea of the GJM solution.
> > To see the programe:- go to www.Presstv.com
> > <http://www.presstv.com/>then
> > (left-hand side) Programs then The Agenda then Global
> > Money Crisis: -- the programme on Monday, 9th January,
> > 2008
> > Rodney Shakespeare.
> > Be a better friend, newshound, and
> > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
> > http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
> > You're subscribed to this list with the email firstname.lastname@example.org
> > For more information, visit
> > http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit<http://www.elistas.com/list/socialcredit>
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN
> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are
> You're subscribed to this list with the email email@example.com
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
You're subscribed to this list with the email firstname.lastname@example.org
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.12/1245 - Release Date: 26/01/2008
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 19239 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
[MIME component not shown: journal 24a08.rtf (application/octet-stream)