Since when the banks started practicing usury and Why isn't

>>1618515
Protestantism.

The Vatican disapproved of usury. Jews were allowed because they weren't Christians.

>>1618515
Because it's seen as a necessary evil to allow for the growth of economies. Usury is legally defined as more than 28.9% interest anyways.

Because immoral or not, spending money you don't have permits you to do things you wouldn't normally be able to do, and people aren't going to lend money unless they get something out of it.

>>1618517
I thought usury was banned in all sects of Christianity?

>>1618517
All started in Italy, right in front of the Popes eyes, though.

>>1618515
>Why isn't anyone doing anything about it?

The Orthodox church has made statements against it. But the fact of the matter is that usury is a requirement of a modern economy. Unless we want to live like feudal peasants (which I'm sure Constantine would be just fucking fine with, but fuck him), we need institutions of credit to make up for the fact most people don't have a lifetime to save up for business, houses, cars, etc.

>>1618515
>an immoral act
Only people who failed Basic Economics 1.01 think that.

>>1618515
>Since when the banks started practicing usury
Day one. That's the idea of a bank.

>>1618517
The Vatican launders money through its own opaque bank. They don't really have a highground in this debate

>>1618549
>>1618521
>But the fact of the matter is that usury is a requirement of a modern economy.
how

>>1618563
Explain please.

If by "usury" you just mean lending money at interest, it's what makes the modern world possible. It's also the primary means of merit-based social mobility.

>>1618581
Businesses need capital faster than they can gather it themselves. People need mortgages to buy houses. Etc etc.
Everething costs money so you need money to get shit done. At its core even money itself is a loan. A $10 note is basically a $10 promise to provide $10 worth of goods or services.

>>1618584
>>1618611

>>1618517
>Protestantism

Love this meme. In reality it was the fucking Venetians and other Dago Catholics who started with the banking and usury.

Borrowing money is effectively sending yourself money from the future, at a loss. Lending money is effectively sending money TO the future, with gain but also risk. Either one can be smart or stupid depending on circumstances, but morality isn't really involved one way or the other.

I don't feel it's immoral inherently. It can be if you're manipulating people into loans you know they can't repay, but at the end of the day a loan is a service. You get the money you need, and then the interest is what you pay for the service of having someone providing you with money.

>>1618581
>how

Imagine what society would look like if nobody could own property or businesses without their parents having spent a lifetime saving up so their children could buy. We'd basically be looking at a feudal society.

File: 1469632619840.gif (2MB, 619x619px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 619x619px

>>1618515

Jews

No, I'm not kidding, the answer is really Jews

>>1618927
No it is not.
OP asked when and why, not who.

>>1618515
Actually OP, it's much worse than just usury. Every time a bank loans you money, they are actually loaning you money that doesn't even exist. This is all thanks to the federal reserve. The bank literally creates money out of thin air. Every time money is deposited, 90% of the money can be loaned out, only they don't actually loan out that money. They are allowed to create an amount of money equal to 90% of what was deposited. So when that new "money" get's deposited, they get to do it all over again. This causes massive inflation, and is probably the number one problem in the world today.

>>1618605
>>1618622
>>1618660
So all of you are wrong, because you think they are loaning you money, when in fact, they are creating it.

This explains it very well, it's called "Fractional Reserve Lending" and everyone should watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5ayg3hbhoM

File: 2016-t-rowe-price-global-economic-outlook-7-638.jpg (68KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 638x479px

>>1618965
>massive inflation
No.

File: usury_is_a_sin.jpg (109KB, 700x690px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 700x690px

>>1618927
Worth noting that even the Jews considered it a sin and immoral. It's only that their religious laws only prevent them from committing said sin against one another, while it's fine to commit usury against gentiles.

...Which is why the Catholics had the Jews handling their financing for so long, until they decided "eff it" and just ignored the teachings of Christ for profit directly themselves.

>>1619092
Are you literally fucking retarded? This graph proves absolutely nothing. For one, it only shows a few years. And 2, their methodology is horribly flawed. The real inflation numbers are terrible, and if you look at the dollar since the Federal Reserve was created, it has lost about 96% of its value.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/perianneboring/2014/02/03/if-you-want-to-know-the-real-rate-of-inflation-dont-bother-with-the-cpi/#526479fc118b

http://www.cnbc.com/id/42551209

File: Inflation since 2006.png (50KB, 665x514px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 665x514px

>>1619092
Also, if you want to see how bad inflation really is, just go here, it is an inflation calculator:

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

>>1619212
>it has lost about 96% of its value.
So has every other currency on the planet over the past century. Calculating big numbers over long periods of time is meaningless.

>OMG you could buy a cow for 60 cents back in 1798.
>MUH INFLATION!

I'm just going to leave this here.
https://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2014/11/10/usury-faq-or-money-on-the-pill/

>>1619212
>it has lost about 96% of its value.

This is such a cringeworthy meme.

>>1618515
>why do people normally practice such an immoral act?
Because not everyone is a pitty moralfag.

>>1622211

I am a moralfag and also a proud capitalist.

>le jews le usury memery

Usury in the middle ages (from very early on actually) was certainly 'fought against' by Church officials, but don't let that fool you. You lot ought to know better than to fall for a simple explanation that 'Christianity banned usury and the only guys lending money were Jews'.

There's 12th century (or was it the 1200s? I forgot) writings complaining about loads of English priests owing money to Italian (non-Jewish) bankers. There's Italian rulers passing out decrees that lending is fine as long as you got a permit (bought from the rulers, how unexpected). There's even priests arguing that loans and interests are fine because of something (because you take a risk and so can expect a reward, something along those lines, it had to do with the dogma of only actual work being productive and thus deserving of payment). Then you got the funny workarounds like early foreign currency exchanges.

Perhaps most importantly, most of the anti-usury spiels focus solely on 'manifest usury' (as in extraorbitantly high interest) and not merely on interest alone. Usury is not lending.