Is it possible to have Capitalism wiithout private banks and usury?

>>136857916
sure, you can have public banks

>>136858047
You mean debt free loans?

That sounds just as unreal as communist utopia

>>136858155
Interest isn't usury mate.

There's no incentive to lend money for free, that would just be retarded, especially in a capitalist society.

>>136858155
He just means non-private banks.

>>136858155
You can have banks that arent granted a monopoly by the government and doesnt get bailed out when it goes to shit. Such a bank would have to operate on the merit of its services provided, much to the pleasure of the consumer.

>>136857916
Basically NatSoc

Nationalized banks?

>>136858237

So who decides what is usury? The unreasonableness of a specific interest rate is a subjective standard.

>>136857916
No you really can't, what you call capitalism it's just central banking.

Shit goes up so high that we have to invent reptilians and weird shit to explain why they control everything.

>>136857916
>Is it possible to have freedom without freedom?
Sorry, no.

>>136857916
It would just be a bank that does not provide loans or credit. They would be paid for their service by account fees.

Does not seem like there is any profit in that.

>>136858155
ban loans entirely

>>136857916
No. You would be managing other people's private property. Presumably via force. Unless you lived in some type of covenant community that agreed to not charge interest in loans to members.

Tl;dr
Yes, but it probably wouldn't be popular.

>>136858819
>So who decides what is usury?
Why don't we go back to the foundation of western civilization, the Bible.

File: Suffolk_1.png (695KB, 1347x2068px) Image search: [Google]

695KB, 1347x2068px

>>136858558
This. Money monopolism is what allows a bank to keep printing etc even when it makes them a terrible investment. The force of law is the only way you can make people invest in something they know loses value, such as the dollar. Allow free competition, and the central banks will fall. They won't be able to keep up. They already can't keep up with bitcoin.

File: Suffolk_2.png (733KB, 1369x2061px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 1369x2061px

>>136859686

>>136858819
It's based on risk of the lending institution. Home loans are capped at a low rate because the house isn't going anywhere and if the debtor defaults, it can be repossessed.

A credit card can charge insanely high interest rates because the risk is high. A debtor can buy an Xbox or HDTV then skip town with it.

>>136859601
Nah let's go even further back to where all the values and details of stories in the bible were stolen from. It's a literal book of memes. Bullshit works in mysterious ways~

>>136859686
>banks print money
hmm

>>136857916
Well it depends.. did you try open a history book yet.. the paper thing with letters and dates marked on it ..you can find those at what is called a library...

File: IMG_0033.jpg (44KB, 475x307px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 475x307px

You guys make me angry I go back to pizzagate topic to relax my nerve you are so fucking clueless I'm outta here

>>136857916
Yes.

Nobody should borrow to consume, and you can get capital to produce by offering equity to the capitalist.

>>136859601

Still doesn't answer the question.

>>136859842

I understand that, but that's exactly what we have now. The point is that usury is the "practice of lending money at unreasonably high rates of interest", and I simply asked who determine what is "unreasonably high".

I'm not trying to be contrarian; it's a legitimate question. "unreasonable" is a subjective standard.

>>136857916
You can have both
You decide where to go

>>136859686
Only problem I see is that once the bank fails, people lose their money since these shysters don't actually have it on hand.

>>136861798
>Still doesn't answer the question.
Yes it does.

Don't lend money to poor people.

>>136859601
American expat detected