Usury : $b a scriptural, ethical and economic view — John Shaqi
Usury : $b a scriptural, ethical and economic viewElliott, Calvin
Religion
Usury : $b a scriptural, ethical and economic view
Elliott, Calvin
Usury
It would be manifestly as unjust for the constructors of the plant to
compel the operators to pay them over and over again, as it would be
for the operators of the machine, having supplied the community with
shoes, to demand payment over and over without making another shoe.
The shoes will wear out, so will the machines. It is as unreasonable
for the first class of laborers to compel the operators of their
machinery to keep the same in repair, as for the operators to compel
their customers to keep their shoes in perfect condition. For the
first laborers to receive a new payment they must build a new plant,
and for the operators to receive a new payment they must make new
shoes.
The confusion of ideas comes in when there intervenes a third party
between these two classes of laborers. This third party meets the
demands of the class of laborers who build the plant and machines,
from hoarded wealth, and then exacts payment from those who operate
it. This is then called productive capital, but it is no more
productive than the money in the bank vault. The producing, so called,
is but the exacting of a part of that which the operators produce. It
is the exacting of payment that never pays. The operators are
compelled to be forever buying, yet the plant is never bought. The
capitalist is forever selling, yet the plant is never sold.
Usually, the usurer is a fourth party that stands yet behind the third
party, taking no risks, demanding complete security for his loan and
also an increase out of the products of the operators. The third party
assumes all care and guarantees against all losses and depends for his
compensation on a portion of the product after the demands of the
fourth party are satisfied. This third party may be an active
producer. All that he receives may be fully earned in care, oversight
and management of the business of the plant.
But the fourth party can have no claim for his services, he has no
part in the production. The absurdity, the figment that his capital is
productive, is introduced to cover the evident fraud of appropriating,
without compensation, a portion of the products of the operators. He
has no more claim to an increase of his capital year by year and a
doubling in a term of years, than the laborers who built it have to
the same plant, perfect and unworn at the end of a term, and in
addition, another plant equal in every respect. They built but one,
they have no claim upon a second. For the usurer, who takes their
place, to double his wealth, and yet the debt be undischarged, is a
flagrant fraud.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account