Ask Moshe

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
161

[quote]Cortes wrote:
There’s probably no good answer to this question, but the conversation has shifted toward it and I’ve always wondered about it so I’ll just go ahead and let loose with it.

The first real inkling I got that there even was such a thing as antisemitism outside of Nazi Germany was, strangely, the movie School Ties, with Brendan Frasier. I’m certainly not recommending the movie, but upon watching it in high school, I was positively floored by the idea that there were large swaths of society, much less my own society, that harbored this surreal hatred of someone who in most cases was indistinguishable from any other member of their in-group. This opened up my mind, and I started seeing how bad the problem really was, in Europe, of course in the Middle East, and yes, in America, where the internet opened up a whole lot of ugly doors I later wished I hadn’t peeked behind. And then I began to learn of the historical aspect of antisemitism, which I naively had thought was limited to Hitler’s just choosing a minority group at a crisis point in German history. Wow, was I ever ignorant.

Anyway, my question, if it can be called that, for you and the Doc, or any other Jews who happen to be here, is this: WTF?

:wink:

Seriously, though, why? Do you think there is a particular reason that the Jews seem ALWAYS, throughout their entire history, to be caricatured and demonized and scapegoated. Whence this weird “need” to create this grand evil foe which must be dehumanized and eradicated from every corner of the earth? Seriously. WTF?

[/quote]

162

[quote]Da Man reloaded wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Da Man reloaded wrote:
JB- I had never even considered the Israelites goyem before Mt Sinai, that is very new to me. Is there any indication of what their ultimate fate was? I mean the fate of their soul.

Also- what is the Jewish view on adam and eves ejection from eden
[/quote]

I am not JB, but try Genesis 4:5-7.

Doc,

May i ask which translation that was from? I am most familiar with the NIV, unfortunately. Not having the ability to read the Bible in its original language is kind of annoying… I dont trust anyones translation, quite frankly.

the NIV reads:
5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.
6 Then the Lord said to Cain, �?�¢??Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast?
7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it. �?�¢??

As you can see, the language you detail is not there. I read it and wondered what you were getting at but never did ask. From the NIV version I glean that Cain being a good man (ruling over sin) will gain him acceptance into G-d’s heart/kingdom/world/whatever you want to call it. That is mostly from 7, 5 and 6 kind of leave me scratching my head in general.

also, I read the description of the book you linked to. It sounded almost like a diest view to me, where the creator withdrew from his creation, which again left me scratching my head. I will look more closely at it.

My apologies for not responding, I was more confused than anything. I absolutely appreciate your thoughts.[/quote]

“Per tradurre e tradire,” I believe is what the Italians say. “To translate is to betray.”

“Door” is inadequate to express the full and multiple meanings in the context of God’s first advice to mankind. Further, the translation should not be “do what is right,” but “will better” or “will improve.” Next consider where the word “entrance” is not used: the cherub with the revolving sword is not guarding the “entrance” to Eden, but the path to the Tree of Life (Chap 3 v 24). Cain, like all men, has free will, but chooses not to “improve” but to sin, rejecting the path to the Tree of Life and choosing instead the opening of the grave.

163

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
“Per tradurre e tradire,” I believe is what the Italians say. “To translate is to betray.”

“Door” is inadequate to express the full and multiple meanings in the context of God’s first advice to mankind. Further, the translation should not be “do what is right,” but “will better” or “will improve.” Next consider where the word “entrance” is not used: the cherub with the revolving sword is not guarding the “entrance” to Eden, but the path to the Tree of Life (Chap 3 v 24). Cain, like all men, has free will, but chooses not to “improve” but to sin, rejecting the path to the Tree of Life and choosing instead the opening of the grave.
[/quote]

Yeah, I’ve also heard, “the translator becomes the heretic.” Basically no two languages are going to be able to match word for word with the same everything, otherwise it wouldn’t need to be translated.

164

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Cash or Credit? Which is better, spending wise.[/quote]

I assume you posted this because of the sterotype that Jewish people are “cheap,” earned due to the fact that, during the Middle Ages, your church forbid Jewish people from earning a living at many professions, but permitted Jewish people to lend money and be merchants.

[/quote]

Not only that, but in those days the church considered charging of interest to be usury (at the time any form of interest was considered usury), and good Christians did not not practice it. So the Jews were a perfect solution to the problem. Since of course Europe required money lending services, and most people dislike paying it back or the lending party. So it fueled the anti Jewish feelings as well…[/quote]

Islam is against usury too apparently. Sharia compliant loans don’t charge interest. Here’s how it works - instead of lending $100 at 10% fixed interest over the term they lend you $100 interest free for a $10 fee. Hey presto! No dirty usury. Any ‘interest’ accumulated by Sharia compliant investments gets skimmed off and sent to ‘charitable causes’ like Hamas and al-Qaeda and so on. Of course fundamentalist imams decide what is ‘interest’ and where to funnel it.

EDIT: Oops. Sorry, didn’t mean to derail the thread.

165

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Cash or Credit? Which is better, spending wise.[/quote]

I assume you posted this because of the sterotype that Jewish people are “cheap,” earned due to the fact that, during the Middle Ages, your church forbid Jewish people from earning a living at many professions, but permitted Jewish people to lend money and be merchants.

[/quote]

Not only that, but in those days the church considered charging of interest to be usury (at the time any form of interest was considered usury), and good Christians did not not practice it. So the Jews were a perfect solution to the problem. Since of course Europe required money lending services, and most people dislike paying it back or the lending party. So it fueled the anti Jewish feelings as well…[/quote]

Islam is against usury too apparently. Sharia compliant loans don’t charge interest. Here’s how it works - instead of lending $100 at 10% fixed interest over the term they lend you $100 interest free for a $10 fee. Hey presto! No dirty usury. Any ‘interest’ accumulated by Sharia compliant investments gets skimmed off and sent to ‘charitable causes’ like Hamas and al-Qaeda and so on. Of course fundamentalist imams decide what is ‘interest’ and where to funnel it.

EDIT: Oops. Sorry, didn’t mean to derail the thread.[/quote]

Yes, I’m well versed in how sharia insanity works, they just massage the terminology and voila…

166

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Cash or Credit? Which is better, spending wise.[/quote]

I assume you posted this because of the sterotype that Jewish people are “cheap,” earned due to the fact that, during the Middle Ages, your church forbid Jewish people from earning a living at many professions, but permitted Jewish people to lend money and be merchants.

[/quote]

Not only that, but in those days the church considered charging of interest to be usury (at the time any form of interest was considered usury), and good Christians did not not practice it. So the Jews were a perfect solution to the problem. Since of course Europe required money lending services, and most people dislike paying it back or the lending party. So it fueled the anti Jewish feelings as well…[/quote]

Islam is against usury too apparently. Sharia compliant loans don’t charge interest. Here’s how it works - instead of lending $100 at 10% fixed interest over the term they lend you $100 interest free for a $10 fee. Hey presto! No dirty usury. Any ‘interest’ accumulated by Sharia compliant investments gets skimmed off and sent to ‘charitable causes’ like Hamas and al-Qaeda and so on. Of course fundamentalist imams decide what is ‘interest’ and where to funnel it.

EDIT: Oops. Sorry, didn’t mean to derail the thread.[/quote]

Yes, I’m well versed in how sharia insanity works, they just massage the terminology and voila…
[/quote]

Thats the same method Christians used to circumvent their usury laws.

167

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Cash or Credit? Which is better, spending wise.[/quote]

I assume you posted this because of the sterotype that Jewish people are “cheap,” earned due to the fact that, during the Middle Ages, your church forbid Jewish people from earning a living at many professions, but permitted Jewish people to lend money and be merchants.

[/quote]

Not only that, but in those days the church considered charging of interest to be usury (at the time any form of interest was considered usury), and good Christians did not not practice it. So the Jews were a perfect solution to the problem. Since of course Europe required money lending services, and most people dislike paying it back or the lending party. So it fueled the anti Jewish feelings as well…[/quote]

Islam is against usury too apparently. Sharia compliant loans don’t charge interest. Here’s how it works - instead of lending $100 at 10% fixed interest over the term they lend you $100 interest free for a $10 fee. Hey presto! No dirty usury. Any ‘interest’ accumulated by Sharia compliant investments gets skimmed off and sent to ‘charitable causes’ like Hamas and al-Qaeda and so on. Of course fundamentalist imams decide what is ‘interest’ and where to funnel it.

EDIT: Oops. Sorry, didn’t mean to derail the thread.[/quote]

Yes, I’m well versed in how sharia insanity works, they just massage the terminology and voila…
[/quote]

Thats the same method Christians used to circumvent their usury laws.

[/quote]

Wow, I ask an honest question of JB because I’m curious what Judaism has to say about it (plus he’s a businessman) and now I’ve turned the thread into a Christian/Muslim bash. I’m not even going to ask for sources, because now it’s just inappropriate.

Sorry about that Jewbacca. Back on topic:

Moshe, is that your name or is that referring to the CoF of the IDF?

168

[quote]Cortes wrote:

Seriously, though, why? Do you think there is a particular reason that the Jews seem ALWAYS, throughout their entire history, to be caricatured and demonized and scapegoated. Whence this weird “need” to create this grand evil foe which must be dehumanized and eradicated from every corner of the earth? Seriously. WTF?

[/quote]

Well, it said it would be that way in the Torah, did it not?

In fact, it’s an express punishment for the Jewish people when Jewish people (any of them) don’t follow the Commandments. So we bring it on ourselves by misbehavior. Part of why I am hard on the Reform.

You have 2,000 years of anti-semitic Christianity — something that changed dramatically recently, I think with the printing press and decent translations of the Bible put in people’s hands, but which still resides in many Christian Denominations (e.g., replacement theologians).

Islam preaches absurdities regarding Jewish people.

You have the misunderstanding of “chosen” being “better” – which it does not mean — it means “chosen” — that leads to jealousy.

Jewish people tend to prosper when left alone — so that leads to jealousy.

Persecution has made many Jewish people suspicious and unfriendly – which leads to anger and disgust by unfairly rejected friendly people — I am guilty of this — I hear German, I bow up, and get ready to kick someone’s ass.

Jewish people are a people apart by command — different — which breeds suspicion — I think groups like Chabad that reach out and explain why we can’t marry you and why we dress stupid help this.

You have communists and socialists who are in rebellion against G-d, and see (whether they know it or not) the Jewish people as proof of G-d’s power.

Tradition!

169

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Moshe, is that your name or is that referring to the CoF of the IDF?[/quote]

That is my name.

Jewbacca is also my nickname, given to me because I am 196 cm tall (like 6 feet something) and had an unfashionable beard in the IDF.

Specifically, in gas mask training, I was given a special rubber piece to get a positive lock in the following manner: “this special gas mask is for bearded freaks like fucking Jewbacca over here.”

The name stuck. I kind of like it, given I had Star Wars pictures all over my room as a kid and dreamed of being Han Solo. (Luke was a pussy.)

170

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Moshe, is that your name or is that referring to the CoF of the IDF?[/quote]

That is my name.

Jewbacca is also my nickname, given to me because I am 196 cm tall (like 6 feet something) and had an unfashionable beard in the IDF.

Specifically, in gas mask training, I was given a special rubber piece to get a positive lock in the following manner: “this special gas mask is for bearded freaks like fucking Jewbacca over here.”

The name stuck. I kind of like it, given I had Star Wars pictures all over my room as a kid and dreamed of being Han Solo. (Luke was a pussy.)

[/quote]

What mask is this? I had to shave my beard for my SCBA in fire training. does it seal way outside the jaw line or something?

Random factoid:
Chewy was supposedly based on Lucasâ?? malamute. Malamutes are large, muscular, and furry and actually make a talking noise that sounds reasonably close to Chewbacca speaking.

171

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Moshe, is that your name or is that referring to the CoF of the IDF?[/quote]

That is my name.

Jewbacca is also my nickname, given to me because I am 196 cm tall (like 6 feet something) and had an unfashionable beard in the IDF.

Specifically, in gas mask training, I was given a special rubber piece to get a positive lock in the following manner: “this special gas mask is for bearded freaks like fucking Jewbacca over here.”

The name stuck. I kind of like it, given I had Star Wars pictures all over my room as a kid and dreamed of being Han Solo. (Luke was a pussy.)

[/quote]

What mask is this? I had to shave my beard for my SCBA in fire training. does it seal way outside the jaw line or something?

Random factoid:
Chewy was supposedly based on Lucasâ?? malamute. Malamutes are large, muscular, and furry and actually make a talking noise that sounds reasonably close to Chewbacca speaking.[/quote]

There are a couple kinds. My favorate just slipped over the head and had a bag – you’d put your kevlar on top if you had time. They are readily available, but cost 2X of a regular gas mask.

172

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Cash or Credit? Which is better, spending wise.[/quote]

I assume you posted this because of the sterotype that Jewish people are “cheap,” earned due to the fact that, during the Middle Ages, your church forbid Jewish people from earning a living at many professions, but permitted Jewish people to lend money and be merchants.

[/quote]

Not only that, but in those days the church considered charging of interest to be usury (at the time any form of interest was considered usury), and good Christians did not not practice it. So the Jews were a perfect solution to the problem. Since of course Europe required money lending services, and most people dislike paying it back or the lending party. So it fueled the anti Jewish feelings as well…[/quote]

Islam is against usury too apparently. Sharia compliant loans don’t charge interest. Here’s how it works - instead of lending $100 at 10% fixed interest over the term they lend you $100 interest free for a $10 fee. Hey presto! No dirty usury. Any ‘interest’ accumulated by Sharia compliant investments gets skimmed off and sent to ‘charitable causes’ like Hamas and al-Qaeda and so on. Of course fundamentalist imams decide what is ‘interest’ and where to funnel it.

EDIT: Oops. Sorry, didn’t mean to derail the thread.[/quote]

Yes, I’m well versed in how sharia insanity works, they just massage the terminology and voila…
[/quote]

Thats the same method Christians used to circumvent their usury laws.

[/quote]

Wow, I ask an honest question of JB because I’m curious what Judaism has to say about it (plus he’s a businessman) and now I’ve turned the thread into a Christian/Muslim bash. I’m not even going to ask for sources, because now it’s just inappropriate.

Sorry about that Jewbacca. Back on topic:

Moshe, is that your name or is that referring to the CoF of the IDF?[/quote]

That has nothing to do with bashing anybody.

At a certain point a financial system became necessary and so there was one, unfortunately there are some religious rules that did not allow for that.

So, they worked around it.

In the case of the CC probably because they were heavily influenced by Aristotle, who never quite crocked neither trading nor lending and what he could not crock, the scholastics refused to crock.

If you look at Mahers Religulous, there is this one Jewish guy who does pretty much the same, he develops kosher workarounds.

Nothing wrong with that per se.

Oh no, you are not operating a telephone, you are stopping it from operating because it is technically on the whole time.

Thats a solid business model, also a highly entertaining one.

173

“he develops kosher workarounds.Nothing wrong with that per se.Oh no, you are not operating a telephone, you are stopping it from operating because it is technically on the whole time.Thats a solid business model, also a highly entertaining one.”

This kind of thing was always what made me really just have to shake my head at the dogma aspects of it. I had an orthodox Jewish girl I know explain the tenets of her beliefs on a grand scale and they were quite beautiful actually but this whole not turning on the lights, not writing your name, blah, blah, blah is just off putting. I have Jewish doctors at seminars all the time ask me to sign their sheets for them or push the elevator button or whatever because they can’t and although its more a respect of traditions reasoning I can’t help but feel like if your God gives a shit whether you flick the lights on a certain day or not, may not be the right one. But again I know its not God that made up those rules, its man.

174

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Cash or Credit? Which is better, spending wise.[/quote]

I assume you posted this because of the sterotype that Jewish people are “cheap,” earned due to the fact that, during the Middle Ages, your church forbid Jewish people from earning a living at many professions, but permitted Jewish people to lend money and be merchants.

[/quote]

Not only that, but in those days the church considered charging of interest to be usury (at the time any form of interest was considered usury), and good Christians did not not practice it. So the Jews were a perfect solution to the problem. Since of course Europe required money lending services, and most people dislike paying it back or the lending party. So it fueled the anti Jewish feelings as well…[/quote]

Islam is against usury too apparently. Sharia compliant loans don’t charge interest. Here’s how it works - instead of lending $100 at 10% fixed interest over the term they lend you $100 interest free for a $10 fee. Hey presto! No dirty usury. Any ‘interest’ accumulated by Sharia compliant investments gets skimmed off and sent to ‘charitable causes’ like Hamas and al-Qaeda and so on. Of course fundamentalist imams decide what is ‘interest’ and where to funnel it.

EDIT: Oops. Sorry, didn’t mean to derail the thread.[/quote]

Yes, I’m well versed in how sharia insanity works, they just massage the terminology and voila…
[/quote]

Thats the same method Christians used to circumvent their usury laws.

[/quote]

Wow, I ask an honest question of JB because I’m curious what Judaism has to say about it (plus he’s a businessman) and now I’ve turned the thread into a Christian/Muslim bash. I’m not even going to ask for sources, because now it’s just inappropriate.

Sorry about that Jewbacca. Back on topic:

Moshe, is that your name or is that referring to the CoF of the IDF?[/quote]

That has nothing to do with bashing anybody.

At a certain point a financial system became necessary and so there was one, unfortunately there are some religious rules that did not allow for that.

So, they worked around it.

In the case of the CC probably because they were heavily influenced by Aristotle, who never quite crocked neither trading nor lending and what he could not crock, the scholastics refused to crock.

If you look at Mahers Religulous, there is this one Jewish guy who does pretty much the same, he develops kosher workarounds.

Nothing wrong with that per se.

Oh no, you are not operating a telephone, you are stopping it from operating because it is technically on the whole time.

Thats a solid business model, also a highly entertaining one. [/quote]

Okay, if you’re not bashing. From what I have found the no go on usury* comes from two things:

  1. those who had money, usually had a lot of it, and had a lot of it sitting around (think Kings in the OT who had a lot of gold and silver at times) doing nothing. It was pretty fruitless, for someone to ask to borrow some and you to charge interest (what the interest was by the Medici family in the Renaissance was equivalent to a high end cc rate today) was quite interesting, absurd more likely.

You were seen as trying to make something fruitful, that could not be fruitful. Being selfish with what is God’s.

  1. The secular reasoning, though I haven’t seen it corroborated by any academic source–just word of mouth–if you want your group of people to prosper, the best way for them to do that is to have the lowest weighted average cost of capital they can get, having a 0% cost of debt would do this.

*Historians argue over if charging interest is the same thing as usury, or if usury is interest above fair.

175

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Wow, I ask an honest question of JB because I’m curious what Judaism has to say about it (plus he’s a businessman) and now I’ve turned the thread into a Christian/Muslim bash. I’m not even going to ask for sources, because now it’s just inappropriate.
[/quote]

It stems from Deuteronomy 23:20. Here:

“You shall not deduct interest from loans to your COUNTRYMEN, whether in money or food or anything else that can be deducted as interest, but you MAY deduct interest from loans to FOREIGNERS.”

(emphasis added)

The word COUNTRYMEN can mean only fellow Israelites or, if a true citizen of another country, all your fellow COUNTRYMEN, depending who you are talking to.

The term FOREIGNERS specifically does not include “resident aliens” or people who live and pay taxes among the Jewish people — e.g., Druze, arab residents of Israel, etc.

And it’s a “MAY” — as in, you CAN, but I (in this case I = G-d) don’t particularly care for it, and you BETTER NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE POOR.

The reason for this rule is: (1) for Jewish people to treat other Jewish people as family and (2) to protect the poor.

Historicaly, interest was charged during the Middle Ages to non-Jews living in the same country as a given group of Jewish people because Jewish people were expressly foreigners, living at the whim of the monarchs (and so, as non-citizens, could lend to other people in the same country). As Jewish people were accepted as full citizens (pretty much a post WWII phenom everywhere but the USA), controversy erupted over whether it was OK to lend at interest to other.

I note the work-arounds people use (paying points) and cringe at the style over substance that is ocurring.

In Israel, there is much push-back over the style-over-substance, and a lot of civil laws have been created to make sure consumer loans are fair (but too much regulation makes the loans not available, which is not a good thing, either).

I tend to structure deals where people get equity in deals and are preferred investors in the deals, in part for this reason — it creates a situation where the lender becomes a partner, which is much more the intent.

I would also note that corporations are not “people” — so interest is appropriate — it’s a business transaction, where (presumably) the poor are not being taken advantage.

++++++

As far as when I personally borrow money, it only to purchase non-depreciating assets. I have never borrowed money to buy a car or the like. It’s stupid to pay interest and incur depreciation.

176

[quote]storey420 wrote:
"I have Jewish doctors at seminars all the time ask me to sign their sheets for them or push the elevator button or whatever . . . [/quote]

The mistake that is ocurring is the Jewish doctor is at a seminar on the Sabbath — in effect, trying to live in two worlds at one time.

That’s impossible to do, and leads to absurd results as you discussed.

177

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Wow, I ask an honest question of JB because I’m curious what Judaism has to say about it (plus he’s a businessman) and now I’ve turned the thread into a Christian/Muslim bash. I’m not even going to ask for sources, because now it’s just inappropriate.
[/quote]

…
I tend to structure deals where people get equity in deals and are preferred investors in the deals, in part for this reason — it creates a situation where the lender becomes a partner, which is much more the intent.

…[/quote]

In this, Jewbacca honors and echoes the precepts of Maimonides. Here, from his Mishneh Torah are the degrees of charity, with the first cited as the highest form of giving:

Giving an interest-free loan to a person in need; forming a partnership with a person in need; giving a grant to a person in need; finding a job for a person in need; so long as that loan, grant, partnership, or job results in the person no longer living by relying upon others.
Giving tzedakah (charity) anonymously to an unknown recipient via a person (or public fund) which is trustworthy, wise, and can perform acts of tzedakah with your money in a most impeccable fashion.
Giving tzedakah anonymously to a known recipient.
Giving tzedakah publicly to an unknown recipient.
Giving tzedakah before being asked.
Giving adequately after being asked.
Giving willingly, but inadequately.
Giving “in sadness” (giving out of pity): It is thought that Maimonides was referring to giving because of the sad feelings one might have in seeing people in need (as opposed to giving because it is a religious obligation). Other translations say “Giving unwillingly.”

(Hilkhot Matanot Aniyim (Laws about Giving to Poor People), Chapter 10:7â??14)

178

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Cash or Credit? Which is better, spending wise.[/quote]

I assume you posted this because of the sterotype that Jewish people are “cheap,” earned due to the fact that, during the Middle Ages, your church forbid Jewish people from earning a living at many professions, but permitted Jewish people to lend money and be merchants.

[/quote]

Not only that, but in those days the church considered charging of interest to be usury (at the time any form of interest was considered usury), and good Christians did not not practice it. So the Jews were a perfect solution to the problem. Since of course Europe required money lending services, and most people dislike paying it back or the lending party. So it fueled the anti Jewish feelings as well…[/quote]

Islam is against usury too apparently. Sharia compliant loans don’t charge interest. Here’s how it works - instead of lending $100 at 10% fixed interest over the term they lend you $100 interest free for a $10 fee. Hey presto! No dirty usury. Any ‘interest’ accumulated by Sharia compliant investments gets skimmed off and sent to ‘charitable causes’ like Hamas and al-Qaeda and so on. Of course fundamentalist imams decide what is ‘interest’ and where to funnel it.

EDIT: Oops. Sorry, didn’t mean to derail the thread.[/quote]

Yes, I’m well versed in how sharia insanity works, they just massage the terminology and voila…
[/quote]

Thats the same method Christians used to circumvent their usury laws.

[/quote]

Wow, I ask an honest question of JB because I’m curious what Judaism has to say about it (plus he’s a businessman) and now I’ve turned the thread into a Christian/Muslim bash. I’m not even going to ask for sources, because now it’s just inappropriate.

Sorry about that Jewbacca. Back on topic:

Moshe, is that your name or is that referring to the CoF of the IDF?[/quote]

That has nothing to do with bashing anybody.

At a certain point a financial system became necessary and so there was one, unfortunately there are some religious rules that did not allow for that.

So, they worked around it.

In the case of the CC probably because they were heavily influenced by Aristotle, who never quite crocked neither trading nor lending and what he could not crock, the scholastics refused to crock.

If you look at Mahers Religulous, there is this one Jewish guy who does pretty much the same, he develops kosher workarounds.

Nothing wrong with that per se.

Oh no, you are not operating a telephone, you are stopping it from operating because it is technically on the whole time.

Thats a solid business model, also a highly entertaining one. [/quote]

Okay, if you’re not bashing. From what I have found the no go on usury* comes from two things:

  1. those who had money, usually had a lot of it, and had a lot of it sitting around (think Kings in the OT who had a lot of gold and silver at times) doing nothing. It was pretty fruitless, for someone to ask to borrow some and you to charge interest (what the interest was by the Medici family in the Renaissance was equivalent to a high end cc rate today) was quite interesting, absurd more likely.

You were seen as trying to make something fruitful, that could not be fruitful. Being selfish with what is God’s.

  1. The secular reasoning, though I haven’t seen it corroborated by any academic source–just word of mouth–if you want your group of people to prosper, the best way for them to do that is to have the lowest weighted average cost of capital they can get, having a 0% cost of debt would do this.

*Historians argue over if charging interest is the same thing as usury, or if usury is interest above fair. [/quote]

Well I think the high interest rates were due to very underdeveloped financial systems, a high uncertainty whether you would get it back and very little free money to go around.

You have to start somewhere and this was it.

179

[quote]orion wrote:
Well I think the high interest rates were due to very underdeveloped financial systems, a high uncertainty whether you would get it back and very little free money to go around.

You have to start somewhere and this was it. [/quote]

I can see that.

180

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

I tend to structure deals where people get equity in deals and are preferred investors in the deals, in part for this reason — it creates a situation where the lender becomes a partner, which is much more the intent.
[/quote]

Unless of course the lender is neither interested nor qualified to become a partner in this business venture, which kinds of is the case in almost all loans.

That is a workaround if I ever saw one.

It seems that the trick is to make the workaround just elaborate enough so that it is no longer seen as one.