JKJ:

Your use of the word pious to describe adherents of morality, is deprecating for a purpose I believe.

Interest is a tool used against the weak by the wealthy, to extract riches over time from those indefensible against its evils.

If fairness was a component of the modern economy, morality as applied by religions great and small, would be imbedded .

An economy lacking the plunderous aspects of interest, is inconceivable to the western mind: as is the word "morality".

However, what is also UNacknowledged in the west, is the fact economics is not a science in strict terms. Economics is an explanation by economic experts, of unpredictable random events portrayed as a science. Shaman, criminal or both fit well, and the GFC, as more truth behind the lie that modern day economic theory without morality, is trustworthy!

" is the fact economics is not a science in strict terms."

Obviously if your only concept of economics is totally confused with openly arbitrary moral value judgments - such as "the weak", "extract riches", "indefensible", "fairness", "morality", "plunderous" - then you're not going to have ANY HOPE of any kind of logical understanding of economics than as just a jumble or arbitrary value judgments. But that's not economics' fault - it's yours.

All I've got to do is retort the same to you. Your comments are evil, you are supporting immorality, you believe the strong should exploit the weak, you oppose fairness, etc. etc. etc.

There. Do you find that persuasive?

You're just indulging yourself in spraying your moralistic nonsense over other people.

What you haven't explained is HOW OR WHY it is immoral for one person to lend another person something, in exchange for the AGREEMENT of the borrower to pay it back in future, plus something extra to compensate for the time during which the lender couldn't use it. There's nothing exploitative about it, nothing indefensible about it. You might as well say that any other act of human agreement or human sharing or co-operation is exploitative and indefensible.

Just going into an unthinking orgy of moralistic gibberish - which is all you've done - doesn't prove anything. Not only that, if what you were suggesting was carried out, it would cause the death by starvation of hundreds of millions of people. You are just spouting ignorance.

"Economics is an explanation by economic experts, of unpredictable random events portrayed as a science."

Not it's not, and you're only showing you don't understand what you're talking about.

If you think you're in a world whose social events are determined by "unpredictable random" causes, you are in no position to criticise other people's grasp of theory. Not even you believe it.

Your arguments have much merit JKJ, however, nothing can justify loan sharking, payday lending and the like, followed by stand over tactics/violence to extract exorbitant interest.

Islam forbids the application of interest per se!

However, nothing prevents a partnership arrangement, and financing for a particular project, on the basis of a shared reward?

Much in the way we conduct share farming arrangements or self terminating thirty year bonds.

In other words, the arrangement is based on a known fair agreed return and for a limited time!

Interest is full of variables, and goal posts that can be changed after the kick is taken, to use a footballing analogy.

In christian mythology, the only time the master lost his cool, was at the sight of money changers using a holy place to conduct their business, or produce profit without any personal effort/risk.

I think there is a place for Muslim custom in the world of finance, and hardly that different from a parent taking an equity position in the purchase of a offspring's house.

What seems immoral is the practice of sharking, and on the most vulnerable!

Who can only ever get deeper in overwhelming debt as the consequence!
Theft remains theft, even when seemingly legal!

Perhaps not so much of a morality problem, if interest was pegged at 7% P.A., to remain legal?

As always, there are any number of issues, that may be legal, but remain inherently immoral. (short selling/ponzi schemes; and those who try to somehow justify/defend them)
Rhrosty.

JKJ :

At the risk of preaching to the dead.. To my mind, interest falls under the heading
"Usury". This puts the subject in the category of morality.

Islam allows debate viz:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riba#Rationale

That's not logical, diver dan.

>>To my mind, interest falls under the heading "Usury". This puts the subject in the category of morality<<

Any definition of "usury" will include the word "interest", for example:

Usury n. the lending or practice of lending money at an exorbitant interest

The qualification that turns interest from a straight commercial proposition into a moral issue here is the word "exorbitant". The word "interest" itself cannot denote usury, which renders your interpretation entirely illogical.

The subtlety of the Islamic interpretation is interesting, and worth examining. Their concern - or rather, the concern of the majority of their scholars, is that interest itself represents a moral hazard, because it has the capability of damaging either side of the transaction:

"Ozsoy argues that the main characteristic of interest is that either the borrower or the lender would absolutely and inevitably be subjected to a loss and an injustice in any case, for its rate is fixed at the very beginning, but it is impossible to predict the outcome of the business at which the loan is used, profit or loss, or how much either would be. Thus, it can be identified with an absolute injustice for either side of the transaction. It does not matter whether the interest rate is high or low and whether it is called interest or usury because the different kinds of interest or different rates change only the address, or the direction, of the injustice; it is sometimes the payer and sometimes the receiver of interest who is exposed to this injustice and/or financial loss."

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riba#Rationale

Intriguing thought processes.

Nevertheless, Islamic banking can look remarkably similar to "Western" lending, in real life.

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/oct/29/islamic-finance-sharia-compliant-money-interest

http://www.mcca.com.au/

A (non-exorbitant interest) loan can hardly be described as immoral, and lends itself to greater flexibility when running a business.

Or buying a house...

diver dan

At risk of discussing with an offensive childish moron, you haven't established that there's anything immoral about interest.

You could say any other consensual transaction, or any other act of human co-operation, is just a "tool used against the weak by the wealthy" to extract "riches over time from those indefensible against its evils".

But that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with voluntary human co-operation. All it means is that you are just spraying your arbitrary moralising over other people in what is none of your business, and are a self-opinionated person who is ignorant of both economics and morality.