certainly. 100% agree. i believe interest on loans is unethical. probably under an even slightly less absurd rent-seeking, predatory system than our own, the situation i believe they have created for themselves would not even be possible or would certainly be passively discouraged. the ideological frame of the petite bourgeoisie is not to do socially valuable work, but instead leverage one’s future to “invest” in scarce resources and corner some market. real estate in a densely populated area being a favorite. they internalize the idea that their capacity for risk is their capacity for success and the path into “success” which is entrance into the haute bourgeoisie.
of course, the haute bourgeoisie already has all the markets cornered and can wait out any deal while the petite bourgeoisie fatted sheep is sheared and slaughtered by their capitalist allies in the banks, pushing them to sell their position lower than they’d like. and this particular sheep, being devoured by the wolves, is crying out that problem is foreign sheep and how the wolves don’t have enough power.
Completly agree. These are perverse incentives. They never consider that the “risk” means a portion of them will be sacrificed.
I was listening to a show that had michel hudson the other day and he was talking about how it goes against the laws of thermodynamics. That you cant charge mere interest than a certain fraction of land yields or the society inevitably collapses, thats why most societies frowned upon the practice. And it was allowed on some ventures like trade expedition because it was asumed that most of them would fail and woulndt have to pay anything back.
Even if the situation these people are is entierly pf their own making, usury is still a big problem.
certainly. 100% agree. i believe interest on loans is unethical. probably under an even slightly less absurd rent-seeking, predatory system than our own, the situation i believe they have created for themselves would not even be possible or would certainly be passively discouraged. the ideological frame of the petite bourgeoisie is not to do socially valuable work, but instead leverage one’s future to “invest” in scarce resources and corner some market. real estate in a densely populated area being a favorite. they internalize the idea that their capacity for risk is their capacity for success and the path into “success” which is entrance into the haute bourgeoisie.
of course, the haute bourgeoisie already has all the markets cornered and can wait out any deal while the petite bourgeoisie fatted sheep is sheared and slaughtered by their capitalist allies in the banks, pushing them to sell their position lower than they’d like. and this particular sheep, being devoured by the wolves, is crying out that problem is foreign sheep and how the wolves don’t have enough power.
Completly agree. These are perverse incentives. They never consider that the “risk” means a portion of them will be sacrificed.
I was listening to a show that had michel hudson the other day and he was talking about how it goes against the laws of thermodynamics. That you cant charge mere interest than a certain fraction of land yields or the society inevitably collapses, thats why most societies frowned upon the practice. And it was allowed on some ventures like trade expedition because it was asumed that most of them would fail and woulndt have to pay anything back.