2002. Loaner, in an Ex-state.

A lot of absurd claims circulate, to establish usury/interest, as a "tool." None of them may ever start to justify it, though.

• A loan is not needed for farm-work - or for firm-finance, education, etc.
• even at zero-percent (= pure debt), it is not always easy to pay.
• as such, a "low-rate" is an oxymoron, if not a gambler-jargon.
• And it is even worse, if the bank (or, the state) establishes that, e.g: if the 0.5% is not paid in time, the "punishment-rate" is 80%. How is that "low?"
• A fair way to avoid inflation-bias, is to pool a few. e.g: A third of the received debt, in each of $US, DM, and gold.
• a bank may go bankrupt, too, sometimes even maliciously. i.e: It is no guarantee against loss. If that occurs, only about 20% of your money is paid, unless the state pays the full sum (with tax-payer money), or the bank-system agrees to. These would only mean to enlarge the circle, at the end, to mean a single bank - and if that is bankrupt, all the people lose. Even unexpected-inflation may turn that token-economy to a caricature. By contrast, if it is a real economy, any person is firmly the owner of what his/her fund was invested in. No confusion. No oscillation. It is extra preferrable, if people invest in what they want themselves. e.g: If I may happily eat potato-chips day-in, day-out, I may invest in potatoes, too. Then, even if the economy collapses altogether, I ain't. A potato is a potato. It is not nullifiable (to meaninglessness) like a paper.

it is no good, if the God is opposed to it

Any muslim must acknowledge that it is a sin to work with usury/interest - whether the payer, or the paid, and it is even a sin, to do the paper-work (commit the transaction, e.g: as a secretary, or a bank-clerk does, when that transaction is recorded).

escalation of loans, and going bankrupt

No-loans ==>No bankruptcy.

Bankruptcy means to lose what you do not own, too. i.e: It gets worse and worse. Usury/loans, taxes, and/or litigations may cause bankruptcy.

The taxes and loans do not exist in this world-view.

A litigation, is not specific to a firm, or the people. And in a fair-world, I may not mention a litigation, as a business-issue, at all. The rightful may get, the unrightful may pay. No problem. Keep yourself rightful, and plan to avoid (unrightfully) hurting people.

In the firm-finance model that I offer, a firm may (almost) never go bankrupt, although it may lose a percentage of its budget. e.g: As a type of fun, financing a risky venture, with a fraction of your money, is thinkable.