When did the interest/loan/debt based monetary system come into existence?

recedite

Bertie Ahern was able to buy, sell, and exchange goods and services without ever having a bank account. Using bundles of cash, barter and occasional dig-outs

orchidsrpretty

That zeitgeist (1,2 or 3 can't remember) movie on netflix goes into some details of it iirc. In my understanding, when the federal reserve act was passed, it paved the way to the fiat currency, after the bretton woods system was abolished by Nixon, there was nothing backing the value of the Dollar to which all currencies are tied to!


usury |ˈjuːʒ(ə)ri|
noun [ mass noun ]
the action or practice of lending money at unreasonably high rates of interest. the medieval prohibition on usury.
• archaic interest at unreasonably high rates.
ORIGIN Middle English: from Anglo-Norman French usurie, or from medieval Latin usuria, from Latin usura, from usus ‘a use’.


Usury was outlawed for the most part of history iirc. Now all currency is owed to someone, with interest!

andrew

orchidsrpretty wrote: »

That zeitgeist (1,2 or 3 can't remember) movie on netflix goes into some details of it iirc. In my understanding, when the federal reserve act was passed, it paved the way to the fiat currency, after the bretton woods system was abolished by Nixon, there was nothing backing the value of the Dollar to which all currencies are tied to!


usury |ˈjuːʒ(ə)ri|
noun [ mass noun ]
the action or practice of lending money at unreasonably high rates of interest. the medieval prohibition on usury.
• archaic interest at unreasonably high rates.
ORIGIN Middle English: from Anglo-Norman French usurie, or from medieval Latin usuria, from Latin usura, from usus ‘a use’.


Usury was outlawed for the most part of history iirc.

I think people should have a healthy mistrust of 'documentaries' like that. From what I've seen, they tend to be gross oversimplifications at best. Also, there's an over emphasis on America, given Europe's long economic/monetary history.

recedite

The original Zeitgeist movie was fairly wide ranging, also including a criticism of religion and a 9/11 conspiracy theory. Various aspects of it were subsequently debunked by others.
The sequel, called Zeitgeist Addendum, was slicker and mainly concerned with money creation alright. I'm not aware of those basic ideas being debunked by anyone. Then it went on to discuss a possible future "resource based" economy, which is more controversial.

andrew

recedite wrote: »

T I'm not aware of those basic ideas being debunked by anyone.

I havn't seen it so perhaps I'm thinking of a different film, but if it's the one I'm thinking of (or similar to the one I'm thinking of) then it does a good job of spinning and decontextualising things such that it's main point or message is at odds at reality. If it's a genuinely good documentary about money and the fed, then it's the first one I've heard of.

orchidsrpretty

andrew wrote: »

I think people should have a healthy mistrust of 'documentaries' like that. From what I've seen, they tend to be gross oversimplifications at best. Also, there's an over emphasis on America, given Europe's long economic/monetary history.

I do, don't worry, that 'The Secret' was an eye opener, my partner thought I'd be brain washed by it, I was like seriously people read and believe this drivel?? Simplified is ok, appealed to the neanderthal in me, and explained it all quite well. I mean bond for a loan + interest, and we'll be in perpetual debt for eternity is easy to grasp. Sorry if I neglected past fiat currencies prior to 20th century. Although given that a lot of major currencies were tied to the Dollar after WWII via Bretton Woods system which was backed by gold (Gold standard) was then abolished, meaning nothing backing any currency, and money was held in good faith I thought it was relevant to add in there even if not asked by OP, on a related note as it were.

recedite wrote: »

The original Zeitgeist movie was fairly wide ranging, also including a criticism of religion and a 9/11 conspiracy theory. Various aspects of it were subsequently debunked by others.
The sequel, called Zeitgeist Addendum, was slicker and mainly concerned with money creation alright. I'm not aware of those basic ideas being debunked by anyone. Then it went on to discuss a possible future "resource based" economy, which is more controversial.

Yeah watched them a while back vaguely remember all/any of the content, haven't had netflix since February (I find you watch it to death and have to have a break for new content), one had a terrible hissing noise on the audio, had to abandon the viewing, disappointed with netflix on that too (not first time) by the way... I understand it wasn't asked in the OP, but thought I'd throw it out there for some extra added content, so yeah, its a debt based currency, scary! right? but that debt is imaginary, only reality is title deeds,


*tinfoil hats* if the bank holds your deeds, come collapse there is a good chance they will claim the land for themselves and the 'elite' (if you believe it) and put us all into slavery/dark ages... and they lived happily ever after (the elite that is)...moiwahahahha :pac::p:D:):o:o :rolleyes:


*apologies for CT scandal! :P

The Corinthian

gctest50 wrote: »

And our banks aren't powered by nazi gold unlike some abroad in other places

Christ on a stick. That's won this months Corinthians Choice for Most Stupid Post award.

The success of the Swiss banks comes down to the fact that they had banking secrecy, originally and ironically to stop the Nazis from taking other people's money, and they're very conservative and thus less likely to go crazy during booms (UBS and CS being the only two banks that got in any way burnt by the credit crisis). Of the latter, they're not alone - Italy was saved by it's conservative banking sector; Italy's problems are principally with sovereign debt, not the banks.

recedite

The Corinthian wrote: »

The success of the Swiss banks comes down to the fact that they had banking secrecy...

Correct. Swiss banks have served as safe havens for the wealth of dictators and despots, mobsters and arms dealers, corrupt officials and tax cheats of all kinds over the years, on a "no questions asked" basis.

The Corinthian wrote: »

originally and ironically to stop the Nazis from taking other people's money...

Nonsense. The secrecy tradition dates back to the middle ages. Nazis never had jurisdiction in Switzerland, so how could they take "other peoples money" from there? They murdered other people all over Europe, and then brought much of the stolen wealth to Switzerland where they deposited it.

The Corinthian wrote: »

they're very conservative and thus less likely to go crazy during booms...

That is true.

The Corinthian

recedite wrote: »

Nonsense. The secrecy tradition dates back to the middle ages.

Banking secrecy or confidentiality has been about since the middle ages, or at least the Renassance, and not just in Switzerland - the Medici bank operated in much the same way. However I was talking about Swiss banking secrecy which made it a criminal offence for a bank official to disclose bank details and this law was passed only in 1934.

Nazis never had jurisdiction in Switzerland, so how could they take "other peoples money" from there?

Actually what was apparently happening was that the Gestapo were bribing Swiss banking officials to disclose the details of accounts held by German Jews. My feeling is that while it happened, this may not have been the principle reason for the law and this story has largely gained popularity in Switzerland since the Americans started to put pressure on the banking laws here.

They murdered other people all over Europe, and then brought much of the stolen wealth to Switzerland where they deposited it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that the Swiss were more than happy to play both sides (just as we were) - it was hardly a coincidence that the Allies 'accidentally' bombed Schaffhausen and Neuhausen am Rheinfall, in 1944, given SIG was based there and allegedly selling weapons to the Germans.