Libya to be ruled under Sharia law (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Garygaz
- Start date
noworriez1
Member
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2011
- Messages
- 456
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- N/A
*you're not even Islamic
*you're not even Muslim
boris
Banned
- Joined
- May 6, 2004
- Messages
- 4,671
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2007
The one part they have nicely avoided mentioning is the fact that Islam (from research) forbids interest (Which is what they have proposed for Libyan Law). Now what does that mean for big banks who wish to use the fractional banking system (as Islamic banking also requires 100% reserves; I do economics BTW)?
funkshen
dvds didnt exist in 1991
as is the case with most religious principles that directly contradict modernity, moslams find creative ways to completely circumvent their religious principles, such as restrictions on usury. moslams most certainly don't ever practice full-reserve banking.
Interest is not a modern system. It has been proven (by Economists, heck even in Economic classes your own TEACHER proved that an interest based system WILL never lead us to ending the numerous wealth distribution issues, as well as reduce a family's MPC which drives the economy through the multiplier effect.)
Not all of them, but yes that would be true. You are also correct in that in the current setting no muslim practicing pure full reserve banking practices. Although this does also apply to all other religious faiths (considering the major players) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury
Interest is bad. Period.
Matches up and exceeds self-proclaimed economist experts as seen on mainstream news channels. Wearing a trendy suit does not equal an Economist.
We all know true economist attain knowledge through non-mainstream news that require subscriptions to in order to attain news faster an unbiased than the general consensus right? right?
(Walks away back to news feed)
Garygaz
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,827
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2008
lol good luck in an economy where you can't earn interest. bonds, deposit accounts, managed funds, superfunds? pre-banking the only way to invest your wealth was by injecting capital into business, and it's quite a simple assertion to state that this would actually worsen wealth distribution as this is not an avenue available to everyone. john citizen is going to have his money sitting in a non-interest earning account whilst donald trumps can have their money in hedge funds and invested with venture capitalists.
that's beside the whole point that interest is really a negligible point considering money can be invested in a variety of other instruments which essentially have the same effect.
that's beside the whole point that interest is really a negligible point considering money can be invested in a variety of other instruments which essentially have the same effect.
Which effect do you mean?
And as you've just said since Interest is quite negligible (and the main strain of interest is felt by the 99%) then it would be easier to just get rid of it. The sharemarket, forex are still there.
Last edited:
Garygaz
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,827
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2008
then you are discriminating against those who never will or have any interest in anything apart from depositing their money into a term deposit or a savings account? the more sophisticated individuals will be happy to take advantage of these other instruments. the fact that they can earn interest by simply sticking their money in an account is actually slightly reducing the wealth inequality that exists.
^^
Wait, so the extremely wealthy allow their money's to be given out , generating more money for them to increase their wealth by purchasing from their profits from 3-4% compound interest
on having millions into savings.
Whilst lower income owners place their money into savings accounts because THATS THE ONLY ACCOUNT BANKS OFFER. NO SUCH THING AS A TRUE ZERO INTEREST ACCOUNT AS BANKS WILL STILL USE YOUR MONEY IN LENDING OUT TO OTHERS. i.e. The same $500 you put into the bank is NOT the same $500 you will receive after you withdraw. Plus now people are accustomed to using credit card, STILL keeping their money into the bank whilst now utilizing credit that they you then have to pay back - with interest at 13%+. And we have become influenced and grown accustomed to having our earnings transferred straight into the bank. bank fees, on top of the interest they earn from the money that WE place into the accounts for Them to use (and this is excluding the fractional banking system).
Erm... "the more sophisticated individuals" --> Who mean the more wealthy ones? The thing is anyone can invest - you don't need over $9000 dollars to enter the sharemarket.
BTW you have avoided my passive question that is asking about what other instruments essentially create the same effect as interest. Please explain.
Last edited:
kaz1
et tu
Islamic finance has interest disguised as profit. Bank buys your house for 200k and sells it back to you for 500k over 20 years or something. Almost exactly the same as a mortgage.
That's correct
It shouldn't be THAT high.
The only thing is that each month's repayment is the same as the previous.
It's just that inheriting our parent's house has become some sort of view that it lowers your social status --> Who gives a shit. A house is a house.
Garygaz
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,827
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2008
any other instrument which compounds wealth is working in the same way as interest. you sacrifice wealth now to receive an increased amount at a future date.
let me make this simple:
economy a) 0 interest bank accounts
average citizen with no financial background will have their wealth stored in an account earning no interest. as i'm sure you know over time their wealth will deteriorate. higher wealth individuals who either a) are privy to financial markets or b) can afford financial advisors, will still accumulate and compound their wealth at the same rate.
economy b) as it is now
the exact same situation as above except for the fact that the less financially informed individuals will not have this effect of time decaying wealth and the more wealthy individuals will still be in a similar situation.
if you think that 'anybody' can invest, whilst technically true, you overestimate the intelligence of the average australian. left to their own devices people will simply stick with what they know.
let me make this simple:
economy a) 0 interest bank accounts
average citizen with no financial background will have their wealth stored in an account earning no interest. as i'm sure you know over time their wealth will deteriorate. higher wealth individuals who either a) are privy to financial markets or b) can afford financial advisors, will still accumulate and compound their wealth at the same rate.
economy b) as it is now
the exact same situation as above except for the fact that the less financially informed individuals will not have this effect of time decaying wealth and the more wealthy individuals will still be in a similar situation.
if you think that 'anybody' can invest, whilst technically true, you overestimate the intelligence of the average australian. left to their own devices people will simply stick with what they know.
scuba_steve2121
On The Road To Serfdom
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2009
- Messages
- 1,343
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- N/A