Re: interest v. "usury"
royls_at_telus.net
Date: 09/04/04
- Next message: VHarris001: "A Money Supply Question"
- Previous message: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: Wall Street's Trade Settlement Dilemma"
- In reply to: Bill Ryan: "Re: interest v. "usury""
- Next in thread: jim blair: "Re: interest v. "usury""
- Reply: jim blair: "Re: interest v. "usury""
- Reply: Mark Monson: "Re: interest v. "usury""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:37:56 GMT
On 4 Sep 2004 07:01:12 -0700, william_b_ryan@hotmail.com (Bill Ryan)
wrote:
>In this essay Belloc differentiates interest per se
>from "usury," which is rightly condemned,
For no consistently defensible reason...
>and uses
>the terms "interest" and "profit" interchangeably,
>which is correct usage.
It most certainly is not. Profit is revenue less expenses. Interest
is the difference in value between money now and money later.
>You might remember that
>Douglas said that interest is profit "on an
>intangible." The term interest is therefore merely
>colloquial usage for a particular classification of
>profit.
No, it is not.
-- Roy L
- Next message: VHarris001: "A Money Supply Question"
- Previous message: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: Wall Street's Trade Settlement Dilemma"
- In reply to: Bill Ryan: "Re: interest v. "usury""
- Next in thread: jim blair: "Re: interest v. "usury""
- Reply: jim blair: "Re: interest v. "usury""
- Reply: Mark Monson: "Re: interest v. "usury""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|