Conscionable Banking

[elam]

It's just one more bit of evidence that elam isn't what he claims to be.

Billy,

Did you ever make it past kindergarten?

If you have the intellect to respond to a simple economic prospectus, then please do so.

Otherwise, I'll have your crayons confiscated and have you sit in the corner facing the wall to repeat the "Hail Mary" one thousand times!

[elam]

Property laws are State Regulated. Mortgage laws are as well both Federally and State regulated IIRC.

No, YUI (you understand incorrectly) In the US, all States AFAIK, have the mortgagee as the property owner and the bank as a lien holder. Because property is so expensive, usually the only thing mortgagee's have to guarantee the loan is the property itself. Therefore, in case of default, the bank takes the mortgagee to court in order to obtain the collateral for the loan. If the mortgagee has something else to guarantee the loan other than the property, then that would be what was forfeited and the property would stay with the mortgagee...but it's very rarely done that way. Also, (at least here in Texas), if you can come up with the balance due before the court date, then the lender must accept the payment and release the lien on your loan.

Thank you for an intelligent answer. Special thanks for correcting my misunderstandings.

From what you have explained so far, the USA & Oz systems are basically the same. It is the next bit I need clarified...

Not exactly. If you default on the loan, then (again) yes the bank retrieves it's collateral, which is usually the land and sells it for what it can get. You do lose your payments to settle the loan, but you are only on the hook for the balance (of what you have already paid + what they get for the property minus the total loan amount.

To help me understand what happens in the USA with mortgages in default, I'll explain what happen in Oz and trust you to tell me whats the same or detail what is different...

In Oz, a mortgagee's debt liability usually continues until a mortgage is settled in full - even after the property is sold as a partial recovery of the debt. There are two escapes:..

1. If the mortgagor decides not to pursue recovery of the debt and writes it off ,or
2, The mortgagee can go to court and declare bankruptcy.

[elam]

While the Istituto per le Opere di Religione (Institute for Religious Works a.k.a. the "Vatican Bank") doesn't make loans they do charge interest on securities. As Fortune magazine notes:

Its biggest regular source of revenue is the “spread income” between what it pays depositors and the interest it receives on the securities that back those deposits, mainly short-term government and corporate bonds.

Your prejudice blinded you to the phrase "mainly short-term government and corporate bonds". These are negotiable instruments subject to fluctuations in yield and carry a certain amount of risk. You can actually end up losing money in holding bonds (a little thing like inflation eats their value way). So these commodities aren't prohibited under the usury laws.

And according to Cannon Law Made Easy (which bills itself as providing "Church Law for Common People"):

The Catholic Church isn't isn't opposed to charging or paying interest on a loan per se; but its moral teachings on dealings with our fellow-man can definitely be applied when the conditions for obtaining a loan fail to take into consideration the humanity of the borrower.

Where's the issue? You even highlighted "per se" which is an indicator that the idea "interest" requires qualification. As the OP noted the issue in usury is "extortionate charges" not "returning funds borrowed in terms of purchasing power" ie: per the Jewish sage Hillel.

Of interest: Hillel preached what he called the Golden Rule "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn". Some years after Hillel's death in 10CE, a fellow from Nazareth preached a similar philosophy. His disciples disseminated the idea worldwide...

Reread your last cite. Is it not obvious to you that Jesus' philosophy is entrenched inthe approach to loans of the RCC?

[elam]

Not RCC then, but "RCC", as in Novus Ordo / Vatican II and the stuff.

At least I don't subscribe to the secularism of "novus ordo seclorum"

[Cerebrum123]

You did not specify any post in which I would have used the term.

It wasn't in this thread, and I would need to go digging to find which one it was. Which wasn't conducive to a quick explanation.

The whole thing is commercial bull...Isa ben Miriam (Jesus) was probably, by all biblical indications, born in October not during the northern hemesphese's winter solstice!!!! But, Heh! I live in the summer sun of the Southern Hemisphere. So wwho cares!!!!

Somewhere in scripture it says no ones birth has value, it is only in ones life , and ultimate death that there is value..

I can only assume that his brain cells are clogged with bacon fat. He seems to have missed the fact that regarding the usury laws I made mention it applied to the three Abrahamic religions and specifically noted the RCC in Canon Law still prohibits it within a particular definition...so he seems to have been too preoccupied with his prejudices to actually respond to the OP.

********************

As for the one occasion I can remember using "Isa bin Maryam": It appears I may have been misinformed regarding the Aramaic (there are several dialects).

I trusted the account of an acquaintance of mine who originated from an Aramaic speaking Christian village in Syria. He always uses the name Isa bin Miriam". When I asked him why, he told me that "Isa" was the name his mother called him. "It is his in Aramaic name". Since then, from text book sources, I've encountered another three forms of the name in Aramaic = Eesho, Ishu & Isho

I underlined a likely source of the problem. Syria being a Muslim majority country most likely has a lot of people hearing "Isa bin Maryam", and not knowing the history behind it. Going by the posts of another poster here, those aren't correct either.

Almost. There is no such name in Hebrew or Aramaic as "Yahshua", "Yahushua", "Yahusha" or any number of odd variants. The only two possible names are "Y'hoshua" יְהוׂשֻׁעַ or "Yeshua" יֵשׁוּעַ

So none of those options you gave are Aramaic versions of Jesus' name.

In middle-English (attested from the 12th century), the son of Mary, Son of God was called "Iesu" which is close to the Aramaic dialects.

Not if Y'hoshua's post is right. Given his posting history I trust what he's saying on this quite a bit more than your own posts.

You may not be aware that the name "Jesus" was not used in the original KJV of 1611. It used "Iesous” (pronounced ee-ay-sooce'),

The modern nominative name "Jesus" was coined less than three hundred years ago via linguistic shifts.

I'm aware of that, and I'm aware that "Jesus" is more recent. From what I understand it's an English transliteration of the Latin Iesu.

So what? In English, Muslims translate it to "Jesus son of Mary". It is a recognisable name, in another language.

It wasn't a "recognisable name" when it first appeared in the Qur'an. Yasu is the Arabic for Yeshua/Jesus, and not Isa. Isa is a specifically Islamic perversion, and is also extremely insulting to Jesus even if "Isa" wasn't due to the "bin Maryam". In Middle Eastern cultures to name a child after their mother is to say they are an illegitimate child.

So you take umbrage when Hebrew speakers refer to Yeshu?

Nope, as it doesn't have the history of perversion that "Isa bin Maryam" does.

You may not be aware, that Islam isn't a cohesive religion. There are numerous sects. Some"heretically" almost Christian. Islam universally teaches the second coming and that Jesus will at this time judge the living and the dead. That is something Christian believers have in common with them.

There are primarily 2, Shia and Sunni. Going by this standard Christianity is even less cohesive due to there being RCC, Eastern Orthdox, and Protestants(among others).

I've done quite a bit of study on Islam, which is why I vehemently reject the term Isa bin Maryam, and try to correct those who would use the term without knowing the background behind it. Islam teaches a false Jesus, a complete perversion. One who will help Mohammed slaughter the Jews, who will sit back and let Mohammed help Allah in judging the world, and one who is oddly enough the nephew of Aaron and Moses.
You might find a similarity here and there, but the differences between Islam and Christianity far outweigh them.

Why so? Read the Catholic Catechism. I'm not aware of ever contradicting it...

Because of your use of Isa bin Maryam, and even after being corrected about it continuing to defend it. Your promotion of Sharia regarding usury. You can easily enough speak against usury without bringing Islam and Sharia into things. All of that combined with your criticism of the USA* make you sound much more like a Muslim.

I'm highly suspicious of how many Christian believers actually participate in these forums. Many seem to get riled when Acts 4:31-32 is referenced = "filled with the Holy Spirit...believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had."

I have no idea what you're talking about with that one.

*Given how common it is for Muslims to call the United States "The Great Satan".

[Littlejoe]

Thank you for an intelligent answer. Special thanks for correcting my misunderstandings.

From what you have explained so far, the USA & Oz systems are basically the same. It is the next bit I need clarified...

To help me understand what happens in the USA with mortgages in default, I'll explain what happen in Oz and trust you to tell me whats the same or detail what is different...

In Oz, a mortgagee's debt liability usually continues until a mortgage is settled in full - even after the property is sold as a partial recovery of the debt. There are two escapes:..

1. If the mortgagor decides not to pursue recovery of the debt and writes it off ,or
2, The mortgagee can go to court and declare bankruptcy.

That's pretty much the same AFAIK. Mortgage laws do vary from state to state, but there are federal mandates that all Lenders must meet and adhere to...but here in Texas if you default on your home and it is foreclosed on, then you are responsible for the deficiency.

For example: Say the total debt owed is $200,000, but the home only sells for $150,000 at the foreclosure sale. The deficiency is $50,000.
In some states, the lender can seek a personal judgment against the debtor to recover the deficiency. However, here in Texas, if the debtor can prove a Fair market value is excess of the sales price then the debtor can get relief of the amount owed. In the above example, were to happen, but the debtor can prove with a certified estimator let's say, that the property was actually WORTH $200,000, (and the court agrees) then the debtor would owe nothing. This encourages lenders to not sell for pennies on the dollar as their losses could potentially be much greater.

[siam]

...

I'm guessing, that as a broad principle, Islamic banking practices (prohibition of usury) under Islamic law, applies equally to anyone & everyone (? ).

Imu, as with the Jewish sage Shammai, the Muslim sages were/are concerned about eliminating "profit" from all financial transactions. So, imu, "extortionate charges" = "profit", have to be eliminated from the mortgage repayment calculation.

So how do Islamic banks make a "profit"?

Imu, the guiding principle within Islam is that you can't gain wealth without "personal active work" - which immediately quarantines passive earnings = the profit component of "interest repayments".

In a typical Western banking model, mortgage repayments are calculated as a curious composite of an agreed capital repayment amount, plus accumulated movement in the cost of funds for the loan in a deemed currency + administrative overheads + a profit factor (the later being distributed to shareholders = the providers of the original capital used to support loans). The actual repayments are "smoothed" over the life of the loan to ensure predictability of repayments - periodically either the repayment amount or loan term are adjusted due to monetary fluctuations.

Imu, in the Sharia law banking model, mortgage repayments are additional to an "agreed household rent", which is progressively reduced as the loan is repaid. Loan repayments are recast periodically to reflect monetary fluctuations = the purchasing power of money (Hillel's end product argument). To this is added admin overheads, a facilitation fee (reimbursement for procuring capital) and a "share distribution" of profits in the value of the property.

Imu, under Sharia law should the Mortgage holder have to "foreclose" any profit/loss is distributed to the banker & the borrower (?). Not sure what happens in the case of a loss event. Assuming the mortgagor is considered the property owner, I assume the borrower just walks away...

*********************

The bank failures in the U.S. during the 1980s [and more recently] revived interest in equity-based [banking]proposals and the separation of the payment of deposits from the portfolio activities of banks. The proposals made were strikingly similar to the Islamic systems now being implemented, at least on the deposit side. But the Islamic system goes further, requiring that loans made by banks should also be equity-based...

...slamic economics is a complete system of social and economic justice. It deals with property rights, the incentive system, the allocation of resources, economic freedom and decision-making and the proper role of government...

...[An] Islamic principle is that there should be no reward without risk-bearing. This principle is applicable to both labour and capital. As no payment is allowed to labour unless it is applied to work, so no reward for capital should be allowed unless it is exposed to business risks...

Basis of Islamic Banking

... under an Islamic banking system, the cost of capital is not analogous to a zero interest rate, as some people wrongly assume it to be. The only difference between Islamic banking and interest-based banking in this respect is that the cost of capital in interest-based banking is a predetermined fixed rate, while in Islamic banking; it is expressed as a ratio of profit...


"

Islamic Institution of Banking & Finance
http://www.islamic-banking.com/what_is_ibanking.aspx

Sharia only applies if it is voluntarily accepted--- A Muslim who voluntarily accepts Islam, uses "Sharia" (ethico-moral principles) and those who are non-Muslims can choose the Sharia systems or choose other systems...

The chosen profession of the Prophet was that of a merchant/trader so ethical economics/commerce/finance play an important role in Islam. In the Islamic system it is permissible to make a "profit" because one of the pillars of Islam---that of obligatory charity (Zakat) depends on profit/production of wealth. Zakat is the "tax" put on unused wealth which is to be used for the provision of "basic" needs such as education, hospitals, social security for the widowed and orphaned, food and shelter for the travelers or the homeless etc....(Zakat is not to be used for military expense...etc)
(unused wealth---the portion left over after all the needs and obligations of the earner are met...such as the needs of dependents etc)
Basically, Islamic system balances the production of wealth with the distribution of wealth without overburdening both human beings or human institutions.

Money is simply a means of exchange (for real assets) and not the tool to generate wealth. (see---labor theory of value---Marx)

Islamic system is based on (transparent) contracts between a creditor and debtor---thus the profit/loss is clearly spelled out at the time of contract. In Venture capitalism, (Mudarabah) a creditor invests money in an asset (a company) the debtor receives the money to do business and the contract spells out the sharing of profit and loss. In the case of home ownership (or other asset) the profit and loss is spelled out in the contract at the beginning of the transaction. One owner sells the shares/parts of the asset to another over time with a profit markup. This is like lease-financing (Murabaha.) Another way of financing is shareholding (Musharaka) where two or more investors provide capital and share in the profits/loss....

The Islamic system is pro-profit but it regulates the generation of wealth/profit to ethical/moral means. This is because in the Islamic paradigm---humans are not the source of wealth---rather wealth is a "loan" from God---any wealth generated belongs to God because it is from God and human beings are simply given the responsibility (Khalifa) to manage it (for benefit). This means that ethical generation of wealth must be balanced by an ethical distribution of wealth (Charity/Zakat)...

[elam]

LittleJoe & Siam thankyou for your clarifications. Seems people who can have an intelligent conversation are in short supply around here.

I've been reflecting on Equity Banking of late...back in the distant past, here in Oz, there were small "shadow bankers" who may have attempted to follow the principle. The ones I have in mind were absorbed by the big banks long ago. The one thing I do remember is that they were unregulated (not considered as being engaged in banking) and you had to buy at least one share in the company before you could open an account...

[hansgeorg]

While the Istituto per le Opere di Religione (Institute for Religious Works a.k.a. the "Vatican Bank") doesn't make loans they do charge interest on securities. As Fortune magazine notes:

Its biggest regular source of revenue is the “spread income” between what it pays depositors and the interest it receives on the securities that back those deposits, mainly short-term government and corporate bonds.

And according to Cannon Law Made Easy (which bills itself as providing "Church Law for Common People"):

The Catholic Church isn't isn't opposed to charging or paying interest on a loan per se; but its moral teachings on dealings with our fellow-man can definitely be applied when the conditions for obtaining a loan fail to take into consideration the humanity of the borrower.

You are aware your second source is XXth C and the Istituto per le Opere di Religione was not founded to 1929, when that is what Pius XI did with the financial damage payments Mussolini paid for the annectation of 1870?

[hansgeorg]

Your prejudice blinded you to the phrase "mainly short-term government and corporate bonds". These are negotiable instruments subject to fluctuations in yield and carry a certain amount of risk. You can actually end up losing money in holding bonds (a little thing like inflation eats their value way). So these commodities aren't prohibited under the usury laws.

Word!

If I lend an opening bakery 100 dollars and insist on getting all back whatever their fortunes, I should receive no more than 100 dollars. But if I am fine with losing 10 percent should they lose that much, I should also be able to earn 10 percent should they gain that much.

Simple Thomistics!

[hansgeorg]

It wasn't in this thread, and I would need to go digging to find which one it was. Which wasn't conducive to a quick explanation.

You may want to go back and see if that was really me and if your citation does not deform what I was saying.

[hansgeorg]

I'm aware of that, and I'm aware that "Jesus" is more recent. From what I understand it's an English transliteration of the Latin Iesu.

Latin actually has diverse case forms:

Nominative : Iesus
Genitive, Dative, Vocative, Ablative : Iesu (due to Greek influence)
Accusative : Iesum.

Much or even most of Empire, as in English, accent on first syllable, Spain and Italy seem to have been an exception (Jesús, Giesù). Or it's simply they are closer to Empire's Latin than English form is.

I+vowel was pronounced differently in different languages (and regional renderings of Medieval Latin) and replacing the sign I with the sign J, when used as a consonant, really didn't change that.

[Raphael]

.... I seems to recall a number of articles detailing that Australia only survived the GFC because the mining industry was booming, and that since it stopped booming things are getting worse .... I recall a number of scathing editorials about it, especially compared with how well our [NZ] economy is going .....



ETA: random question..... Rabbitohs or Roosters?

[rogue06]

.... I seems to recall a number of articles detailing that Australia only survived the GFC because the mining industry was booming, and that since it stopped booming things are getting worse .... I recall a number of scathing editorials about it, especially compared with how well our [NZ] economy is going .....



ETA: random question..... Rabbitohs or Roosters?

What did the Georgia Forestry Commission do to Oz?

[Cerebrum123]

You may want to go back and see if that was really me and if your citation does not deform what I was saying.

Sorry, I got you confused with elam. Oops.