solarpunk memes

2937 readers

19 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

ex_06@slrpnk.net

tsugu@slrpnk.net

Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net

1092

no wait he has a point (slrpnk.net)

submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net to c/memes@slrpnk.net

95 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 26 points 6 months ago (1 children)

In many historical societies including ancient Christian, Jewish, and Islamic societies, usury meant the charging of interest of any kind, and was considered wrong, or was made illegal.[3]

BTW chrishitery should be the next capitalist McCarthyism. Muhh! red hats!

[–] cerement@slrpnk.net 20 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Deuteronomy 23:19-20 – “^19^ You shall not charge interest to your countrymen: interest on money, food, or anything that may be loaned at interest. ^20^ You may charge interest to a foreigner, but to your countrymen you shall not charge interest, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all that you undertake in the land which you are about to enter to possess.”
Exodus 22:25 – “^25^ If you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, you are not to act as a creditor to him; you shall not charge him interest.”
Deuteronomy 15:1-3 – “^1^ At the end of every seven years you shall grant a release of debts. ^2^ And this is the regulation for the release of debts: every creditor is to forgive what he has loaned to his neighbor; he shall not require it of his neighbor and his brother, because the Lord’s release has been proclaimed. ^3^ From a foreigner you may require it, but your hand shall forgive whatever of yours is with your brother.”

[–] festnt@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

just dont look into exodus 21 alright

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 0 points 6 months ago (3 children)

This sounds good in theory, but is relatively bad in practice. Without interest, no one will loan the government money. Municipalities would need to rely on huge tax increases to fund large projects, instead of bonds funded by small tax increases over time.

No one will loan money to businesses either, and you are not getting any money to buy a house. It would favor those who already own established businesses, as they can just use profits from one to invest in another one.

[–] RustyWizard@programming.dev 10 points 6 months ago

I don’t think anyone is saying this is sound economic theory, just that Christianity has a lot of kooky shit that modern Christians are ignorant of and are contradictory to the theocracy they envision.

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think the idea is that you give loans to the needy, and do so out of generosity, hoping to get your money back but not relying on it. It's one of those things where the law does not work without the spirit.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That would mean rich donors end up "lending" money to the government for "no interest". I'm sure in return they would receive zero favors or benefits of any kind.

Like a lot of things in the Bible, it may work for goat herders lost in the Bronze Age desert. But it definitely doesn't literally work today. It didn't even work under the Romans during Jesus's time.

He was like "not a word shall be changed", but also don't worry about tiny details. Regarding keeping Kosher He said, "it's not what goes into your mouth that defiles you, but what comes out." The point is to keep yourself clean, not details about shellfish.

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That would mean rich donors end up “lending” money to the government for “no interest”. I’m sure in return they would receive zero favors or benefits of any kind.

That can happen under just about any system.

[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Yes, but you don't want to make it a primary source for government funding.

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 3 points 6 months ago

Right, that's what taxes are for.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 0 points 6 months ago

Exactly, and no it can't "just happen under any system". Right now the US government is giving out 5.1% interest on risk free Treasury Bills. There's literally no way to bribe the Treasury with free money because everyone and their dog is rushing to lend the government money at those rates.

[–] poVoq@slrpnk.net 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

You realise that the government can (and does) just make new money? There is no need for the government to borrow any money (but it does it anyways for other more complex reasons). And if done in moderation the resulting inflation is in effect identical to taxes, except that it automatically "taxes" the rich more and incurages further investments.

And with sufficient inflation, businesses will have no problem to attract investments as people will want to have investments that retain their value, no interest needed.

Similarly, investing money in houses is sound business when inflation is relatively high, both individually and for housing companies.

But the real problem is anyways not basic interest, but compound interest that forces the borrower to repay the lend amount many times over and still be in debt afterwards.