I would like to talk to you tonight about something that has been happening in Italy for the past 4 years but it is mostly unknown and not understood
banks have started to be taken to court for Usury
The Courts (we have 3 degrees of judgement and all 3 have denounced this practice) have finally turned the result of consistent condemnations into a Law that forbids the application of Usury.
Not only, Banks found guilty of applying usury in the form of compounded interests, have to publish on their website that they are undergoing an investigation for usury
Generally speaking, usury is controlled in our society by the determination of an interest threshold, above that threshold, the applicant can be charged for usury
so, Banks, along time ago, invented the system called of 'compound interests' – this means that, taking the example of an overdraft, a client owes a bank 10000, on that amount, interests are calculated every 3 months
and then they are 'capitalized' meaning, they are added to the 'Capital' due, so now, the client owes 10500 on which – interests are calculated
This is how banks found a way around the interest threshold
They play the same game with mortgages, in fact they play an even crueller game, imagine you take out a mortgage for 100000, the bank will calculate the total of the interest due to them until the end of the restitution, then, for every payback monthly rate, they ask back a fixed (or indexed – as in subject to market fluctuations) amount that is divided in interests + Capital.
The game consists in getting a client to start paying All the interests first, with a ration of 100% interest restitution or 90% interests and then 10% Capital, if a client defaults because they could not make the payments anymore, banks can prove the clients has never paid back one cent of the loaned Capital, hence, they de facto own the house.
Of course as we know there are much more layers to the banking game, but I would like us to investigate this aspect as the masses are supposed to understand it – if they even get to this step-, to check how it works in yr country, if usury is allowed, what is the threshold that is considered legit and how do they handle the restitution of mortgage money and interests.
Now, going back to the point of banks being taken to court for usury and having to publish what they have done OR that they are undergoing an investigation
The word for usury in Italian is
we all understand this word, we even more or less understand its roots,
it comes from Latin, USUS, meaning the use of something, in the specific, the use of money that doesn't belong to the one using it
So, Italian Banks had this GREAT idea, they do publish the fact that they are under investigation, but not for USURY
they use another word,mostly unknown to the general public, this word comes from the Greek Word ANATOKISMOS, meaning basically – ana – on top/kismos -a token/interest – translated in Italian as Anatocismo
here I post a link of my mother's bank – under investigation
on the first page the little tiny square under their banner shows that post that the Court has forced them to post PUBLICLY, so the clients may understand what is going on, check if they have been subjected to Anatocismo and take action.
Obviously NOT knowing the 'word' and having it posted so small under a flashing banner means – no one can see it – at all – and they get away with this for another 100 years since they own the media and no one is talking about it.
There is though another side to Usury that I would like us to investigate
here is a brief excerpt about the History of Usury and what roles religions around the world have played in either condemning it or excusing it
Some passages have really hit a spot for me so I will share them with you and see if anyone gets any idea from them for a blog
Originally, usury meant interest of any kind
By the 3rd Century acute currency problems in the (Roman) Empire drove the back alley 'banks' into decline. The rich who were in a position to take advantage of the situation became the money-lenders when the ever-increasing tax demands in the last declining days of the Empire crippled and eventually destroyed the peasant class by reducing tenant-farmers to serfdom. It was evident that usury meant exploitation of the poor.
St. Thomas Aquinas, the leading scholastic theologian of the Roman Catholic Church, argued charging of interest is wrong because it amounts to "double charging", charging for both the thing and the use of the thing. Aquinas said this would be morally wrong in the same way as if one sold a bottle of wine, charged for the bottle of wine, and then charged for the person using the wine to actually drink it. Similarly, one cannot charge for a piece of cake and for the eating of the piece of cake. Yet this, said Aquinas, is what usury does. Money is a medium of exchange, and is used up when it is spent. To charge for the money and for its use (by spending) is therefore to charge for the money twice. It is also to sell time since the usurer charges, in effect, for the time that the money is in the hands of the borrower. Time, however, is not a commodity that anyone can sell. In condemning usury Aquinas was much influenced by the recently rediscovered philosophical writings of Aristotle and his desire to assimilate Greek philosophy with Christian theology. Aquinas argued that in the case of usury, as in other aspects of Christian revelation, Christian doctrine is reinforced by Aristotelian natural law rationalism. Aristotle's argument is that interest is unnatural, since money, as a sterile element, cannot naturally reproduce itself. Thus, usury conflicts with natural law just as it offends Christian revelation: see Thought of Thomas Aquinas.