I've wondered the same thing myself for a long time. I still have not settled for a final answer.

On one hand, if we take a loan, we are participating in the expansion of the money supply together with the banksters. We are diluting the fiat currency at the expense of everyone. What specially makes this a spicy point in my mind is thinking how I can do this because I am a privileged westerner, and how there are billions on earth that will never have access to such options. In a sense, you could picture being a cantillionaire not as a binary yes/no status, but rather as an spectrum. And in that spectrum, we are much closer to the cantillionarie side than most people.

On the other hand, game theory dictates you should. It's the good old "if you don't do it, somebody else will". Actually, when you think about it, they don't even need you to ask for the loan to expand the money supply. The government-banking cartel will do it anyways as they please. So, why be left behind? It's as if everyone is drinking from the lake, and this will make the lake go dry and hurt everyone, so you wonder if it's an evil thing to do to drink yourself. But, if the lake is going to go dry regardless...

It makes me wonder about the prisoner's dilemma in a moral way, which is something I had never done before. Are the prisoners being evil by incriminating each other?