There's people that say generating credit in a bitcoinized world will be not needed anymore, because everyone will understand the PoW.
Today anti-globalization demonstrators carry signs that read “abolish usury” or “abolish interest.” But isn't the credit/debt game (outside the usury and high interest topic), since the barter days, what drove us to have the current market? (the original agora that nowadays is more virtual than IRL)
Would money lending be a legitimate and moral activity as long as it is conducted in a free market where both parties agree to the terms voluntarily and benefit from the exchange?
Isn't money only a tool of trade, a means to exchange value for value? Capitalism and its financial mechanisms, including lending, as the most moral and practical economic system, as it is based on voluntary trade and the principle of self-interest. Now what make the difference is this self-interest. Remove the self and understand it as only interest, or actually intent.
Shouldn't be this intent to make the difference itself? Should be the responsibility of the borrower to understand what's the final intent of the lender? ... and if not aligned with thy morals and ethics leave it, where is it to find a better one?
What
if, in a pure context where trust is already built, you do it without any usury, fees or interests?And
if there's no trust already, could you use incremental amounts in short amounts of time (instead of big ones in a longer term) to build that trust between lender and borrower?What
if you do it for the goodness and greatness of the world facilitating a circular economy, instead your personal interest?So many questions, eh! Well, I did not find much on this topic here in SN, and interested to know your thoughts
Thanks for sharing