Quote from: CoinCube on January 10, 2017, 08:20:34 AM

Quote from: iamnotback on January 10, 2017, 06:25:04 AM

Quote from: CoinCube on January 09, 2017, 09:08:13 PM

You cannot successfully top-down ban usury. The only was to eliminate it is to get people to voluntarily refuse to participate both as borrower or lender despite the fact that doing so is potentially profitable.

It will never happen, unless you want a static universe. They tried banning usury in the Middle (Dark) Ages, and economic growth became static or declined.

I do not feel like explaining. Assemble the puzzle based on my past writings (but I've seen that you haven't quite assimilated all my writings).

It depends on your definition of slavery. My definition is broad and that is humans will never be equal, so some will always be subservient to others. Society can mask this as social obligations, slave level wages, or whatever, that is still slavery in my definition. I am a tax slave to Uncle Sam. People who think they are free even when they are not, are a form of satiated slave (Stockholm Syndrome being another example of that phenomenon).

Your definition of slavery is simply another way of saying that we will never be entirely free. This is true. However, it ignores the fact that there are degrees of slavery. We can approach freedom gradually over time. Freedom can progress.

I didn't ignore that. I wrote it depends on your definition of slavery.

Technology (you call this knowledge) is what drives the level of freedom we have, and I have said that for years. I am surprised you would forget.

Physical slavery was required when most labor was fungible, menial labor. That is what my entire thesis that you quoted in the OP of Economic Devastation. How could you forget?

Quote from: CoinCube on January 10, 2017, 08:20:34 AM

I understand your arguments that large concentrations of capital were required to facilitate the industrial revolution and that usury and fractional reserve were a necessary part of this process. I agree with it. However, this is just another example of the need for some level of top-down control when knowledge is lacking. At the time and even today there are a lack of options outside of usury when it comes to concentrating funds for large scale projects. The current lack of options does not mean usury is desirable or forever necessary. It simply means we lack the knowledge to move on to a superior system. We are not yet ready to eliminate usury.

However, I believe the knowledge is coming. We will eventually be able to create a society with lower levels of top-down oppression. It is not a process of absolute but rather incremental change.

And the transformation can be as I have described many times that we won't need to aggregate capital, because technology will enable maximum division of labor to coordinate without Theory of the Firm Coasian costs, because of decentralization technology of which the Inverse Commons of open source is a main component. Refer to my prior writings for the cited references.