Money is kind of an agreement or contract within the whole society and its terms can be changed.
Yes, the problem is that the systems you propose (money that rots f.e.) produce discordination in the economy and if imposed exclusively would lead to poverty.
Can you elaborate on this "discordination in the economy" and how it would lead to poverty?
You're ok with Ripple then?
There is nothing bad in interests. If you have a car and rent it, you are getting a profit because you are renouncing to its use for a while. Same with money. You rent it out and get a profit because you are renouncing to its use for a while. I fail to see the difference and why you consider one ok and the other not.
With the example of the car, you're not only renouncing to its use for a while. The car will eventually crash after X miles/kilometers. Even a building has a limited lifetime. Money doesn't. With free money, you would still rent your money, but just at the risk premium, the basic interest would not exist.
The main difference is that more houses could be produced to lower the rental price, but "money cannot be produced". If it's produced, its production costs have nothing to do with its use as a value symbol, that's why money can be made of paper and bits. It's just a symbol, an agreement, not a commodity.
Why the costs of production of houses is not near the earns of its lifetime rentals? Because that's not enough for capital.
Houses must be at least as profitable as money. Therefore we can't build that many houses because the financial market won't allow it.
Money, the highway of commerce should be free. We shouldn't
pay a tribute to money with every trade we make.