American Monetary Institute: The Usury Problem Remains

kristy Beyond GDP

PO BOX 601, VALATIE, NY 12184
Tel. 518-392-5387, email [email protected]
Stephen Zarlenga, Director

Dedicated to the independent study of monetary history, theory, and reform


We’ve been to the moon; were on the verge of artificially creating life, yet we have made almost no progress on a question which most societies considered a great danger – a destroyer of nations – the question of usury. Even bringing up the matter invites pre-judgement. What should civilized society’s attitude be toward usury?
1)Early Loans And Interest Were thought to be Based On Agricultural Produce One line of reasoning, as seen in Fritz Heichelheims work proposes that the ancient oriental systems made an error allowing interest to be charged on metallic loans.
Its presumed that Loans in the pre-urban societies were made in seed grains, animals and tools to farmers. What was loaned had the power of generation, and interest was a sharing of the result.The Sumerians used the same word – mas – for both calves and interest. A similar Egyptian word meant to “give birth.”
The ancient orient made a momentous innovation, according to Heichelheim allowing usury to be charged on metallic loans with the interest to be paid in more metal. The conceptual error treated inorganic materials as if they were living organisms with the means of reproduction. But metals are “barren” – they have no powers of generation and any interest paid in them must
originate from some other source or process.

Click here to read “The Usury Problem Remains