Well, not in so many words, but more or less to the same effect. Here’s the little gem penned a couple of years ago, by a blogger after my own heart, who likes to let bankers incriminate themselves, in their own words, albeit in forked tongue:
There is much of interest in the IMF’s Financial System Stability Assessment of Australia, published in November 2012. The following line in particular caught my eye, and is worthy of comment. The context is the IMF’s consideration of what are the “key risks” to our banking system (page 10-11):
Pressure on the net interest margin, which accounts for almost two-thirds of operating income, has the potential to encourage more risk-taking by banks in order to preserve profitability.
Thoughtful readers will observe that this statement unintentionally lends direct support to a fundamental argument your humble blogger has made — that usury is the root problem of the global monetary system, and that fractional reserve banking (or endogenous money creation) is only a secondary problem.
I too marveled at this very fact over 10 years ago – there are only two kinds of people in this world, those who pay more interest than they collect and those who collect more interest than they pay. 99% of us are in the former camp.
When you consider this fact, coupled with the fact that the ‘carry trade’ infects almost every financial instrument in the world, you begin to see the depth and breadth of this catastrophe. It is an endless rot, undermining all of humanity.
The IMF has directly admitted that the root of banks’ profit-making model is net interest income, and that pressure on the “margin” between what they charge in interest for loans, and must offer in interest on deposits, “has the potential to encourage more risk-taking by banks in order to preserve profitability”.
What exactly is meant by “more risk-taking”?
In the footnote (3) to the IMF’s comment, we are told that:
“Riskier activities could include, for example, loosening underwriting standards or expanding too quickly into new business or geographic regions.”
What’s left unsaid is what exactly “loosening underwriting standards” means — exploiting the most vulnerable of humanity.
Which brings us to the heart of darkness and the true nature of charging interest which I explored in depth almost ten years ago:
So, it’s not the principle of ‘free markets’ at play, but another entirely different and malignant one.
When a lender extracts more ‘interest’ from a borrower in exchange for less money loaned, that lender is in effect saying:
- ‘It is not in my interest to lend money to you.’
- ‘I am better than you.’
- ‘I deserve to be in the position that I am in, not by luck (or a rigged system), but because I am qualitatively better than you.’
- ‘You deserve to be in the position that you are in, not by luck (or a rigged system), but because you are qualitatively lesser than me.’
- ‘If I thought you were like me, subject to the same rules and the same God’s wrath, then I would lend you my money and you could repay it in kind.’
- ‘BUT SINCE I AM BETTER THAN YOU, there is NO reason for me to lend money to you UNLESS you can pay me for extending that privilege to you.’
- ‘The more badly you need that money, the more money I will demand from you in return for that privilege before I am gracious enough to lend it to you.’
Among polite company, this attitude would be reviled as self-centered, egotistical, antisocial, and utterly without social redemption. The person or persons exhibiting this quality would fairly quickly be short on friends.
Yet, in business it’s applauded and facilitated with a system that relies on INTEREST-based debt to fuel ALL economic activity, which in turn is fueled by self-interest run amok.
The logical conclusion of this attitude is complete and utter subjugation of one group of people by another — in short, slavery. And those who refuse to be slaves are annihilated.
That’s all folks, usury is the root of all evil.