After working temp for a credit card company, I've tried to
assuage my moral scruples by learning exactly what usury is. No
such luck. Hillaire Belloc held that usury is taking interest on
a non-productive loan. Belloc's example of a usurious relation
is if a farmer's field is let out, only to be rendered useless
by river which has changed its course. While still paying
interest on the property, the tenant would have no means of
making a return on his investment. This has a great deal to be
said for it. If I loan somebody $100 for food and charge them 5%
interst, they're out $105 with no chance to make it back. But if
I loan somebody $100 at 5% interest, and he puts it to
productive use, then we're both ahead, and there's no transfer
of wealth from the poorer to the richer. Yet there are a few
difficulties: for instance, what if the loan is potentially
productive, yet the loanee botches the use of his capital? The
author of the usury article in the Catholic Encyclopedia
mentions those who share Belloc's theor