Chapter XXV - Usury oppresses the poor
Moses, Solomon and the prophets connect
usury with the oppression of the poor. For this
reason many have thought the divine prohibition of
usury applied only to loans to the poor. By careful
attention we will find that its evils are not confined
to the immediate participants in the transaction.
In the natural operation of economic laws the ultimate
burden rests upon the poor. It is clear that when
each member of a community contributes his portion
to the common welfare the burdens are equally distributed.
When any one fails to contribute his proportion the
burdens are made heavier for the other members, and
the burdens increase as the number increases of those
who for any cause fail to contribute their part.
This is true in the family home life.
When every member of the household is able, and with
cheerful willingness does his full part for the family
support and comfort, the burden is equally distributed.
Let one member of the family be in any way disabled
and his duties must be performed by others. If
several are disabled the burdens upon the others may
be greatly increased. If any are indolent the
burdens are made heavy upon those who are industrious.
The same is true in the larger family,
the community and the state, for political economy
is but enlarged home economy. The burdens are
lightest when every one contributes his full share
to the general welfare. When any are idle the
duties become heavier upon those who are faithful.
Usury makes it possible for many to
live upon incomes from their property. They are
not classed, nor do they class themselves, among those
who are personally productive. This makes it necessary
for the poor, those who have no property, to produce
more in order to house and clothe and feed the community.
But those non-productive persons are
consumers and are the most active consumers.
They make heavy drafts upon the energies of others.
They become extravagant in their habits and the spendthrifts
of the world; while in proportion to their extravagant
habits there must be severity and simplicity in the
habits of the industrious and productive, on whom
the support of the community rests.
The world does not grow richer nor
are the conditions of life for one class eased by
the extravagance of another class.
It is sometimes said that the idleness
and the wasteful habits of some are for the benefit
of others because they make a demand for more work.
It would give the lumberman and nail-cutter and carpenter
and glazier and plasterer and painter more work to
call back the fire department and let the house burn,
but that is not the way to house the houseless.
Extravagance is wasteful destruction of property.
“It is insisted upon both moral
and economic grounds that no public benefit of any
kind arises from the existence of a rich idle class.
Their incomes must be paid, though inconsistent with
the public good. To illustrate, the London and
Southwestern railroad contemplated a reduction of
fares in cars of the third-class. It was defeated
because it might reduce the dividends. The poor
could not be relieved lest it should reduce the incomes
of the idle.” Ruskin.
That family is happy and prosperous
in which every member contributes personally his portion
to its support and comfort. That condition affords
the highest measure of relief for all. It is unfortunate
if there should be an idler in the home who, as a
parasite, feeds on the industry of the others; it
is a double misfortune if that idler proves a spendthrift
to waste the thrifty gatherings of the diligent.
The same economic principles make it necessary for
the highest good of every individual in the community
that each shall contribute his personal part.
“If any will not work neither shall he eat.”
If any insist upon eating and yet will not work, it
imposes an oppressive burden on others to compel them
to supply his table.
Again: The limiting of production
is a hardness to the poor. Their welfare requires
the largest possible product along every line of human
needs. Over-production is a term of the trade
and means only that the supply has become so great
that it cannot be sold at prices satisfactory to the
trade. But as the prices fall the market broadens.
Consumption increases with the increasing abundance,
and that which it was not possible for certain classes
to enjoy now comes within their reach and may become
possible to even the poorest. There never can
be an over-supply of fruits and vegetables and grains
and meats and shoes and clothes and salt and oil and
fuel and houses until the wants of the poorest are
supplied. Their welfare requires that there shall
be no restraining of the supply until they come out
of their huts into houses; until they can shed their
rags and dress in clothes both comfortable and attractive;
until their tables are supplied with nutritious food;
until they have the means of discovering and cultivating
their aesthetic nature by shaking off the repellant
conditions in which they are mostly compelled to live.
The practice of usury restrains the
supply by freeing so large a part of the people from
the necessity of active productive effort by the incomes
from their properties. Many born to wealth have
never felt the necessity, and have never made an effort
nor turned a thought along productive lines.
The world has lost all that they might have added to
the world’s supply for human needs. Many,
who have been successful in accumulation early in
life, retire from active work while yet in full vigor,
because they are relieved of the necessity by the income
of usury or increase, and the most valuable portion
of their lives is lost to the world.
Production is further limited by the
demand that it shall yield an increase on the property
employed. The shop is shut down when the goods
cannot be sold at such a price as to pay a satisfactory
profit on the investment. The shop stands idle
until the stock is depleted and the demand raises
the price of the goods and then the shop is again
opened. The workmen could go on with their work,
supplying the world with their goods, bringing the
price down until within the reach of the poorest,
but it is the owner of the shop that holds the key
and demands that the supply shall be so far restrained
that the price shall yield a satisfactory increase
on the property.
Inventions and improved tools are
a blessing to the poor when they make labor so productive
that they can enjoy results of labor that could not
be enjoyed by them before. They are not a blessing
when used to gain an increase on wealth by employing
less labor. Their proper use is to make labor
more productive; their perverted use is to make property
more profitable.
There is a natural restraint by the
law of supply and demand when all needs are so supplied
that there is no longer a sufficient compensation
to the producer; but it is a perverted and unrighteous
restraint to place property between productive labor
and human needs and demand a reward for it before
these human needs shall be satisfied. There is
an utter want of pity for the poor in permitting them
to go unhoused, unfed and unclothed, unless there shall
be a profit by increase in supplying their wants.
True benevolence requires that labor shall be made
so effective as to fill every human need, but pure
selfishness uses property to supply the need for a
gain. This restraint for an increase on property
is oppression of the poor for a price.