Ok, you said absolutely nothing new here. But you are justifying it after the fact with hypotheticals. It does not change the moral wrong. If someone is trapped in a burning car and I refuse to pick up a rock an break the window unless they pay me to offset the risk to me that makes me a dick.
Demanding money for doing nothing but loaning money is wrong. That you can make an argument about how you deserve the money for taking risk does not make the fundamental transaction morally good, it just justifies the small immorality to sustain a system that has benefits.
I'm not saying banking has no good, or that interest is not justified as a way to sustain it. I'm saying it is fundamentally immoral. It is usury.
(post is archived)