Beginnings of Banker Capitalism

Smith's Invisible Hand could not conceal all the injustices of bank lending. Aristotle and Mohammed said lending at usury (usage, interest) was unjust. Aquinas pronounced it contrary to natural law. Why should lenders earn increments to the money they lent out while doing nothing- and then relend repaid capital and accumulated interests while doing even more nothing?

There is simple theft, organised crime, and the creation of money at little or no cost and spending into circulation at a high face value. The difference is a form of theft perpetrated by those who create the money from all of the rest of the population. Bank 'lending' makes it possible to create practically unlimited amounts of money out of nothing. A person who deposits his/her savings in a bank is the legal owner of those savings. The bank owns the money it lends out- borrowers are legally obliged pay it back to the bank- with interest. Borrowed moneys may be spent to build factories, pay workers least, and charge clients most. Builders and workers then redeposit into banks that fraction of their wages that they do not spend on living. That re-deposited money is new money created out of nothing in the banking system. Meanwhile, the banks earned all of the unearned increment (agio) for having created the money they lent to capitalists out of nothing at far higher rates than they paid depositors. Re-deposited money can be relent to capitalists, repaid to workers who re-deposit a part of it - and so on, over and over again, creating huge piles of worthless numbers in accounts.