Should interest rates be regulated or abolished? The case for the abolition of usury
Joanne Lee
Abstract
Joanne Lee
Abstract
This article makes the normative case against usury, defined in the article as any interest on a loan. It argues that usury legitimises bondage of the borrower to the lender through debt. Based on this radicalised understanding of usury, it is further argued that usury facilitates debt accumulation, as well as fosters irresponsible lending and borrowing. It considers the counter-arguments of moral hazard, adverse selection and efficiency, concluding that it remains that the better view is that usury should be prohibited altogether. The article proposes a law to criminalise usury, as well as critically examining this proposed law and its rationale.
OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This article makes the normative case against usury, defined in the article as any interest on a loan. It argues that usury legitimises bondage of the borrower to the lender through debt. Based on this radicalised understanding of usury, it is further argued that usury facilitates debt accumulation, as well as fosters irresponsible lending and borrowing. It considers the counter-arguments of moral hazard, adverse selection and efficiency, concluding that it remains that the better view is that usury should be prohibited altogether. The article proposes a law to criminalise usury, as well as critically examining this proposed law and its rationale.
Key concepts: Usury, Debt, Moral hazard, Loan, Economics, Law and economics, Normative, Law