Allow me to reply to you with some crude and primitive examples

since a scholarly answer would detract me from replying to you for

lack of available time on my part.

In order to better illustrate my prior answer, first, I must explain to

you what the concept of Usury is, and once you comprehend to the full
extend that Usury is a logical impossibility, my answer shall become
quite clear to you.

In simple terms, Usury is the charge or fee for the use of something
payable in the exact same thing that was lent plus the amount of the
charge or fee in the exact same thing. It should be obvious to you
from the prior sentence that anything that is due in the exact same
thing plus an increase in the exact same thing would be impossible to
pay or perform as contracted; that is what the concept of Usury is.

By way of illustration, if I lend you my car at a 10 per cent fee for any
period of time, the fee consisting of the same car, you would owe me
the car plus 10% of the car at the end of the specified time. Again, it
should be clear and obvious to you now that it is impossible for you to
perform on this contract since there is only one car and you cannot
produce an additional 10% of the exact same car.

Notice that words can allow us to draft up the agreement, but that
does not negate the fact that performance on the agreement is an
impossibility on the part of the borrower. Keep this in mind as we go
forward.

You may be thinking, well, why can’t I go to the factory and get an
amount of parts equal to the sum of 10% of the car and pay them to
you to satisfy the contract? The answer is simple, because the
agreement called for an additional 10% of the exact same car and not
10% of an additional car, although you may have secured the
additional 10% in parts from the same factory and the same molds or
blue prints. These subtle points are important as you will see and
comprehend.

Taking the above illustration, and I know full well that performance by
you on the above contract is an impossibility, you agree to borrow my
car anyway. If I was being an Usurer, I would agree to lend you the
car provided you pledge collateral equal to the value of the car for
security in case you fail to live up to the terms of our contract.
It should be obvious to you what would be the outcome of this deal
once the specified period of time was expired, you would fail to
perform as agreed and I would take over your pledged collateral since
you would have failed to perform as per the covenants of our contract.
And if we were to go before a tribunal, I would win and it would be just
for me to win since you failed to fulfill your end of the bargain. Your
saving grace would be that the Law does not compel the doing of
impossibilities.

I hope that by now the concept of Usury should be clear in your mind.

There are other concepts that I need to share with you in other to
better illustrate my answer, many are subtle concepts that need to be
completely understood.

Moving on to the concept of Wealth, let us agree that anything useful

is Wealth. Next, in order to account for our Wealth, we agree to devise
the following symbol to stand and account for Wealth: $

Furthermore, we agree that a single unit denomination of our agreed

symbol shall be called a Dollar; and the Dollar shall be divisible in
centimal form, that is to say a fraction of one Dollar will equal to 1/100
and we will call that fraction a Cent.

One of the points in having devised a symbol for Wealth is to enable

people to do business among each other, and to have a rational way of
accounting for those transactions that may take place. In other words,
we turn the figures represented by the Dollar symbol $ into the
concept Money. In the next examples I will show you how we turn $
into Money.

Example One: There is Charlie and Larry. Charlie is a chicken farmer,

Larry is a laborer. Charlie and Larry agree to do a deal; Charlie will
give Larry 10 Chickens in exchange for 40 hours of Larry’s labor, Larry
Agrees. This is simple barter, Wealth for Wealth. Charlie’s chickens =
Wealth, Larry’s labor = Wealth.

Example Two: Larry cannot take the 10 chickens with him so he asks
Charlie to give him a note stating that Larry is entitled to receive 10
chickens from Charlie, Charlie agrees and gives Larry the note stating
that Larry is entitled to receive 10 chickens from Charlie at anytime
Larry presents the note to claim the chickens. Now we are getting into
commerce, Larry has surrendered his Wealth (Labor) for a Claim of
Wealth (the note for the chickens) from Charlie.

Example Three: Larry goes into town, there he sees Sam the
shoemaker offering to trade some shoes. Larry tells Sam that Charlie
owes him some chickens, and then Larry asks Sam if Sam is willing to
accept some chickens in exchange for some shoes. After some
haggling Sam agrees to accept 1 and ½ chickens for a pair of shoes.
But they have a problem; Sam asks Larry how can Sam get his 1 and
½ chickens from Larry when Larry only has a note from Charlie?

After some thought, they agree and go to see Robert the town’s
records keeper. Larry tells Robert the problem; then Robert agrees to
record the transaction and any other transactions Larry is going to do
with the remainder of the note from Charlie in exchange for ½ a
chicken. Now they have another problem, how can Sam and Robert
get their half of a chicken? After giving it some thought, they all go to
see Bill the butcher. Again, after some haggling Bill agrees to pick up
the chickens from Charlie, and split and payout any portion of a
chicken to anyone that Larry gives a note owing any chicken, all for
the simple fee of one chicken. Having agreed on their respective deals
Robert fills a ledger with the following details:

Chicken Debits and Credits

Larry’s Account
Debit Credit
$10 From Charlie
$1.5 To Sam
$0.5 To Robert
$1.0 To Bill
$7 Remaining balance.

Notice how Larry went from having a note (claim on Wealth) of 10

chickens to receiving 1 pair of shoes, bookkeeping and butchering
services (Wealth).

There are several subtle points from this example, one of them being
that we have given “parity” to our symbol: $=1 chicken, this can be
said to be the “chicken standard”; the need for a ledger to record the
transactions, trust, and agreement between the parties.
Example Four: After the debits and credits have been recorded, Robert
tells Larry that he still has seven chickens left to claim from Charlie.
Larry tells Robert that all this trading is very time consuming, how can
they simplify their trade to take less time and without all those
involved going back and forth? After some thought, Robert tells Larry
that it is simple; Robert will give Larry several notes in different
chicken denominations that he can trade with the other merchants.
Larry likes the idea and then Robert writes out several notes and
updates the ledger:

The notes read: I Robert the record keeper, certify that Larry is
entitled to receive from Charlie the chicken farmer, 7 chickens, and
the bearer of this note may claim, X chicken(s) from Bill the butcher at
anytime.

And the ledger:

Chicken Debits and Credits

Larry’s Account
Debit Credit
$10 From Charlie
$1.5 To Sam. (Shoes)
$0.5 To Robert. (Bookkeeping/Recording Service)
$1.0 To Bill. (Butcher/Payout Service)
$7.0 Bearer notes outstanding.
$0 Remaining balance.

What happened here in this example is that Robert in effect

“monetized” Larry’s claim on the remaining 7 chickens Larry is entitled
to claim from Charlie. Robert did this by certifying Larry’s claim
through the notes. Notice also how the Bearer notes have a
“derivative” denomination from the original claim on Wealth that is the
note from Charlie to Larry.

Example Five: Larry goes off into the market with his Bearer notes to
trade them for other goods and services. They do this for a while, but
one day Robert being an observant and bright fellow notices
something peculiar about the Bearer notes that Larry trades into the
market. Robert notices that other people are now trading Larry’s
Bearer notes for goods and services among themselves. Another thing
Robert notices is that when Larry comes to town and he trades his
notes, there is a lot more trading than when Larry is not around.
Robert decides to investigate why there is more trading when Larry
comes to market than when he is not around and is surprised by the
answer. The answer is that when Larry comes to market with a fresh
batch of Bearer notes, the notes allow many other merchants to easily
trade among themselves, but when a merchant takes the note to Bill
the butcher to claim chicken, the Bearer notes are destroyed by Bill
when the chicken is paid out in satisfaction of the claim, thus taking
the Bearer note out of circulation. Robert notices several other peculiar
things, he sees that as the Bearer notes are taken out of circulation
and destroyed, trade is stifled among the other merchants. Also,
Robert notices that while the Bearer notes are out in circulation, Bill
does not have to pay out any chicken, but the liability to payout
chicken still remains. Next, having gathered the previous information,
Robert begins to analyze the information to see how he can benefit
from the knowledge he has gained.

Example Six: After some careful analysis Robert devises a plan, he can
clearly see how he can benefit from all the trading and the work of
others without incurring any great liability. The next time Larry comes
to town, Robert tells him that it getting too expensive for him to
administer Larry’s trading, so they will need to work out a different
deal. Larry asks Robert what he has in mind. Robert tells Larry that in
addition to the fee he now pays for the services, he will have to pay
Robert 2% of any Bearer notes Robert issues to Larry payable in
Bearer notes. Although not happy about paying more, Larry does not
give it much thought and agrees to Robert’s proposition, “monetizes”
his note from Charlie and goes into the market to trade. What Robert
has devised is a system of Usury and Larry with giving it much thought
agreed to impossibility. Usury is a Wealth transfer mechanism; let us
see how the system works:

Larry comes into the market with a promissory note from Charlie in
the amount of 100 chickens. Robert “monetizes” the note from Charlie
and the transaction looks like this:

Chickens due to Larry from Charlie $100

Bookkeeping and Recording fee $0.5 chickens
Chickens left to be monetized: $99.5
Monetization fee: ($99.5 x 0.02%) = $1.99 Chickens.
Chickens payable to Robert from Larry = $2.49

Now Robert has $2.49 in Chicken claims that he can lend to the other
merchant is the market at whatever rate the market will bear.
Dana the dancer agrees to borrow from Robert the $2.49 at 10%
interest, when Dana is done paying Robert, Robert will have $2.49 +
10% = $2.739. This means that Dana will have spent $2.49 into the
local economy and then surrender $2.739 in Wealth (Labor) to earn
back the principal and interest to pay back Robert.

Repeat this process and you will see that Robert claims on Wealth
increase while the liabilities are carried by the people who supply the
Wealth and by controlling the supply of “money” Robert can control
the rate of interest he can charge the producers of Wealth without
incurring any liabilities himself.

So the Profit centers for Robert (Bankster/Money Master) are in the

fees he charges for the monetization and interest he gains for the use
of the money symbols. While those that borrow the money symbols
are bound and liable to pay Wealth in exchange for the use of the
symbols only Robert can issue and control (Usury).

There is a misconception.
Usury is ANY FEE, in money, for the use of money.
That means interest and dividends are usury.

If the fee is in anything else but money, it is not usury.

Loan a carpenter $10, and only ask for $10 back PLUS a some wooden
object, you're not engaged in usury.

Loan a carpenter $10 and demand $11 later, you're engaged in usury.

Usury is mathematically impossible to pay in a finite money token

system. Usury is a scheme to rob people.

Aggregate usury (sum total of all debt and interest) exceeds the whole
set of money tokens. That means a proportion of debtors will default
simply because the money does not exist. And they will be deprived of
their pledged property, used as collateral. Since usurers know that
the game is rigged, usury was and is nothing more than a
complex way for thieves to prosper.

THOU SHALT NOT STEAL!