Iron County news. [volume] (Hurley, Wis.) 1913-1950, 1923-09-01
EDISON-FORD PLANS
ATTACK ON INTEREST
Abolition OF Rent No More PIauSl-
Bile Than Abolition of Pay
on Loans, Expert Shows.

II is no more unreasonable to pay in.
terest on a loan of money than to
pay rent on a house, declares William
T. Foster, Director of the POllack
Foundation for Economic Research, In
exposing the fallacy OF the attack on
interest charges by Henry Ford and
Thomas A. Edison In their commodity
money scheme TO do away with the
present financial system. Mr.. Fosters
argument is reviewed In the present
article which ia one OF a series pre-
pared by the American Bankers Assoc
citation.
THE Ford-Edison commodity money
plan is regarded as a step toward the
abolition of all interest charges" Mr..
Foster says Interest says the
Dearborn Independent, is tax that
few ancient tyrants would have dared
impose. Interest in actual modern
practice Is a continuance whereby all
production is taxed by parasites. and
whereby money is given supremacy
over men. material and management
which 1t cannot sustain
Renting Money
''But is there really anything more
terrible about paying for the use OF
money than about paying for the use
Of anything else2 Suppose farmer
finds himself In need of a harvesting
machine, and without enough money
to buy one. In that case he can either
borrow a machine OF Neighbor Brown
or borrow money and buy machine,
The farmer would consider It right
to pay In some way for the use OF the
machine Why should he expect to
borrow money-which is honored In
the markets in payment for the same
without paying for the use
of the money?
Now let us suppose that the farm
er uses the machine so successfully
that he saves a thousand dollars.
With that money he can buy farm
and he can let Neighbor Brown have
the use OF II, NeighboT Brown natU.
rally would expect to pay rent. In
stead Of buying the farm, however, he
could lend the thousand dollars to his
neighbor In order that his neighbor
might buy the farm. In that case
Neighbor Brown should expect TO pay
for the rent of the money. All this
seems clear. When the transactions
are as simple as these 1t is plain that
there is Just as great propriety In
charging for the use Of money as IN
charging for the use of things that
money will buy.
Loaned Money Builds a School
I'VE may assume. however, that the
farmer does not want to buy land and
Neighbor Brown does not want to
borrow money. In that case the
farmer deposits his thousand dollars
in a bank and the bank pays him In
terest for the use of his money But
the bank can pay interest only II Il
makes profitable use OF his money
Now the bank finds that the city
needs a high-school building. and has
decided 20 borrow enough money 10
construct 1t. II order to obtain the
money the city~has Issued bonds, each
Of which is a promise TO pay one thou
sand dollars at q specified date. and
interest In the meantime at specified
rate. The bank buys one Of these
bonds. Thus the farmer has had a
part In providing the city with q
school building: and the farmer has
just az much right to expect interest
for the use Of his money as though be
had loaned the money directly or in
directly 10 Nelghbor Brown"