Sharia Money

Nick Real Deal

Vital Football Legend
Forgive my ignorance but I would like to understand how the Muslim finance system works. Charging interest on money is against Sharia law to my knowledge.

Firstly buying a house. They get a Sharia bank to buy it. The bank puts on a charge and takes monthly payments from the occupier to buy the house. Of course they could have 4 or 5 wage earners in that house so the repayments could be more affordable. Do they have an advantage over non Muslim buyers ? Could I go to a Sharia bank and do the same ?

Then there is the flash cars some of them drive, how does that work. Then business finance for their corner shop , the one that sells fruit and veg from the pavement along with 20 others in the space of half a mile. Does the Sharia bank own all this ?
 
Coffee House
Trevor Phillips is finally discovering the pitfalls of the term ‘Islamophobia’
Douglas Murray

Douglas Murray




The former head of the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission has once again said the ‘unsayable’. In a piece for the Sunday Times (ahead of a Channel 4 documentary to go out on Wednesday) Trevor Phillips unveils an in-depth new poll carried out by ICM (which can be viewed here).

The findings include the facts that:

23 percent of British Muslims polled support the idea of there being areas of the UK where sharia law is introduced instead of British law.
39 percent believe wives should always obey their husbands.
31 percent believe it is acceptable for British Muslims to keep more than one wife.
52 percent think homosexuality should be illegal in the UK.

The usual people are trying to find ways to quibble with the authority or depth of this poll. Their effort only proves once again that however bad the facts, some people remain so sectarian that they will continue to blame everything except the problem for the problem (‘How dare that bigoted polling company discover our dirty laundry?’)

But in some ways the Phillips piece is most important for what he himself admits. Among other things Phillips confesses that Britain has for years been telling itself a lie in relation to its Muslim populations – not least in pretending that they will blend in just like everyone else. Phillips writes:

‘Britain desperately wants to think of its Muslims as versions of the Great British Bake Off winner Nadiya Hussain, or the cheeky-chappie athlete Mo Farah. But thanks to the most detailed and comprehensive survey of British Muslim opinion yet conducted, we now know that just isn’t how it is.’

He even recognises that the authority for these views may in fact come from Muslim scriptures and traditions. After a discussion of British Muslim attitudes towards women he says:

‘We didn’t get to discuss whether the injunction at sura 4:34 of the Koran to chastise your wife falls under this rubric. I have no doubt that many husbands will claim that it does. The bland Koranic platitude, in my view, hides a clear invitation to legitimise domestic violence.’

For all of which – and more – Trevor Phillips deserves considerable praise. Once again he has proved able to break taboos which too many liberals in the UK are keen to continue enforcing in the face of all available evidence.

But a problem remains which Trevor Phillips himself continues to be a part of. While admitting to the fact that he and others woefully misunderstood the nature of Muslim attitudes in the UK, and while admitting that many British liberals continue to be too frightened to face up to the facts, he says near the outset of his piece:

‘When I was chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, I played a principal role in the creation of UK laws against religious discrimination — and it was a report that I commissioned exactly 20 years ago that first introduced the term Islamophobia to Britain.’

Later on he says:

‘Twenty years ago, when, as chair of the Runnymede Trust, I published the report titled Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, we thought that the real risk of the arrival of new communities was discrimination against Muslims.’

And then:

‘Non-Muslims who live and work in areas with a large Muslim presence have been uneasily aware of the emerging differences for a long time, but many are too worried about being tagged as Islamophobes to raise the debate.’

Well isn’t that the problem right there? I am as happy as anyone to see the liberal dams cracking when it comes to the big issues of our time. But it is harder to celebrate those causing those cracks when they are the very people who put up those dams in the first place.

It was the mainstreaming of the fraudulent concept of ‘Islamophobia’ and the whole grievance-industry set up by Trevor Phillips, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission and their ilk that made Britain so incapable of answering this problem any earlier. Even now Trevor Phillips remains principally helpful in waking up to things just a few years too late. So although his proscriptions for how to deal with this problem may be helpful, even this late in the day, they miss perhaps the biggest remaining ‘unsayable’.

So having mapped the fact that Muslims are uniquely unwilling to integrate into Britain, Phillips writes:

‘There are now nearly 3m Muslims living in Britain. Half of them were born abroad, and their numbers are being steadily reinforced by immigration from Africa, the Middle East, eastern Europe and the Far East, as well as the traditional flow from the Indian subcontinent. The best projections suggest that, by the middle of the century, the number of Muslims in Britain and elsewhere in Europe will at least double, given the youthfulness of the communities.’

Now if you accept the reality that Phillips now does accept – and that mainstream opinion across Europe is coming to accept – would one particular answer not stand out as eminently sensible at this juncture? Such as turning that flow into the merest trickle? If a community is currently causing a lot of challenges and looks like posing them for many generations to come, why on earth would you not slow that ‘steady reinforcement’? Other than out of fear that you might be branded an ‘Islamophobe’?

I know from experience what an honourable and decent man Trevor Phillips is. So here is a prediction. In ten years time he will agree with people like me that the numbers matter, and that it is purest insanity to continue encouraging through migration the growth of a population which raises so many problems of integration once it is here. Of course for another ten years those of us who do say that will be pelted with the same insults Phillips and some of his colleagues set in motion all those years ago. And when he does say it there will be as much rejoicing as there is today for these latest statements. The only snag is that ten years from now, when Trevor finds it comfortable to say this, it will be even later in the day to turn these trends around.
 
the study he conducted was flawed. for a start he sampled only from muslims living in area that has greater than 1 in 5 muslims.

This, if anyone interested, is where the majority of Muslims do not live in the UK. Polling from large cliques of dense Muslim populations that are actually a minority of the Muslim population overall will tend to include Muslims that do not want to integrate into British society, hence why they live in such Muslim-dense populations in the first place. Places like Bradford.

The study is the equivalent to looking at prevalence of disease in the UK population, where your sample data is only from the top 20% of socially deprived areas - your study becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, geared towards finding higher prevalence of disease than the population as a whole.
 
This thread has moved away from my question. How does Muslim finance work and are normal mortgage payers at a disadvantage. For a start how many wage earners live in a Muslim household ?

The houses they live in, do they buy them, rent them or what

I am trying to establish if Muslims have more chance of affording to buy a house than non Muslims and why?



 
Spurfect11 - 29/4/2016 13:43

the study he conducted was flawed. for a start he sampled only from muslims living in area that has greater than 1 in 5 muslims.

This, if anyone interested, is where the majority of Muslims do not live in the UK. Polling from large cliques of dense Muslim populations that are actually a minority of the Muslim population overall will tend to include Muslims that do not want to integrate into British society, hence why they live in such Muslim-dense populations in the first place. Places like Bradford.

The study is the equivalent to looking at prevalence of disease in the UK population, where your sample data is only from the top 20% of socially deprived areas - your study becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, geared towards finding higher prevalence of disease than the population as a whole.

Statistically as a sample it works perfectly and ticks all these types of studies boxes for transparency and fairness.

Trevor Phillips has simply told us all what many have known for years - there are no 'uncle Tom's' as Labours muslim london candidate would have it - there are just Muslim and non-Muslims and most Muslims have absolutely no interest whatsoever in integrating into the wider society.
 
SOMEONE needs to stand up and say that we are NOT going to have our accepted way of life, that is our legal system and laws changed by a minority group that has outdated ways of treating women (as an example), and let them introduce their own laws, undiscussed with our British native population and unagreed with us.

We need to stop the ghettos of this sort of thing before it becomes too difficult to stop. Where have the British stout hearted people gone?
 
Spursex - 5/5/2016 12:10

Spurfect11 - 29/4/2016 13:43

the study he conducted was flawed. for a start he sampled only from muslims living in area that has greater than 1 in 5 muslims.

This, if anyone interested, is where the majority of Muslims do not live in the UK. Polling from large cliques of dense Muslim populations that are actually a minority of the Muslim population overall will tend to include Muslims that do not want to integrate into British society, hence why they live in such Muslim-dense populations in the first place. Places like Bradford.

The study is the equivalent to looking at prevalence of disease in the UK population, where your sample data is only from the top 20% of socially deprived areas - your study becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, geared towards finding higher prevalence of disease than the population as a whole.

Statistically as a sample it works perfectly and ticks all these types of studies boxes for transparency and fairness.

.

no it doesn't - it only takes people from one quintile of the population. It's clearly biased.
 
Sharia banks - they don't lend, but rather buy (a house for instance) and you pay rent on it (interest free) until it is paid off. The item is then yours. The bank obviously makes no money from the customer, but rather invests customer deposits and shares profit made amongst the customer and the bank.

Anyone can have an account, which includes non-muslims. So non-muslims are not at a disadvantage.

And even though the way it is run is inspired by Islamic Law, I think of it simple as a quirk of a new bank, such as banks like Aldermore that now offer 100% mortgages to first time buyers. You could argue then that first time buyers taking out a mortgage with Aldermore are at an advantage.

Banks are run differently, the fact it is a "muslim" way of running it is not the interesting point at all considering non-muslims can have an account.

I would also argue that it is far more ethical of not charging interest on "loans" but rather investing and sharing profits. The downside are the uninspiring returns from said profit compared to standard interest rates a normal bank pays out.

Why are people like Tel getting hett up about this? The real disadvantage the working class have are not Sharia banks - but bank CEOs gambling with our money, expecting us to bail them out and then being tight with lending....all while they collect hefty bonuses. Why doesn't people like Tel and his "stout Britishness" stand up to that? after all, that is what is ruining our country.
 
It's OK saying anyone can borrow Sharia money but how many non Muslims have ?

The bank will make far less than on a conventional mortgage so it has to favour the borrower. Muslim families are larger and have more wage earners to a household or spread it further to a wider family who may own a number of houses all being joint owned with very helpful Muslim banks.

This is a suggestion not fact. It's a scenario where Muslim house buyers may have an advantage. If the house prices are climbing fast as in London for example , it is OK to sell a Sharia financed house early and make a profit quickly, then use that profit to deposit another and so on.

Imagine the scenario, a house is found for 400 k, I have 5 wage earners and can easily service the so called rental payments. No problem says Sharia bank we will buy for you but want 450 back at end of term or before. 5 years later house sold for 600 k, 150 into next project.

I am trying to establish the reality. What is actually going on. Do Muslims buy houses easier.

This new housing programme for all Londoners , who will be buying them and how ? Close watch on this.
 
as I said - non Muslims can buy a house through a Sharia bank so I don't see where your issue lies? it is not a "Muslim bank" at all.

and besides - if you had 5 earners you could all go in on one house not with the Islamic Bank of England and still make similar profits, as many do investing in the property market. Or is this about that your family is not big enough to have 5 earners where a Muslim family is? In which case again this has nothing to do with Sharia law.

 
The bank may reserve the right to lend to who they want to. What are the figures on lending from Sharia banks percentage to Muslims . ?

My issue is, is there one ? Do Muslims buy houses easier and why .





 
I am not sure and that number would be hard to come across I'd imagine. But it;s worth pointing out that there are other religious banks - yes even the Christian bank - which all have their quirks. and let's not forget religious charities that pay no tax, where you cannot guarantee that every penny going into such charities are not spent on funny business.

at the end of the day, like any bank competing with another (lloyds vs natwest etc etc) certain schemes will be advantageous to certain people. First time buyers get certain perks with certain banks for instance.

what I find interesting about Sharia banking is that the principle is that no-one should make money off money sitting somewhere. It is ethical and in my opinion is how a fair banking system should be . Obviously you would be at a disadvantage to invest your cash in a Sharia Bank compared to an ISA.

it's horses for courses and considering there are other religious banks, this is no big deal for me.

oh and you need at least 20% deposit to buy a house with IBE. most other banks offer 5%.....so that is on obvious advantage for those that cannot raise 20% deposit.
 
because i'd never given it any thought? why don't you go down to the bank and take one out if you are so fascinated? there's nothing stopping you!
 
Nick Real Deal - 9/5/2016 18:39

Govt scheme has been extended to Sharia loans so only 5 % is needed as deposit.

My gut feeling is sceptical.

why are you skeptical? for what reason? that it might offer a better rate than other banks?

newsflash - all banks can offer better offers for certain groups of customers.

there is nothing stopping me setting up a bank that does not create profit based on interest or charge it's customer interest. religion has nothing to do with it, it is just that Islam does not subscribe to interest based profit - which probably makes it the most ethical banking system around if you ask me.
 
A Swedish co-operative bank that offers loans interest free. Sweden is about as secular as you like.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAK_Members_Bank
 
in fact - historically and according the the New Testament of the Bible, usary (any form of interest back in those days) was forbidden.

perhaps Tel, being a proud Christian may be able to shed some light on this.

Here is a passage I have found from somewhere in the New Testament:

"And if you lend to those from whom you hope to receive back, what credit is that to you? For even sinners lend to sinners to receive as much back. But love your enemies, do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High. For He is kind to the unthankful and evil. Therefore be merciful, just as your Father also is merciful." - Luke 6:34-36

Where did Christianity abandon it's views of not charging interest eh? I thought Britain was supposed to uphold Christian values? I think humans just like the feel of money and will turn a blind eye when it suits!


yes it's a slow day in work.........
 
Borrowing money should have nothing to do with religion and vice versa.

I don't need a mortgage but our future generations will if they can find a house that's affordable.

I have no religion, anyone that has is weak minded and deluded.