Sure - one of the many ways that money can work for you is letting people borrow it.
Nobody works for themselves in a modern economy. The money has to come from somewhere higher up. Those below have to hope that the 1% are growing the economy so that more money is available for all. That’s not trickle-down, but the standard process of mild positive growth that the Fed is always striving for.
That’s why it takes as much effort for a bank to go bust as it does for a casino to go bankrupt.
And people have been condemning it as an evil as far back as Ur. Collecting interest was called “money farming” back when, and “usury” was something people were depicted as being damned to Hell for. The Old Testament says the ancient Israelites had the custom of the Jubilee: any debts older than seven years were voided.
And Christians for hundreds of years hated lending so much (whether it was usury in the modern sense or not) that they left it to the Jews. And then they vilified, imprisoned, or exiled Jews for their part in the practice - especially when the Christians didn’t want to pay them back. Oooh, lending, scary stuff.
The world has run on lending since long before capitalism existed, traceable back some 5000 years. What’s your point?
In relation to the current discussion– the 1% and their ability to accrue interest-paying assets seemingly without limit– that it can become the ultimate example of “rent seeking”. Think neighborhood loan shark rather than friendly banker.
And ultraprocessed foods are just the modern version of soft corn kernels. And landlords are our punishment for not building our own homes. And ballistic missiles are just an advanced form of spears. The modern world is terrible and horrible and awash in everyday luxury beyond the conception of people in the past.
What do we ban first?
And of course more recently back in 2008 the entire economy nearly collapsed because banks overextended themselves on complex debt-based derivatives.
Wealthy people also have the ability to borrow against their vast assets to acquire more assets. And while in theory they can get hit with a margin call in the event the market drops, banks would typically rather not have that happen with their ultra high net worth customers and will usually make arrangements.
Poor people usually just end up losing whatever it is they purchased with the debt (e.g their home or car).
So the moral of the story is that poor and middle class people debt can be useful, but it’s easy for them to get into trouble if they can’t make their payments. Rich people can use debt to get richer.