Financiers, with their ability to monetize today future revenue streams, are able to generate instant profits which can be captured by them and, to a lesser extent, their clients and employers.

I don't know how to work it in or even if it is worth 'going there' but once the stream of payments have been incorporated using PV or NPV calculations the entire future has been included in the present.  The problem is the ignoring of the actual cash affect on the future.  

Let me explain.

Borrowing $100,000 over 10 years at 7.5% gives a quarterly payment of $2,509.15.  According to theory the stream-of-payments of $2,509 per quarter has the exact same value as the $100,000 in the hand.  But the actual cash-out of the loan, to the borrower, is $100,366.  

Now let's look at a mortgage.

A $225,000 home at 6% over 30 years with a monthly payment of $1,342.28 means a cash total of $483,219.82 for the property, $258,219.82 of cash-out above the selling price.  That $258k is money already spent, as it were, unavailable for other purchases.  This means the $258k is legally bound to go into the Financial Sector, increasing the total capital available to that sector, privileging the Financial versus the Manufacturing Sector.  

Further, since the Financial Sector can monetarize the debt payments, and the Manufacturing cannot, the former can effectively deploy 30 years of Sales (Capital) to the latter's 1.  The Financial Sector also removes the potential of the $258k being spent 'in' the Manufacturing Sector.

After all a buck, a yen, a euro, or a pound held by a consumer can only be spent once.

The more consumer spending, the majority of economic activity in an economy, is captured by the Financial Sector it must follow the less flows into other areas thus a positive feedback loop is established.  This feedback loop implies, to shorten the analysis, a lowering of total economic activity in direct proportion to the Financial Sector's percentage of the economy.

[As always, criticisms requested and appreciated.]