The Instigator
The_Dark_Knight
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
stolethekimchi
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Force closing all banks and making interest on loans illegal?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/6/2014 Category: Economics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 598 times Debate No: 48549
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

The_Dark_Knight

Pro

The economy of the world, in the moment, is way too dependent upon banks. Even if this does not show so easily, this will start to show in a short time, hard to say how much.

The current amount of debt flowing in the US alone is around 70 trillion USD. Reason? Interest. It is theoretically and virtually impossible to pay back any interest. Here is a short example: there is a total of 1,000,000$ in circulation in the planet. 500,000$ belongs to a bank, 250,000$ is with 2 citizens. One citizen will take a loan of 200,000$ from the bank with an interest of 10%, he will owe the bank a total of 220,000$. The total amount of money on earth at a time would be only 1 million$, but the bank asked for 20,000$ out of thin air, to pay back which, the citizen will take a loan from the other citizen. Now the other citizen will be in 20,000$ debt, which he will not be able to pay back, this cycle will keep going until they realize there is not enough money to pay back the loan, since the bank wants to have 1.02 million dollars, but the total amount of money present is only 1.0 million, and sooner or later all his possessions will be mortgaged and become property of the bank.

Nonetheless, the only way to end this havoc causing millions to starve to death to fill the pockets of few, causing health issues to keep the health system running, is to destroy the banks. Because whether you like it or not, sooner or later, everything will be in the control of the banks. Countries, people, companies and everyone will go bankrupt, meanwhile the banks will only continue to take their possessions via mortgage.
Therefore these steps need to be undertaken;
1- Closing down of all profit making(interest based) banks, if they don't agree to take down the interests.
2- Eliminating any concept of interest.

Just my two cents,
Yours,
Noman. ^_~
stolethekimchi

Con

You see the principle of your argument is sound but your reasoning is flawed. I believe you are biased on the subject based on the tone of your argument and you have only self-serving intentions.
Debate Round No. 1
The_Dark_Knight

Pro

I believe this does not serve me in any way, as I have never been associated with any banks in my life until now. I apologize for any inequalities in my tone, but just trying to be reasonable about the unreasonable.
As to answer the questions of what to replace the bank with, here is something that can be an option:
1- Create government controlled banks which give out loans and hold money.
2- These banks will be completely non-profit, and will give out zero interests.
3- All the money in the banks currently will be returned without the initial interest agreements made on them.

Yours,
Noman. ^_~
stolethekimchi

Con

The mere fact that you now say you are involved with bank circumscribes my entire thesis. Government controlled banks that expand the power of the federal government and punish middle-class taxpayers. I believe my opponent does not have an understanding of economics that can par mine quov to quov. His bombastic language is simply a facade for his flawed reasoning.
Debate Round No. 2
The_Dark_Knight

Pro

My non-association with banks does not mean I have no understanding of economics. Nonetheless, I would like to request my fellow debater here to stick to the topic and the arguments provided here, rather than deviate off topic.
Anyways, government-controlled banks with 0% interest and a flawed system only is what I've proposed.
The fact that I'm debating on the fact that private banks should be closed, is in itself inspired by the amount of corruption and exploitation done by these corporations. At least government-owned banks will have not ultimately and eventually cause the collapse of entire economic systems and whole countries, as we're witnessing.

Yours,
Noman. ^_~
stolethekimchi

Con

I would like to point out that I was sticking to the topic, just simply pointing out my opponents clear misunderstanding of economics. The closure of private banks would place a severely negative effect on the American economy. The federal government would have to buy them all out, further escalating our already massive 16 trillion dollar debt and putting thousands of American's out of jobs. In addition, my opponent made a quite humorous remark that the private banks are more prone to corruption and exploitation, when in reality, it is the federal government who the most corrupt of all. My opponents Idea of closing private banks would simply add to the deficit, destroy thousands of jobs, and diminish the American free enterprise system.
Debate Round No. 3
The_Dark_Knight

Pro

>The closure of private banks would place a severely negative effect on the American economy.
Can you explain how the effect will be severe? Adding to that, The amount of severe negative effects that will be caused by allowing the banks to remain open will be way worse than if we decide to shut them down right now.

>massive 16 trillion dollar debt
Please do not forget that currently the American population is under a debt of 70 trillion dollars. That is the total amount of debt in circulation is actually around 100 trillion due to 87 trillion in unpaid liabilities. Please note the root cause of the debt, as I said before, is interest and the fact that private banks will eventually own everything. If we do not close the banks, the economy will eventually collapse and everybody will be on the streets.

>the government is the most corrupt of all
I do not doubt that, but this current argument is being held in the context that we want it to be, that the government is actually willing to help out. Nonetheless, I do not disagree with you there, that the government is not corrupt, but it will only take a completely corruption free government to do this, as it is pretty much obvious that no corruption free government will ever create non-profit banks.

The idea to simply bail out banks is not helpful, the idea to simply help out large corporations is only destroying nations. I would like to again point out, that if not now, the huge debt will eventually break this fragile economic system and everything will come crashing down, as no interest is ever possible to be repaid. Unless the government decides to step in and help out, bail the citizens out, help the people, help them mortgage, take out the banks from the equation, remove interest rates, there will be no future for the current economic environment.

Yours,
Noman. ^_~
stolethekimchi

Con

I actually did explain how the effect was very severe. Every person on this massive list will lose their jobs. Is this severe enough? http://www.usbanklocations.com.... My opponent failed to address this entirely. Also the 16 trillion dollar debt I was referring to is our national debt, not the debt of American citizens. What I was saying is that in order to close all of these banks, the government would have to buy them all out, which would make our debt skyrocket, considering how huge all of these banks are. I also want to address how my opponent says "it will only take a completely corruption free government to do this, as it is pretty much obvious that no corruption free government will ever create non-profit banks." He is making the assumption that the government will just automatically be corrupt free, when reality, they will not be and therefore as he said himself "no corruption free government will ever create non-profit banks."
Debate Round No. 4
The_Dark_Knight

Pro

Considering that the current unemployment rate, at 7.3%, I still believe a long term solution will be much more viable, rather than us going for short term solutions. I hope my opponent realizes that there are ultimately 0% chance of survival for any type of freedom, should the current banking system continue, in the long term. I want him to understand, that the 87 trillion$ debt is caused by the banks. The citizens are indebted due to the bank. The current amount of debt is basically indistinguishable, there is no way to return this debt theoretically. Please have a look at the current rates of starving, thirsty, and homeless in the world. According to the law, the only priority a financial institution such as the bank has, is to take care of finances, and to achieve maximum profits, by any means possible, while holding no regards to what happens to human life, social life or anything. And with that being said, I would like to conclude my final point.
Yours,
Noman. ^_~
stolethekimchi

Con

stolethekimchi forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by YeoldGoofy 3 years ago
YeoldGoofy
i think his reasoning is better explained by this article http://ximg.us...
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
And replace them with...? Where are people going to get loans from? Where are people going to keep their money? When you're closing down those banks, how are the people going to get their money out of them, especially when most don't keep adequate funds on hand?
No votes have been placed for this debate.