I believe that the current banking system within the United States is causing more problems than it is helping to resolve. Specifically I would like the debate to be about whether or not the banks should only have to hold a minimum amount of the deposits that are made to them. Banking institutions currently with less than 10.7 million dollars in transactions are not required to hold any of the deposits as reserve amounts, institutions with between 10.7 million and 55.2 million must only keep 3% percent of the deposits made, and institutions with over 55.2 million dollars must only keep 10%. This allows banks to loan out the money that has been deposited into there accounts and charge interest on these loans. I would like to argue that these percentages need to be raised up to at least double what they are now in order to better protect the customers of these banks in the event that a mad rush occurs and the banks begin running out of money.
Hi! Not sure if this is frowned on, but I actually do think you're right (however, for different reasons than you present), and I'll be playing devil's advocate.
I intend to argue that the current reserve ratio's do not present a systemic risk of bank runs or financial instability.
Furthermore, I may be reading this wrong, but it's my understanding that the Pro position is hinting that bank reserves were the cause of the recent financial instability (please let me know if I'm wrong here), a position I would happily debate!