The Instigator
revleader5
Pro (for)
Losing
16 Points
The Contender
invertman
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

The US needs to abolish the Federal Reserve.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/23/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,982 times Debate No: 882
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (10)

 

revleader5

Pro

This is a 4 round debate. For the first round give 1 paragraph about your side.

I am on the side of abolishing the Federal Reserve. It wastes tax dollars because it is a private company. The IRS is also private. This is also a scary thing because this means that a private company has control over all of the money we use, they could do anything they want with it.
invertman

Con

The U.S. needs a central bank for a number of reasons; to function as the bank for the United States government, to provide check-clearing, to enact monetary policy and control inflation, to act as a deposit holder for U.S. banks, to efficiently facilitate exchanges between banks, to distribute currency, and to regulate banks. The Federal Reserve is neither directly tax funded nor is it a private company. It is funded by the interest it receives from bonds put out by the U.S. Treasury Department

(http://www.federalreserveeducation.org...).

I will not be debating the merits of federal bonds because this falls under fiscal policy and is not controlled by the Federal Reserve. Also, the Federal Reserve is unrelated to the IRS, and the IRS has no place in this discussion.

(Note: In response to the previous debate criticism of where sources were located, I have decided to post links whenever a fact is either controversial or I am directly responding to an unsupported claim by the opposition)
Debate Round No. 1
revleader5

Pro

I am not saying that the country has no need for it. i am saying that the US needs to make it a government organization.
invertman

Con

That is a completely different argument, and a contradiction to what you said in your opening paragraph. I will quote you:

"I am on the side of abolishing the Federal Reserve."

Abolition does not mean converting the Federal Reserve into a government organization, which it already is. If your most recent statement, "I am not saying that the country has no need for it. i am saying that the US needs to make it a government organization" is what you believe, then why did you entitle the debate "The US needs to abolish the Federal Reserve" and take the Pro side.

If you wish to argue the point you said you would defend, we can continue. Otherwise, your last statement is essentially the same as the Con side.
Debate Round No. 2
revleader5

Pro

In your last debate this is exactly the side that crutherford took. It is no different except coming from me.
invertman

Con

If you wish to have a debate with me about the Federal Reserve, please, define what you really mean by your position before you challenge me to a debate. The title and opening line of the debate seems to give the impression that the U.S. should either have a central bank, the Federal Reserve, or it should not. I did not come to debate a change in the running of the Federal Reserve because that is not what the title of this debate implies.

So far, you have put together no support for your argument and failed to define what your position is. You cannot say you maintain the same side as crutherford because you are not him.

I wonder if you actually read crutherford's arguments, because he clearly did not believe that the federal reserve had a purpose and should simply be turned into a government organization (which it already is). Look at the Act he quotes.

I would ask you to read up on the federal reserve before debating me instead of simply repeating some general rhetoric you may have heard. I believe in order to have a real debate, my opponent must have at least a partial knowledge of the topic and a definite position.

This is an either/or argument: Either the federal reserve should exist or it shouldn't. My question to my opponent is what side are you on, and why.
Debate Round No. 3
revleader5

Pro

The Federal Reserve is not a government organization. I invite you to quote what it is stated on the wikipedia page, and post a link to the page too. It clearly says the federal reserve it quasi-private. This means a private company has control over this country's money.

"You cannot say you maintain the same side as crutherford because you are not him." That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. So because I'm not him, I can't be on the same side as him?
invertman

Con

As anyone reading can observe, my opponent has done nothing to defend his position, has never defined his position, and has refused to debate the issue.

Wikipedia is not by any sense a reliable source, and would never be considered as a reliable source in any scholarly journal or research paper. Also, when wikipedia names its source, it does not cite the government definition but simply a word used to describe it

Quasi-private does not mean private, nor private leaning. It simply means part-government, part-private. In a way, this reflects the federal reserve, but only because it is not directly funded by tax money. However, like other quasi-private or independent government organizations, the policy makers are all appointed by the government, it is not a for profit organization, and its legal purpose is for the public good.

In response to your last statement, I was saying you cannot say you have the same position as another because you cannot say your assuming someone else's argument. You can say you agree with someone else, but you can't say you are going to speak for someone else.

As anyone can see, this debate has gotten well off track because my opponent refuses to debate the issue. He has not even responded to any of my original points and has not defended any of his positions on the issue. My opponent seems to never intend this to be a real debate and has only wasted both of our time. I would encourage those reading to vote on the merits of the discussion, and I will continue discussing this topic with anyone who is willing in the comments section.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by mv 8 years ago
mv
central banking and fed = new world order. there is no law requiring us to pay taxes let alone pay into a private company. "the federal reserve is no more federal than federal express". freedom to fascism my friends.
Posted by clsmooth 8 years ago
clsmooth
I fully understand the Fed and still oppose it. The non-monetary functions it provides are things it actually does do well (check clearing, for example), but those things could be handled, easily, by the free market.
Posted by invertman 8 years ago
invertman
I agree. I think a lot of people are wary of monetary policy being controled by an independent organization within the government, but they fail to address or understand that the central bank does a lot more than just make monetary policy decisions.
Posted by clsmooth 8 years ago
clsmooth
invertman wins again. This is a problem with the anti-Fed case: So many people articulate it so poorly.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by ConservativePolitico 4 years ago
ConservativePolitico
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: *trollface*
Vote Placed by Chob 8 years ago
Chob
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by mv 8 years ago
mv
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Projectilefetus 8 years ago
Projectilefetus
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by andrewsnell 8 years ago
andrewsnell
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by aaltobartok 8 years ago
aaltobartok
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by clsmooth 8 years ago
clsmooth
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by revleader5 8 years ago
revleader5
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by LandonWalsh 8 years ago
LandonWalsh
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by invertman 8 years ago
invertman
revleader5invertmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03