Debate Info

Yes No
Debate Score:17
Total Votes:17
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 Yes (4)
 No (9)

Debate Creator

moderatemark(481) pic

Should the Federal Reserve Be Comprised of Publicly Elected Positions?


Side Score: 6


Side Score: 11
3 points

The federal reserve bank was the start of a financial dictatorship so we should vote to get the hell rid of it

Side: Yes
moderatemark(481) Clarified
1 point

Do you mind clarifying that a little more? You have made a pretty broad statement without much support. Financial dictatorship? Are you saying that because they control interest rates and money supply? Do you propose that we leave interest rates unregulated or do you propose that this goes back to Congress? And does Congress actually have the skill to do this? There's a lot of complexity, where what is actually needed may seem counter-intuitive. For example, the Fed was particularly cautious over the summer when the dollar was rallying against the Euro. There was concern that the dollar would get too strong against the Euro. But wait a minute! Don't we want a strong dollar? Can't the average American buy more when the dollar is strong? Yes,

but it makes Dollar-denominated exports more expensive to Europe. That means Ford and GM to name just one small example have a hard time selling American automobiles in Europe. American exports suffer and our anemic economic growth slows even more. So, it's a very tight balancing act. One that I'm confident we'd guess wrong just about every single time if we left it up to popular vote.

Side: Yes
feelingtruth(2772) Disputed Banned
1 point

Ya well they create money, which makes the dollar less valuable, they create the value, but they also determine who captures the majority of the value, trickle down economics are basically a dictatorship, everything government does, is for corporations and the banks, not us. They dont give 2 shits about us, except for the fact that we keep their services running, we are essentially slaves. We have pretty much gotten ourselves in a situation that cant really be turned around unless we switch to a different form of currency, one that is not paper.

Side: No
1 point

I would like to think our collective ability to elect the membership of the Federal Reserve would be something we could be proud of, but since we end up messing the the choice for President (like Obama), I think we could really mess up the world economy if we elected the fed!

Side: No

To be entirely honest with you, I think that entire philosophy should apply to a lot of areas of government, but people don't necessarily like to hear that. There's a lot of areas that are deeply complex, like economics for example. And I know EVERYONE has an opinion and thinks they're right and that their way the best, but really it's the Dunning-Kruger effect. People seriously over-estimate their own intelligence and they tend to underestimate the intelligence of those who "know what they're doing". No one likes to be told that they're not bright enough to know any better, but in some areas that's precisely the case. Why don't we line up outside the surgeon's door when he's doing an operation and say "well, I think you should cut that vessel instead?" We don't say to the surgeon "well, my opinion is just as good as yours" because it's not. Yet we are collectively asked as a society to make decisions on things that we can't possibly have an adequate understanding of. The State of the Union address in the United States is always written on the tenth grade reading level, because on average it has been determined that the 10th grade reading level is as high as the average American understands. Yet, he's to make decisions on Economics, Health Care, Complex Environmental Law, Ethical Questions regarding stem cell research. I know everyone likes to pretend that they know, because it takes a very humble person to say "that's a little over my head". Yet I constantly hear people, politicians even, say things like "we need to do away with the Federal Reserve". And I just think to myself "oh dear God!"

All of this is eventually going to come down to public opinion and the crowd almost always makes the wrong choice.

Side: No
2 points

I feel like you would enjoy Plato on democracy.

But for the sake of debate, don't you think that by voting, it encourages the electorate to learn more about these issues, to understand the world more, that democracy may be valuable not because it gains the best leaders, but because it's best for the people, due to an instrumental value in it?

Side: No

No, we shouldn't elect the positions of the Fed, we should audit and/or end the Federal Reserve System.

Side: No
1 point

But who truly and honestly has the skills to audit the Federal Reserve? I remember when Goldman Sachs testified before Congress and they pretty much laughed in Congress's face with what the equivalent of: "It's not that the Congress doesn't have the power to oversee us. It's that they don't have the knowledge to oversee us." When you look at what happened to subprime, what happened to banks, what happened to derivatives, there's a very small group of people (Most of them work for industry firms) that truly understand what happened. Sure, there's a lot of OPINIONS, but that gets us nowhere.

To your point, ending the system would be easier than auditing, but you also kind of illustrate my point. I've worked in finance the majority of my career. And I occasionally here the "end the FRB diatribe" that based on some sort of political ideology. And I mean you no disrespect, but, clearly, you don't know what the hell you're talking about it. The free market does not have the skills to mitigate this.

Side: Yes

No, it is much easier to just get rid of the Federal Reserve than electing these officials.

Side: No

The Federal Reserve should be apolitical. It's not something that should be driven by opinion.

Side: No