• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Benefits of National Banking

How should the Federal Reserve be Handled


  • Total voters
    7

Csareo

Member
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
72
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
If I could have one wish before I die, it would be the abolition of free market banking. Don't get me wrong, I love capitalism and socialism alike, but the perks here are substantial. With a sole National Bank, we can cut the debt ceiling in half, cut taxes, start up new programs, circulate inner growth to an all time high, and wall street wouldn't be pissing on you anymore. I see but two arguments in its way....

"Oh golly, if the federal reserve was our sole bank, than they would freely set interest rates and the stock market would collapse"

Two Problems....

1. This would only be true if the government was trying to destroy the economy.

2. The opportunity-cost/trade off, far outweigh that of the stock market investment stream.

Two Solutions...

1. Basic constitutional clauses restrict overtly high inflation rates, or overtly low ones.

2. If the stock market issue was truly a burden, I suppose some sort of investment commitee, board, or even elected body could be formed -_-

Anyways, I want the populous opinion, so lay it on me.
 
You have 23 posts so far. Does that mean 23 new threads?
 
You have 23 posts so far. Does that mean 23 new threads?

My strategy is to piss off as many conservative/libertarians as possible. The solution is providing as many logical threads as possible. Good Day :2wave:
 
My strategy is to piss off as many conservative/libertarians as possible. The solution is providing as many logical threads as possible. Good Day :2wave:

Strategy for what. I can't even follow your idea on this one. Cut the debt in half how? How would you constitutionally restrict inflation? Etc.
 
Strategy for what. I can't even follow your idea on this one. Cut the debt in half how? How would you constitutionally restrict inflation? Etc.

It takes people off beat when you make 12 forums denouncing conservative idealism. How about you answer my questions on the other forum, while I answer yours here....

[1] The debt is maintained at a flat rate as a part of the budget. For example, if we added two trillion dollars into the economy through a national bank, you wouldn't need to keep maintaining a high debt, allowing us to decrease the ceiling overtime. A slow process, but one that can get us to 50% debt. I.E Something Rand Paul claims he can do by abolishing taxes -_-

[2] You can limit the power of setting inflation rates by law. Like everything else in the US. Pretty irrelevant anyways, as that would be of the assumption that the US economy was out to hurt you.
 
It takes people off beat when you make 12 forums denouncing conservative idealism. How about you answer my questions on the other forum, while I answer yours here....

[1] The debt is maintained at a flat rate as a part of the budget. For example, if we added two trillion dollars into the economy through a national bank, you wouldn't need to keep maintaining a high debt, allowing us to decrease the ceiling overtime. A slow process, but one that can get us to 50% debt. I.E Something Rand Paul claims he can do by abolishing taxes -_-

[2] You can limit the power of setting inflation rates by law. Like everything else in the US. Pretty irrelevant anyways, as that would be of the assumption that the US economy was out to hurt you.

You really think that inflation rates are set? Other than wage and price controls, inflation rates are based on what happened with prices, not determined beforehand. Supply and demand, a much more concrete theory than your home brew.

So your strategy is to attack conservative idealism. Sounds like a tactic without an objective.
 
You really think that inflation rates are set? Other than wage and price controls, inflation rates are based on what happened with prices, not determined beforehand. Supply and demand, a much more concrete theory than your home brew.

So your strategy is to attack conservative idealism. Sounds like a tactic without an objective.

You can't predefine a set rate, but flexible rates. Like 1-8%. Ensuring that no matter how much inflation, the citizens can't be abused. Is that satisfactory?
 
You can't predefine a set rate, but flexible rates. Like 1-8%. Ensuring that no matter how much inflation, the citizens can't be abused. Is that satisfactory?

Let's see how abused the citizens will be when inflation hits 15% when your government set rate is only 8%, these are assurances you can't explain either how they happen or how they would work. Magic is a poor even omit policy. Or would you prefer the term voodoo?
 
You can't predefine a set rate, but flexible rates. Like 1-8%. Ensuring that no matter how much inflation, the citizens can't be abused. Is that satisfactory?

Solution: You change the law!!!! *clap* *clap*

Inflation rates can be changed as easily as federal budgets can.Laws expire and need to be renewed, usually with changes. Stop dropping points, as this is the only one you have defended.
 
Solution: You change the law!!!! *clap* *clap*

Inflation rates can be changed as easily as federal budgets can.Laws expire and need to be renewed, usually with changes. Stop dropping points, as this is the only one you have defended.

Not sure if you are arguing with yourself but perhaps the definition of inflation would be helpful for you:
2.
ECONOMICS
a general increase in prices and fall in the purchasing value of money.
"policies aimed at controlling inflation"

Unless you plan on repealing the law of economics, your plan obviously fails.
 
I'd rather go to a free market system, where reserves would be higher, banks would be smaller, and rates of interest for loans and savings would be in line with the true wealth of the economy.
 
Not sure if you are arguing with yourself but perhaps the definition of inflation would be helpful for you:
2.
ECONOMICS
a general increase in prices and fall in the purchasing value of money.
"policies aimed at controlling inflation"

Unless you plan on repealing the law of economics, your plan obviously fails.
?
Not really man. You simply change qualifications as the law renews itself. How do you think the current federal reserve board sets its interest rates?
 
My strategy is to piss off as many conservative/libertarians as possible. The solution is providing as many logical threads as possible. Good Day :2wave:

Ok, let me know when you start with the logical threads.
 
Ok, let me know when you start with the logical threads.

Of course my threads don't seem logical to a conservative. As a ultra progressive, I even tick off the moderates. :lamo
 
Of course my threads don't seem logical to a conservative. As a ultra progressive, I even tick off the moderates. :lamo

Yeah, I won't deny that there are things about some liberal/progressive mindsets that are completely incomprehensible to me.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I won't deny that there are things about the liberal/progressive mindset that are completely incomprehensible to me.

I guess were in mutual agreement. I can't understand the bull$hit that is conservatism, and you can't understand the bull$hit that is liberalism. We'll take this one to the polls.
 
I'd rather go to a free market system, where reserves would be higher, banks would be smaller, and rates of interest for loans and savings would be in line with the true wealth of the economy.

That sounds wonderful. But who would make sure the banks towed the line in a free market system?
 
People, people, it's "toe the line" not "tow the line".
 
You really think that inflation rates are set? Other than wage and price controls, inflation rates are based on what happened with prices, not determined beforehand. Supply and demand, a much more concrete theory than your home brew.

So your strategy is to attack conservative idealism. Sounds like a tactic without an objective.

The Federal Reserve tries to keep inflation around 2% using price indexes to set the target rates and interest rates to keep inflation in check. Inflation targeting helps make the federal reserve's moves more transparent which helps take some of the uncertainty out of the market.
 
People, people, it's "toe the line" not "tow the line".

Learn something new everyday. All this time I thought it was a nautical term. lol
 
If I could have one wish before I die, it would be the abolition of free market banking. Don't get me wrong, I love capitalism and socialism alike, but the perks here are substantial. With a sole National Bank, we can cut the debt ceiling in half, cut taxes, start up new programs, circulate inner growth to an all time high, and wall street wouldn't be pissing on you anymore. I see but two arguments in its way....

"Oh golly, if the federal reserve was our sole bank, than they would freely set interest rates and the stock market would collapse"

Two Problems....

1. This would only be true if the government was trying to destroy the economy.

2. The opportunity-cost/trade off, far outweigh that of the stock market investment stream.

Two Solutions...

1. Basic constitutional clauses restrict overtly high inflation rates, or overtly low ones.

2. If the stock market issue was truly a burden, I suppose some sort of investment commitee, board, or even elected body could be formed -_-

Anyways, I want the populous opinion, so lay it on me.

Well, looking at your other suggestions....


First, you would wind up with price controls, that would start to kill businesses who can't make a profit, so they start to leave. Then you put on capital controls to prevent that money from leaving, then to "fix" the problems you will declare that you need inflation to keep the system in check... Then you are in hyper inflation and your people become billionaires that can't afford a bowl of soup, and then your economy collapses.
 
The Federal Reserve tries to keep inflation around 2% using price indexes to set the target rates and interest rates to keep inflation in check. Inflation targeting helps make the federal reserve's moves more transparent which helps take some of the uncertainty out of the market.

Yes they do, since 2012. Our OP is looking to mandate the inflation rate, not just influence it. So many factors go into how inflation happens including such external factors as currency exchange rates. Not even the most totalitarian states have succeeding setting inflation rates. Most countries try to keep it from any big changes.
 
Yes they do, since 2012. Our OP is looking to mandate the inflation rate, not just influence it. So many factors go into how inflation happens including such external factors as currency exchange rates. Not even the most totalitarian states have succeeding setting inflation rates. Most countries try to keep it from any big changes.

Would you be in favor of national banking if there was a set process of controlling inflation? As you can see, I don't even want the national bank to be the sole bank. I wish for tax incentives to push people towards the federal reserve. Unfortunately, this is not realistic, as the house refuses to put anymore into the federal reserve bank.
 
Would you be in favor of national banking if there was a set process of controlling inflation?

I'm not sure I'm either for a national bank or against one. What kind of set processes are you describing in controlling inflation? Inflation is a result of market and monetary forces that can be influenced but not controlled.

As you can see, I don't even want the national bank to be the sole bank.

Where would I see this on this thread? You seem to have this vision of how you want things to work, but I don't see how you envision things being, or the results that you are seeking. Your thoughts are disjoint and hard to follow.[/QUOTE]

I wish for tax incentives to push people towards the federal reserve.

Again, you have this grand solution in your head but it isn't coming across in this thread. Tax incentives to do what towards the Federal Reserve? What alternative are you proposing as an alternative?

Unfortunately, this is not realistic, as the house refuses to put anymore into the federal reserve bank.

I can't tell whether it is realistic or not as it isn't clear what system you are proposing. "house" as in US House of Representatives? "put anymore"--I'm assuming a typo, but put anymore of what?

You have clearly spent a lot of time thinking about this subject, but you seem all over the map in expressing information without a clear end point. Start with telling what system you want and maybe we can tackle the issues and benefits later. My 2 cents.
 
Back
Top Bottom