The Federal Reserve Bank of the United States ought to be abolished

Okay, well it seems we are getting off topic here and I really don't want to go into Keynesian or Austrian economics. That's for another time.Lets stick to the FED. "1: The Federal Reserve bank is necessary to maintaining price stability. I will explain further if challenged, but prices convey vital information to producers, consumers, workers, and investors in an economy. Sudden and/or unexpected changes in the overall level of prices can have adverse effects on national output by changing the terms of trade. A central, independent monetary authority, like the Federal Reserve, can help to maintain price stability that cannot happen either under a Gold Standard or under a free-banking system. "This was your main point.The problem with this statement is that Gold Standard economies don't require the need to be stabilized. Gold's price has pretty much stayed the same since Roman times (that's mostly where Austrian economics brings in ancient times; this subject) Up until 1914, (the time of the elastic currency's creation) the price of gold had stayed effectively the same price since Isaac Newton, as master of the UK Mint, set the price of it in 1717.And no, it couldn't happen in a free market because that doesn't happen at all. Businesses go under, and then a better business takes its place. Certain businesses aren't supposed to stay in existence forever because they're "too big to fail." Obviously they failed, so they were doing something wrong.Take General Motors for example. People weren't buying cars from General Motors. Mostly because people had been buying Asian cars like Nissan, Honda ect. For years, General Motors had been reducing the quality on their vehicles. People started buying Asian cars because of their quality and price. So when General Motors goes under, the government decides to try and prop them up by pumping money into the economy and giving General Motors bailout money. People weren't buying the cars before, so even if they had more money to buy them, they're still not going to go buy them.In the free market, that company would have gone out of business, and something better would have taken its place. And the economy would go on happily ever after. But for some reason, the government believes they know what's best for us. These brains up their in Congress know more than everyone else, so regular citizens can't be trusted with freedom. Yeah, that's pretty much it.Now that I have explained that, let me explain that the FED does more harm than good.The FED creates money from buying up our debt. This is basically counterfeiting! I know, its crazy, right!? No other business can counterfeit money, but the government can. The government is a monopoly on force. The FED buys treasury bonds (basically IOU's) and creates money from it. It also has other assets, like buying up debt of other countries. (The Federal Reserve Act has been amended 200 times, they can do create money from anything) So, excluding the fact that we counterfeit trillions of dollars and then let the government go wild with it, this new money causes inflation. So I will humor my opponent (and take out all those big words) and say that a little bit of inflation helps the poor. Oh but wait a minute, the poor don't really have enough money to spend in the first place, so somehow making the prices go up, allows them to spend more. Yeah, I don't know about that. Isn't that basically the same thing FDR did by forcing business to sell goods for a certain price? Oh yeah, it was, and the Great Depression lasted 11 years because of it. (Most depressions last 4)By the way, those IRS and FED balance sheets have a lot of stuff missing. And yeah, they pumped 7.77 trillion into the economy during the bailout, and they also shot some money over to Europe for awhile. You're right, I misspoke when I said they gave it to the government directly, but they gave it to banks. The banks now have 7.77 trillion dollars to give loans on. So now, they're receiving interest on money that comes from nothing and making inflation rise. Maybe Bernanke is just terrible with math. I don't know. And I said "was" in secret. Bernanke also can't keep his mouth shut. And my opponent argues that this EPI index is flawed, unlike the CPI because of outside factors with supply. So wouldn't things like cars and houses, which the CPI only takes into account, also be affected by supply factors? Everything has to be produced. Increases in the price of gas affects how machines that create cars are made. So, I don't see how this EPI could be too terribly flawed, only a more reliable source. High or unpredictable inflation rates are regarded as harmful to an overall economy. They add inefficiencies in the market, and make it difficult for companies to budget or plan long-term. Inflation can act as a drag on productivity as companies are forced to shift resources away from products and services in order to focus on profit and losses from currency inflation.[11] Uncertainty about the future purchasing power of money discourages investment and saving.[30] And inflation can impose hidden tax increases, as inflated earnings push taxpayers into higher income tax rates unless the tax brackets are indexed to inflation. -WikipediaSo apparently I'm not the only one who thinks inflation is a bad thing. It seems Wikipedia agrees with me. And since 1913, the value of our dollar has decreased and inflation has risen over 2000% But, gold stays the same for 200 years! Wow, that's crazy. And since its limited unlike paper, inflation barely even occurs. Plus our government really shouldn't be spending as much money as it does in the first place, seeing the ridiculous things our government pays for. And yeah, dude, REALLY! Keynes himself died in 1946. I don't think he was using data points from the 1970's. I'm thinking even he had to use some data points from a good number of years back, when many policies we have today were not around. The FED creates inflation through basically counterfeiting money and then either shoving it into the banks, or giving it to the government and letting them pump it into the economy somehow. Inflation, overall, is a negative factor in an economy. It destabilizes the economy. Also, when a recession occurs, pumping money into it doesn't always fix it. Even with money, people will still not buy from the businesses the government tries to prop up, such as General Motors. Businesses are not supposed to stay in existence forever because they're "too big to fail" In a free market, that business would go under, and a better business would take its place. So, main points. The FED destabilizes the economy through inflation.The FED disrupts the market by propping up businesses that, in a free market, would normally go out of business and something else would replace it.The FED creates our most unfair tax through inflation. Prices rise, and people have to pay for those increased prices. The lost purchasing power is received by the government. (Bernanke even said it was a tax.)The FED rarely prevents economic crashes. (I say this because my opponent did bring up one incident where the FED supposedly did this. I really don't know if this is true or not. The FED dilutes our currency and the decreases the value of the dollar.