The Federal Reserve System

This debate has gotten stale, and I mean so stale that it is pathetic, your repetitive stupid argument is enough to make me sick. So I'm going to sum your paragraphs up in one sentence because they aren't worth the effort of copy pasting, or the words they take up, or having them repeated again, so here you go: "The constitution doesn't matter because the federal reserve is good" No, the constitution is the supreme law of the land, it doesn't matter if the government says it is beneficial, it is not, and even if it was that does not overrule the constitution, it needs to be amended before the federal reserve could happen, no amendment has been passed doing that, and the constitution dress not give the courts the power to amend the constitution. Next, your three clauses only mean that congress has the power to make offices and do their jobs. "The 10th Amendment is old, he states only have the power that the Federal government are willing the give them, the Supremacy Clause is used to justify this." No, this is not only wrong, it is irrelevant, for one we are called the United States, not the federal government. Next off, the tenth amendment said that the federal government only has the powers given by the constitution. "Congress made the federal reserve even though it was not given that power in the constitution, the federal reserve is constitutional because the courts say so" This is a logical fallacy, you are saying that it is constitutional because the courts say so, it violates the constitution, it's unconstitutional, period, your entire debate is based on saying something along the lines of "the government is always right and they said so" "Inflation and fallacy of composition Individual savings is good for that person, but not for an economy. In an economy, savings are idle resources. Idle resources need to be employed to expand the economy. A statement that savings are good for a group is a fallacy of composition." What the, did you ever read the wealth of nations? Apparently not, wait, WHAT THE HELL THEN ARE YOU DOING DEBATING ECONOMICS THEN!!!!!!!!!??????????!!!!!! Two people looking for personal gain can benefit each other, that's how it works, no wonder your debate is always "the government is always right", you're a FREIKING COMMUNIST!!!!! Inflation motivates people to spend or invest hoarded legal tender before value decreases. This debate has gotten stale, and I mean so stale that it is pathetic, your repetitive stupid argument is enough to make me sick. So I'm going to sum your paragraphs up in one sentence because they aren't worth the effort of copy pasting, or the words they take up, or having them repeated again, so here you go: "The constitution doesn't matter because the federal reserve is good" No, the constitution is the supreme law of the land, it doesn't matter if the government says it is beneficial, it is not, and even if it was that does not overrule the constitution, it needs to be amended before the federal reserve could happen, no amendment has been passed doing that, and the constitution dress not give the courts the power to amend the constitution. Next, your three clauses only mean that congress has the power to make offices and do their jobs. "The Fed is constitutional because the courts say so." "Individual savings is good for that person, but not for an economy. In an economy, savings are idle resources. Idle resources need to be employed to expand the economy. A statement that savings are good for a group is a fallacy of composition." Did you ever read the wealth of nations? No, WHAT THE HELL THEN ARE YOU DOING DEBATING ECONOMICS!!??? More savings means more investment means more jobs means better economy, period. Two people searching for personal gain can help each other, commie. "Inflation is good, trust me, I never even read the wealth of nations" "Inflation is good, for the government, he he he" "Fiat legal tender banking system is extremely fragile and requires a highly regulated environment. Fiat currency will not be accepted in a free market of currencies, the government's must designate them as legal tender. Nonredeemable currencies do not have the restraints of scarcity thus nullify rules of supply and demand. An free market is just dangerous without the rules of scarcity. With a free market of fiat currencies, would allow banks to create as much money as possible at any time, the Federal Reserve limits this will tough standards and reserve requirements. The excesses of the 2008 Crises when a handful of banks were able to cause the longest recession since the Great Depression." Who is going to regulate the banking system, maybe the Federal Trade commission, the Fed is no more capable than them, in fact they are less. Yeah, I win.