The Wall Street Protests Are Justified

I will first more closely examine my opponent's case, then I will go back over my own. Looking now to my opponents case, my opponent's first point is regarding how the Federal Reserve printing of money is in essence "stealing from every person using the dollar as currency". What he has so conveniently forgotten however, is two imperative items: 1) The printing of such high amounts of money is imperative to the survival of the United States. The goal of printing this money is to lessen the actual value of U.S. debt's held by China and Japan. Look further into the issue, if the United States prints little money, the value of the dollar goes up, and the U.S. debt goes up higher. If they print more, the United States debt becomes less valuable. The printing of this money is absolutely imperative in order to keep our 15 trillion dollar deficit under control. The Federal Reserve Board is not acting to simply enable the "wealthy" but rather to save the nation's financial system and currency. 2) The supposed "stealing from the people" is utterly false. Despite the printing of large quantities of money to offset United States debt, inflation has risen at a healthy pace. According to the Economist, in an article printed on February 15th, 2011, the United States should shoot for "the target rate from 2% to around 3% or 4%, the debt effect should be a salutary one".("http://www.economist.com...) Stealing from the people would imply weakening the power of the dollar, however, the inflation that has given way due in part to U.S. printing is at a healthy and normal rate, defeating his argument further. Looking toward his argument regarding lowering interest rates: The lowering of interest rates was not an artificial act.It was a direct act. According to Steve Grubbs, CEO of Victory Enterprises, a viable venue in which to spur economic growth is to lower interest rates. A long time venue of economic growth, home ownership, is controlled by the interest rates. It's simple logic: you lower interest rates, more people buy, you heighten interest rates, the more people don't buy. The lowering of interest rates is a successful tool (in most cases) to combat sluggish economic growth and revitalize the economy. Looking back over my own points: 1) My opponent has argued that the end goal of the Wall Street Protests was not to destroy Capitalism, however it ultimately is. According to Herman Cain, former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, and Republican Presidential candidate, the Wall Street Protest is "staged and driven by "anti-capitalism. ("http://www.huffingtonpost.com...) In addition according to The Guardian, an international recognized media authority, based primarily out of the UK, "The anti-capitalist protesters who have set up camp in lower Manhattan are becoming a fixture of the area" keyword: anti-capitalist. (http://www.guardian.co.uk...) The goal of the Wall Street Protests, according to my opponent, are to end the greed or corruption of the 1%. We have to make the distinction. Are they protesting the greed or corruption? Or are they protesting the wealth? Looking deeper, they are protesting the wealth. Why? Because greed and corruption do not play a part a purely capitalistic society. Of course, there are exceptions such as Bernice Madoff, however the vast majority of corporate executives are not greedy nor wealthy. Greed cannot be possible in most cases, as all businesses transaction are done in the faith of mutual benefit. A greedy corporation would be unable to operate, due to the competitiveness of the markets today. So, barring the greed and corruption argument, the Wall Street Protests are protesting the wealth of the 1%. They aim for a more even income distribution, and that, by an account, is not capitalism at all but rather a step toward socialism. The real goal, whether frankly stated by the Wall Street Protesters or not, is to protest the wealth of the few, an integral aspect of capitalism, and therefore they protest Capitalism. 2) My opponent contended that my 3 presented areas are not the goals of the Wall Street Protests. However, according to the Heritage Foundation, an internationally recognized think tank, these are the goals of the movement: 1. Complete bans on federal political contributions, replaced by public campaign financing. 2. Reversal of the "Citizens United v. FEC" Supreme Court decision. 3. Combating Washington's "revolving door." 4. Bans on gifts to federal officials. 5. Tax reform – eliminating special carve-outs and increasing progressiveness. 6. Single-payer health care. 7. Increased environmental regulation. 8. Reduction of the national debt through a progressive income tax and elimination of corporate handouts. 9. Federal job-training programs. 10. Student loan debt forgiveness. 11. Immigration policy, including amnesty for illegals. 12. Recalling the U.S. military globally. 13. Education mandates and teacher pay. 14. Massive expansion of public works projects. 15. Spurring China to end currency manipulation. 16. Reenactment of the Glass-Steagall Act. 17. Refinance all underwater mortgages at 1% interest rate. 18. One-year freeze on all foreclosures. 19. Free air time for all political candidates who gather sufficient signatures. 20. Immediate withdrawal of all troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. (http://blog.heritage.org...'s+Guide+to+the+'Occupy+Wall+Street'+Protests) As you can see, I don't have the time nor the patience to debate all these, I simply choose 3. My opponent only debated the origin, not the argument, therefore the argument now stands unrebutted. I urge a negative ballot today. Thank you.