That the quantity of credit available to american consumers should be sigificantly reduced?

My name is Melanie. I'm 16 and need help answering this question for my debate class. If anyone has any information on this topic I'd greatly appreciate it.





Thank You,


Melanie and Trudy|||Oooooh, debate. You're bringing me back a few years.





Affirmative arguments should focus upon the rising bankruptcies, predatory lending (both institutions and methods even among mainstream institutions), and potential for unsustainable cycles of growth, as well as distortion caused by an excessive money supply (one out of equilibrium; a Hicksian interpretation of the Keynesian IS-LM model is your best target here, but too much to explain in 8 minutes; best to focus on Federal Reserve white papers). There are two books that come to mind: "The Fringe Economy" and "Nickled and Dimed"





The negative should focus on adaptability of consumers and borrowers, so that they become more responsible with time; a strong case can also be made for equality of access, that it is the right of consumers to be able to borrow as they determine, not as some formula, company or government agency determines.|||which side are you representing do you agree or disagree from an individual stand point it would prevent you from over spending and living beyond your means . in the big picture its a win win situation even if there are delinquent accounts the intrest that credit card companies earn off every dollar you charge is so great that it would be diffcult for them to lose in fact they even get great tax shelters because of delinquent accounts thats why they go to the extent of hiring debt collectors tax break.