Instigator / Pro
4
1377
rating
62
debates
25.81%
won
Topic
#1328

The colors God chose to design animals with were made with intelligent choices

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
6
Better sources
0
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
2
2

After 2 votes and with 10 points ahead, the winner is...

Nemiroff
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
14
1554
rating
15
debates
73.33%
won
Description

Here are examples so you get the idea.

When Nintendo was creating Pikachu the Pokemon character they made intelligent choices when designing pikachu.
The reason why Nintendo chose to design pikachu yellow was because lightning is yellow.
so Nintendo chose to color pikachu yellow to go with yellow lightning bolts. so the coloring was intelligently chosen

The weasel is white during the winter. but brown during the summer.

God created the weasel to turn white during the winter to go with the white snow. That is an intelligent choice.

Nintendo created Pikachu yellow to go with yellow lightning bolts. That is an intelligent choice

Half way through voting bump

-->
@crossed

Colors may have been chosen intelligently, or they could have been chosen randomly and only the best one survived.

-->
@Nemiroff

I don't think entire species of animals would die out because they have different colors then there environment. I don't care if Pikachu was designed perfectly or not. All i care about is the coloring was an intelligent choice. Nintendo chose to color Pikachu yellow because lightning is yellow.God chose to design weasels white because snow is white.

Please don't let this end with a tie.

-->
@crossed

This seems like a repeat pattern. How can you expect to open minds if yours is closed?

-->
@crossed

I did understand. Based on outcome, a design by intelligence is a logical possibility. All im saying is that selection from a large pool of variability can equally result in a perfect outcome. Besides, its not like the design of pikachu is trully perfect, its just really really good.

-->
@Nemiroff

I was hoping you would understand.

Serval is no longer my profile pic

this is a serval

https://docs.google.com/document/d/10iJpm5ix0BZHXwOMYS1Q9TOW7X_cV4apOOJ-b0AQuwg/edit

God is so amazing. God colored the animal species called Serval intelligently.

The Serval is my new profile pic

Anyway. The serval right ear has a cool design. but on the second ear is exactly the same design. God colored it intelligently

https://youtu.be/vl-PcTA9HHg?t=84

-->
@TheAtheist

And most importantly, i dont think the current trajectory is sustainable. If you have an alternative solution to an increasing bottom class falling out of our economy, and the macro effects of that, I would love to hear it.

-->
@TheAtheist

I understand your concern, but you have not addressed the increase in spending, and new businesses, especially in the regions that need it most. The increased purchasing would offset some of the increased cost, while the increase in business will necessitate more jobs, not less, which will be a huge boost for the economy.

Furthermore not all costs will rise. Rents (a large part of our costs) derives most of its value from the value of the land, not labor involved with it. Thus rents wont go up that much. Healthcare as well does not involve as much low wage work as the restaurant industry, so it will not increase much either. The effect you are citing is not as universal as you may believe
Only a limited amount of services will go up in price, but far from all, and far from the most costly ones.

In conclusion (of this post)
1. Increased patronage will offset costs and limit job cuts.
2. Many costs will not increase, including rent which is 30-50% of many peoples income.

-->
@Nemiroff

Giving poor people higher salaries won't do anything, it will just cause inflation. In order for the salary/price ration to actually increase, the amount of wealth in a country has to increase. A higher salary won't equal more wealth if all the prices go up as well. It would be extremely unprofitable for companies to be forced to increase their salaries, and so they will have to raise prices as well. Giving people more money will not cause a boost in demand if all the prices increase as well.

-->
@TheAtheist

Min wage is not related to corporate subsidies, but government assistance like welfare and food stamps for those who are employed are a payroll subsidy. Full time workers should not be qualifying for government assistance.

Your conclusion is not always the case. When companies increase in profit, they dont always raise salaries, not if they have no need to. So when profits decrease, especially these companies with more money then small nations, they can absorb some loss.

But more importantly companies will see an increase in customers. Sure stores in beverly hills might not see an increase, but their customers can afford higher prices. We have many many areas with no businesses besides fast food, liquor stores, and bodegas. That is where minimum wage will have the most effect and the increase in income can turn into a boom of new businesses entering this previously forgotten area. The areas that most need the income boost, have the most unmet demand, and will see the largest increase in patronage. Their costs may not go up at all with the increase in sales covering the lower margins.

-->
@Nemiroff

I'm also against subsidizing corporations, but a minimum wage is not related to that.

If companies are forced to raise salaries, they will raise prices to keep the same profit margin. This makes any minimum wage pointless.

-->
@TheAtheist

I think minimum wage can and should have a ripple effect lifting up near min wage wages up as well. However, a substantial part of our workforce is at minimum wage. Combined with rising costs, this substantial segment may soon be unable to effectively participate in the economy, and that will be a major blow to the economy. As income becomes increasingly concentrated, more and more people will fall into the paycheck to paycheck category.

One can view many of our entitlement programs as being a corporate payroll subsidy as many on government assistance are also employed. Without minimum wage/entitlement programs, many of these jobs would not be worth it. With a living wage, many entitlements can be cut, which could then allow for sensible tax cuts. Its time the taxpayer stop subsidizing these (highly profitable) corporations. Im all for small/new business exceptions/assistance.

-->
@Dr.Franklin

Perhaps. I have not looked at voting, dont even know where that would be. Im new to the site and navigating it on mobile. (Totally wish this had an app). Personally tho, i put more value on arguments then votes. Mass layman appeal is secondary to logic and reasons.

-->
@Nemiroff

Sure, you can't make profit without customers. But most customers don't work jobs that are below minimum wage, so no minimum wage won't affect them. Also, supply is important as well, the key is to find a golden ration between supply and demand.

-->
@Nemiroff

No, looka t the votes and yuou will understand

*cant make profit without customers no matter how low your costs are.

-->
@TheAtheist

Essentially arguing for a pure liberitarian approach of letting markets decide. I think its a great solution if you dont think too hard about it and use 1 sentence logic, but theres a reason no 1st world nation is liberitarian with this nation being amongst the most economically concervative of the bunch. I believe i made my case in one of the threads stating that demand drives the markets, not supply. If people cannot afford to spend, whats the point of opening a business? Cant make profit without costumers.

-->
@Nemiroff

There are plenty of liberal people on here as well (TheRealNihilist, PinkFreud, Ramshutu, etc). It just depends on who you interact with.

What are some of those "extremely basic misconceptions" about the minimum wage? I went on that discussion, and actually argued against the minimum wage, and I didn't see any misconceptions.

-->
@TheAtheist

The "stat" is based on the recent forum posts and debates. Things like minimum wage and liberals being attacked with extremely basic misconceptions, and noone comes to counter them. It could just be an anecdotal short term effect, but thats the feeling i got so far.

-->
@Nemiroff

Quite a lot of people on this website are liberal and atheist, actually. I don't know where you got that stat about conservative theists from.

As far as i can tell, most people on this site seem to be conservative theists. Which is great, debating with people who agree with me is boring.

-->
@Dr.Franklin

Im not arguing against god. Im arguing for science. This (should) has nothing to do with politics. BTW, are you capable of thinking beyond your tribal mentality? Did you come to a debate site in order to agree with everyone? Weak.

-->
@Dr.Franklin

Nevermind then.

-->
@TheAtheist

Never heard of him in my life

-->
@Dr.Franklin

Btw, this is not really related, but do you know the YouTuber "DrShaym"?

-->
@TheAtheist

Yeah there everywhere and they VOTE too many vote bias

-->
@Dr.Franklin

The way you said that makes it sound like there's an infestation of liberal atheists on this website.

great, another liberal and atheist

-->
@Nemiroff

This debate is unrated. So as long as you don't do anything illegal. No rules

Hello, this is my first debate. Any rules i should know about before i start?