The Government Should Ration Consumables
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- None
BOP, Pro must show that the government should have an inalienable right to control the collection, distribution and sale of any commodity at any time.
Con must show that such a right should not be granted.
I am open to revisions via comments.
a cause and or particular agenda/goal.
Pro must show that the government should have an inalienable right to control the collection, distribution and sale of any commodity at any time.
Con starts off this Round by arguing that rationing inhibits freedom by limiting the individual’s choice, that resources can be mislocated if this legislation makes it. That rationing leads to government corruption because elected officials will abuse their power to distribute goods illegally and there may be a black market. That price is based on supply and demand, and artificially-set prices make it difficult to determine the objective value of a product. Rationing consumables would interfere with the natural flow of workplaces, stopping employees from accomplishing their goals the way they’re used to. That administration wastes costs and efforts into pointless supervision, directing, and monitoring. That hard workers would be getting paid less than they’re worth and would be less motivated. Rationing amplifies inequality and leads to more conflict and that it has negative psychological effects on society, such as fear.
I’m sort of confused precisely what Pro’s stance is because he does a lot of rambling. This is what I believe he is arguing. 1. That the government is for the people, by the people. If the people demand rationed consumables, then the government has the obligation and duty to act. But if the people have not voted on it or demanded such, then there is no need for the government to ration consumables. Pro, you’re supposed to be defending that the government should ration consumables.
Con retorts that people do not always grasp the complexity of certain issues and by enacting such policies, there would be more negatives than positives. Con also reminds Pro of the BOP.
Pro displays terrible conduct by getting unnecessarily aggressive and indirectly accuses Con of being intentionally ignorant. But there is a semi-good point. Primarily, when he says the government is The People. This isn’t strong enough to push back on any of Con’s arguments. Con is in the lead so far.
Con extends their arguments in the last rounds.
Pro does a lot of rambling this round and it’s hard to keep up with. They try to argue the “should” part of the resolution, by using a substitute definition. That ‘should’ could be used to describe how a certain thing functions. But none of the rambling this round addresses any of the points by Con.
Con used a very basic stance for their position by using all the standard arguments. Pro didn’t even argue the topic, so the point goes to Con for arguments. Neither side used sources, so that’s a tie. Legibility is a tie. Conduct to Con for Pro’s hostility.
Message to Mall: Please DM me. I wish to talk to you about something.
Why did I get credits for my vote in this debate?
This one has a month, so no need to rush for it. But would I be able to get a vote on this one? (It's okay if you don't.)
There is a voting setup in the description for first-time voters for rap battles, but you're welcome to vote according to whatever setup you have in mind.
https://www.debateart.com/debates/4604-rap-battle-sirlancelot-vs-rationalmadman
Lyricism- Wordplay, puns, metaphors. Creative lines.
Flow- Whichever lines sound the smoothest and don't go on for too long.
Rhyme- Self-explanatory.
Diss- Quality or quantity of insults. Whoever had the brutal/savager roasts.
(All 7 points go to the winner, but the above 4 qualities are talked about in the RFD.)
Thank you for the vote.
I am inclined to leave it conceptually broad, Western governments at a federal level.
What government? The Oceania government in Orwell's 1984? The ministry of magic in Harry Potter? The US government in reality?
And I gotta say, it does matter.