Thanks for the compliment, however I'm pretty burnt out on debating for now which is why I haven't taken up any new challenges. Piled onto that and I'm really busy with FINALS, AP summer HW, videogames, filming, and Boyscout stuff, it's unlikely i'll be debating anytime soon
Alright, so I did ALOT of research on the subject. Apparently, there have been a lot of presumed copies made,
- The Originals
- The copies made for the victim's families to view
- The copies made for the court hearing
- And the copies for the FBI
Now a COLORADO ( keyword colorado ) judge ruled all copies of the basement tapes be destroyed.
This would include the originals, the copies made for the court, and the ones for the victim's families to view.
It's unlikely the FBI would listen, crimes of this severity such as the most infamous school shooting ever wouldn't destroy evidence no matter what the circumstance.
Therefore it's likely the FBI still has their own copy of the basement tapes, of course they most likely won't release them unless they get leaked.
What's even funnier about this " bias " accusation is firstly I've voted for you in several debates and countered a vote bomb made against you.
Secondly, I actually AGREE with your position in the debate, the only problem I have is that you are being a coward by blocking me and were exhibiting very poor debate conduct.
Your petty attempts to " insult " me have only highlighted that you have no real argument against my vote aside from ONE taken out of context quote. THe rest of my vote still stands.
What I find hilarious is that you are so worked up over my vote made against you that you blocked me and are now being a coward and arguing with me without me being able to reply back properly.
Don't plagiarise other peoples votes please, it'll only make you look worse to the mods and other debaters. I'd personally respect someone who at least tries to make original votes yet fails than someone who just plagiarizes other peoples. Very insulting to the debaters, other voters who take their time to vote, and the mods.
]Considering that my opponent didn't PM me or argue against the definition in the debate and also considering he argued with the definitions I gave, it's HEAVILY implied he agrees with the definitions.
The redistribution of wealth is mostly exclusive to socialism and it's other forms. Capitalism does not call for the redistribution and believes in the private ownership of property and the free market.
Both of which are contradicted by the redistribution of wealth since if you believe in private ownership, you cannot believe in the redistribution of wealth. Free markets can’t really be “ free “ if the government is redistributing money to other people.
While the redistribution of wealth isn’t exactly only exclusive to socialism, my opponent very clearly demonizes the redistribution of wealth and since we’ve already established the redistribution of wealth pertains to socialism, this means my opponent dislikes socialism which is absurd or logically inconsistent.
You can’t be arguing for a free market and free private ownership but then also believe in the redistribution of wealth as capitalism contradicts that belief.
It should be noted however you can have a capitalist economy with redistribution of wealth which would be a mixed market. However as my opponent already stated, he/she is against the redistribution of wealth and socialism in general. The government literally runs on the redistribution of wealth so by this logic my opponent must be against the government.
Thirdly, you do bring a good point on the BOP, my opponent does actually state the BOP mostly rests on me. However I already gave part of my case regarding this with me giving a case for socialized medicine, education, and other social programs. All of which are government owned through the redistribution of wealth and could be argued they pertain to the means of production.
The definitions you sited such as the Britannica version define socialism along the lines of, the government owning the means of production correct?
Well firstly the government is RUN on the redistribution of wealth, and in order for the government to own the means of production they must REDISTRIBUTE the wealth from the wealthy to the government/public.
Not to mention the fact that me and my opponent already agreed on this definition so it's not underhanded. If my opponent argued against my definition then we could have discussed possibly changing the definition.
The article mentioned actually provides no claims of Bernie stating this at all.
No quotes nor any evidence at all.
The statement itself has a link to another article, I am unable to read it due to me not being a subscriber.
However, the portion I can see makes a claim that articles published in the 1970s stated that Bernie was in support of a maximum wage.
This is true that Bernie USED to support the maximum rate. However recently according to the Atlantic, Bernie's tax plan now is " [Bernies] said that his proposed top marginal tax rate will be somewhere between 50 and 90 percent"
Opinions change, Bernie doesn't believe in a top maximum rate anymore just like a lot of the stuff he said back then.
RFD 5: It’s like a video game you’ve never played, you may not have first-hand experience playing it, but you partially understand the beauty of the game itself.
Well deserved 8/10 by Pro.
Con:
Name/Artist: The Knocks, featuring Foster The People - Vicetone Remix, WOW a foster people song. Big fan of Pumped up kicks ( no joke intended I actually liked the song when I was younger even before I understood the lyrics ).
Beat/Instrumental: Average beat, pretty cliche beat if you ask me. Regardless a suboptimal beat to an otherwise solid song.
Lyrics: Not bad lyrics, most of the lyrics are too upbeat and feel good for my tastes. Regardless objectively I found the lyrics to be solid, not exactly something I’d listen to but pretty acceptable.
Singing: Like lyrics, too upbeat for my tastes. Aright singing overall.
Rating: Fairly solid singing and lyrics with a suboptimal beat. A 5 out of 10.
FINAL SCORE:
Pro, 34/50
Con, 37/50
DECISION:
Overall Con in my personal opinion overall had better songs that suit my tastes.
That’s not to say Pro’s song choices were bad, I did enjoy a few such as Ocean and Free, however, Con just offered more amazing songs such as Cataclysm and ESPECIALLY Running away.
All of this said, my decision for the winner is Con.
Imma go play some Dead Rising now. Goodnight. And thanks to both opponents for a well fought out debate.
RFD 4: Singing: Meh I didn’t care for it too much. I didn’t feel the singer had that good of a voice and sounded a bit older. Not that older people sound bad, however, this particular one just didn’t sound great to me.
Rating: A meh song by Pro, not horrible by any means but not exactly bad. Overall a 5/10.
Con:
Name/artist: Cataclysm by Au5 and Crystal Skies
Beat: Very wonderful beat! Sounded very galaxy theme and went well with the background! Very fantastic beat Con.
Lyrics: None so my decision won’t be based on lyrics on this particular round.
Singing: None so my decision won’t be based on lyrics on this particular round.
Rating: A wonderful beat song by Con, could definitely fit with a space-themed song! A well deserved 8/10
Score so far,
Pro: 26/40
Con: 32/40
Con is in the lead with 5 points, Pro will need a masterpiece song in order to win, or Con will have to post a really bad song. Regardless of the odds I will still give Pro a chance, let’s continue.
Round 5:
Pro:
Name/Artist: "Put Me Back Together" by Cheat Codes, featuring Kiiara
Beat: Very solid beat and gets the job done and fits the themes of this particular
Lyrics: Excellent lyrics that really capture its underlying themes of romance and breakups. Then again I still haven’t experienced a break up yet as I’m still in my first relationship going on 10 months. Just stating this just as a disclaimer that I may not fully understand or relate to the lyrics that well. Regardless of great lyrics on Pro’s part!
Singing: Solid singing, gets across the message. Not marvelous but not garbage pail levels. Pretty Good singing.
Rating: Solid beat and singing with excellent and deep lyrics regarding relationships and romance in general which may not be relatable to all people and there’s nothing wrong with that as it doesn’t distract from its beautiful lyrics.
RFD 3: Lyrics: Barely any although the lyrics that are there are exceptional
Singing: The singing that is there is pretty satisfactory, the constant fast paced lyrics really made the song energizing and catchy! Will definitely be added to my study playlist!
Rating: Fairly Good song, loved the beat and catchy lyrics which was overall very energizing and definitely will be added to my playlist. A well deserved 8 out of 10.
Con:
Name/artist: Here Con chose, Running Away by Taska Black and DROELOE, featuring CUT_
Beat/Instrumental: Very well done beat, very energizing and Inspiring beat, will definitely be added to my study playlist as well! Well done Con.
Lyrics: Loved the lyrics, very lovely and peaceful.
Singing: Very marvelous singing, you can tell the singer put a lot of energy and passion into the lyrics.
Rating: FAVORITE song so far between both sides so far, just an amazing song. I even plan on following the artist to listen to more songs from them now! Amazing job Con! 9/10
Scores so far,
Pro: 21/30
Con: 24/30
Con in the lead by 3 points, moving right along then!
Round 4:
Name/Artist: "The Little Things," by Big Gigantic, the Kasbo remix.
Beat: Aright beat, not particularly great but also not bad. Fairly solid beat with some nice parts.
Lyrics: Similar to the beat, not amazing but no downright horrible. Mostly forgettable.
Name and Artist: Here Pro uses the song, Free by Party Ghost and Restless Modern.
Beat/instrumental: Very pleasant song to listen to in terms of the beat very nice electronic score that plays well with the singers voice. Overall a solid beat.
Lyrics: Lyrics were solid, not exactly all that great but not terrible.
Singing: Singers voice was excellent and relied on only a little bit of effects. Very great voice to listen to.
Rating: Overall another solid song by pro, had a great voice and solid lyrics and beat. On my scale a 7/10.
Con:
Name and artist: The next song Con uses is Nevada by Vicetone, featuring Cozi Zuehlsdorff.
Beat: The Beat was pretty catchy and a wonderful beat that fits the song excellently.
Lyrics: The lyrics were solid like most of the songs on the list.
Singing: Voice, the girl in the track sounded really good and made the song pretty catchy to listen to. This is a prime example of autotune I don’t mind since it’s not overly obnoxious, the singer already sounds good on the parts without autotune, and it overall improves her voice on some parts of the song.
Rating: Overall a fantastic song, a great beat, solid lyrics, and a beautiful voice. Probably going to add this to my study playlist as well. Overall on my scale this would be the best song overall being an 8/10.
Score so far is 13/20 for pro and 15/20 for con.
Moving right along…
Round 3:
Pro:
Name and artist: The song Pro chose for this round was, "Years from Now," by Rameses B
Beat/Instrumental: Very addicting beat to listen to, overall pretty good beat and very catchy.
RFD 1: Greetings I would like to start off by thanking both opponents for a well fought out debate.
I’d also like to thank whichever opponent gave me the honor of being one of the judges, thank you I hope this isn’t the only time i’ll be doing this.
Thirdly I am not very fond of modern music however I will try to remain as objective as possible.
All of that being stated, I will now begin my analysis of this debate which will be conducted through scores for each song and then counted at the end. The opponent with the most points wins! My rating scale goes something like this,
10 - A masterpiece PERFECT
9- A near masterpiece AMAZING but not perfect
8- Very good song, not a masterpiece exactly but very good
7- Pretty good song
6- Solid song, could use some improvement but not bad
5- Average song not particularly great, but not particularly bad
4- Bad song, not terrible but definitely needs improvement
3- Horrible song in need of vast improvement
2- Pure garbage, needs to be completely changed
1- A pain to watch
0- Comparable to the garbage pail kids movie
All of this said and clarified, I will now begin my vote!
Comparing the richest person in the world who pays the most money to charity compared to Bernie who only makes 1 million dollars is a bit of an unfair comparison. Wouldn't you agree?
I couldn't care less how much time it takes for the government to spend their money, people make personal decisions of their own it's only human nature.
You also aren't considering the amount of money that goes to social programs such as welfare, social security, and Medicaid.
Or other services such as the police force, medical services, or the fire department.
The government officials itself only obtain a small fraction of their spending goes towards them anyways.
Besides even if it was a decent portion, I don't see as to why government officials shouldn't get paid a good wage considering the stress and skill a job of that nature takes.
Not to mention the fact you aren't considering time either.
Now which person do you suppose is helping the poor the most,
Billy:
- Is a billionaire who donates 500 million to charity yearly
- Doesn't volenteer his time, and if he does it's very few and far between.
Bob:
- Only makes a million a year so only donates 20,000 yearly
- Since Bob is a popular politician he focuses his time on aiding the poor through financing social programs and services such as healthcare for all, free college, and improving the infrastructure.
Of those two options, it's very obvious Bob is likely contributing more to the overall issue.
Also stating Bill Gates gives half of his money is quite simply not true, he does donate a lot but according to philanthropy.com, Gates only has donated 22 % in the last 17 years.
I couldn't care less what all voters are doing, which they aren't. The rules specifically state that the majority of rounds have to be ff to award a conduct point.
Too clarify, because my opponent heavily implied in the description that he/she will be arguing against socialism, that's what i'll be arguing against. I realize their position is a bit confusing however judging from the description, it's most likely a simple error we'll brush off as a dumb mistake.
Fair point, however, if you're going down this route than by logical extension you'd have to agree that people who are heterosexuals shouldn't have sex since protection doesn't always work.
Assuming they wear protection, I don't see a problem with them having sexual intercourse. Even then however, I feel they should be somewhat limited of how much they have sex and they should tell the person they are having intercourse with that they have a disease.
You still haven't actually proved his vote was a misrepresentation or bias
Stop copying my vote
Thanks for the compliment, however I'm pretty burnt out on debating for now which is why I haven't taken up any new challenges. Piled onto that and I'm really busy with FINALS, AP summer HW, videogames, filming, and Boyscout stuff, it's unlikely i'll be debating anytime soon
I'm kinda interested in the tapes, not as much as this Dylan guy but yeah.
Alright, so I did ALOT of research on the subject. Apparently, there have been a lot of presumed copies made,
- The Originals
- The copies made for the victim's families to view
- The copies made for the court hearing
- And the copies for the FBI
Now a COLORADO ( keyword colorado ) judge ruled all copies of the basement tapes be destroyed.
This would include the originals, the copies made for the court, and the ones for the victim's families to view.
It's unlikely the FBI would listen, crimes of this severity such as the most infamous school shooting ever wouldn't destroy evidence no matter what the circumstance.
Therefore it's likely the FBI still has their own copy of the basement tapes, of course they most likely won't release them unless they get leaked.
He probably posted his last comment and then had to go do personal stuff or something.
Omar hasn't been online for hours he didn't " run away "
What's even funnier about this " bias " accusation is firstly I've voted for you in several debates and countered a vote bomb made against you.
Secondly, I actually AGREE with your position in the debate, the only problem I have is that you are being a coward by blocking me and were exhibiting very poor debate conduct.
Your petty attempts to " insult " me have only highlighted that you have no real argument against my vote aside from ONE taken out of context quote. THe rest of my vote still stands.
What I find hilarious is that you are so worked up over my vote made against you that you blocked me and are now being a coward and arguing with me without me being able to reply back properly.
Well firstly can you elaborate and prove that I'm being " bias"?
This makes no sense since on a few of your debates I voted for YOU or was countering a vote bomb made against you.
You're just upset that I called you out in one of my votes and actually voted against you.
Honestly, I didn't feel as though your arguments were even worth my time when I was typing this last night.
Wow, I took ONE quote out of context and that equates to my entire vote being " inaccurate"?
Also, LMAO King_8 blocked me, probably because he's an ignorant slob with no argument.
Vote bomb is still a vote bomb
Don't plagiarise other peoples votes please, it'll only make you look worse to the mods and other debaters. I'd personally respect someone who at least tries to make original votes yet fails than someone who just plagiarizes other peoples. Very insulting to the debaters, other voters who take their time to vote, and the mods.
Thanks, this was a fun experience and i'd love to be a judge again.
Fourthly, the rules specifically state you cannot vote against someone for purely conduct points for just FF one round
]Considering that my opponent didn't PM me or argue against the definition in the debate and also considering he argued with the definitions I gave, it's HEAVILY implied he agrees with the definitions.
The redistribution of wealth is mostly exclusive to socialism and it's other forms. Capitalism does not call for the redistribution and believes in the private ownership of property and the free market.
Both of which are contradicted by the redistribution of wealth since if you believe in private ownership, you cannot believe in the redistribution of wealth. Free markets can’t really be “ free “ if the government is redistributing money to other people.
While the redistribution of wealth isn’t exactly only exclusive to socialism, my opponent very clearly demonizes the redistribution of wealth and since we’ve already established the redistribution of wealth pertains to socialism, this means my opponent dislikes socialism which is absurd or logically inconsistent.
You can’t be arguing for a free market and free private ownership but then also believe in the redistribution of wealth as capitalism contradicts that belief.
It should be noted however you can have a capitalist economy with redistribution of wealth which would be a mixed market. However as my opponent already stated, he/she is against the redistribution of wealth and socialism in general. The government literally runs on the redistribution of wealth so by this logic my opponent must be against the government.
Thirdly, you do bring a good point on the BOP, my opponent does actually state the BOP mostly rests on me. However I already gave part of my case regarding this with me giving a case for socialized medicine, education, and other social programs. All of which are government owned through the redistribution of wealth and could be argued they pertain to the means of production.
Very pointless statement to make.
The definitions you sited such as the Britannica version define socialism along the lines of, the government owning the means of production correct?
Well firstly the government is RUN on the redistribution of wealth, and in order for the government to own the means of production they must REDISTRIBUTE the wealth from the wealthy to the government/public.
Not to mention the fact that me and my opponent already agreed on this definition so it's not underhanded. If my opponent argued against my definition then we could have discussed possibly changing the definition.
I don't see what the point of that quote is, it was made around 40 years ago.
This is also contradicted by him donating 2 % of his earnings to charity nowadays so it seems he doesn't believe in this anymore.
The article mentioned actually provides no claims of Bernie stating this at all.
No quotes nor any evidence at all.
The statement itself has a link to another article, I am unable to read it due to me not being a subscriber.
However, the portion I can see makes a claim that articles published in the 1970s stated that Bernie was in support of a maximum wage.
This is true that Bernie USED to support the maximum rate. However recently according to the Atlantic, Bernie's tax plan now is " [Bernies] said that his proposed top marginal tax rate will be somewhere between 50 and 90 percent"
Opinions change, Bernie doesn't believe in a top maximum rate anymore just like a lot of the stuff he said back then.
RFD 5: It’s like a video game you’ve never played, you may not have first-hand experience playing it, but you partially understand the beauty of the game itself.
Well deserved 8/10 by Pro.
Con:
Name/Artist: The Knocks, featuring Foster The People - Vicetone Remix, WOW a foster people song. Big fan of Pumped up kicks ( no joke intended I actually liked the song when I was younger even before I understood the lyrics ).
Beat/Instrumental: Average beat, pretty cliche beat if you ask me. Regardless a suboptimal beat to an otherwise solid song.
Lyrics: Not bad lyrics, most of the lyrics are too upbeat and feel good for my tastes. Regardless objectively I found the lyrics to be solid, not exactly something I’d listen to but pretty acceptable.
Singing: Like lyrics, too upbeat for my tastes. Aright singing overall.
Rating: Fairly solid singing and lyrics with a suboptimal beat. A 5 out of 10.
FINAL SCORE:
Pro, 34/50
Con, 37/50
DECISION:
Overall Con in my personal opinion overall had better songs that suit my tastes.
That’s not to say Pro’s song choices were bad, I did enjoy a few such as Ocean and Free, however, Con just offered more amazing songs such as Cataclysm and ESPECIALLY Running away.
All of this said, my decision for the winner is Con.
Imma go play some Dead Rising now. Goodnight. And thanks to both opponents for a well fought out debate.
RFD 4: Singing: Meh I didn’t care for it too much. I didn’t feel the singer had that good of a voice and sounded a bit older. Not that older people sound bad, however, this particular one just didn’t sound great to me.
Rating: A meh song by Pro, not horrible by any means but not exactly bad. Overall a 5/10.
Con:
Name/artist: Cataclysm by Au5 and Crystal Skies
Beat: Very wonderful beat! Sounded very galaxy theme and went well with the background! Very fantastic beat Con.
Lyrics: None so my decision won’t be based on lyrics on this particular round.
Singing: None so my decision won’t be based on lyrics on this particular round.
Rating: A wonderful beat song by Con, could definitely fit with a space-themed song! A well deserved 8/10
Score so far,
Pro: 26/40
Con: 32/40
Con is in the lead with 5 points, Pro will need a masterpiece song in order to win, or Con will have to post a really bad song. Regardless of the odds I will still give Pro a chance, let’s continue.
Round 5:
Pro:
Name/Artist: "Put Me Back Together" by Cheat Codes, featuring Kiiara
Beat: Very solid beat and gets the job done and fits the themes of this particular
Lyrics: Excellent lyrics that really capture its underlying themes of romance and breakups. Then again I still haven’t experienced a break up yet as I’m still in my first relationship going on 10 months. Just stating this just as a disclaimer that I may not fully understand or relate to the lyrics that well. Regardless of great lyrics on Pro’s part!
Singing: Solid singing, gets across the message. Not marvelous but not garbage pail levels. Pretty Good singing.
Rating: Solid beat and singing with excellent and deep lyrics regarding relationships and romance in general which may not be relatable to all people and there’s nothing wrong with that as it doesn’t distract from its beautiful lyrics.
RFD 3: Lyrics: Barely any although the lyrics that are there are exceptional
Singing: The singing that is there is pretty satisfactory, the constant fast paced lyrics really made the song energizing and catchy! Will definitely be added to my study playlist!
Rating: Fairly Good song, loved the beat and catchy lyrics which was overall very energizing and definitely will be added to my playlist. A well deserved 8 out of 10.
Con:
Name/artist: Here Con chose, Running Away by Taska Black and DROELOE, featuring CUT_
Beat/Instrumental: Very well done beat, very energizing and Inspiring beat, will definitely be added to my study playlist as well! Well done Con.
Lyrics: Loved the lyrics, very lovely and peaceful.
Singing: Very marvelous singing, you can tell the singer put a lot of energy and passion into the lyrics.
Rating: FAVORITE song so far between both sides so far, just an amazing song. I even plan on following the artist to listen to more songs from them now! Amazing job Con! 9/10
Scores so far,
Pro: 21/30
Con: 24/30
Con in the lead by 3 points, moving right along then!
Round 4:
Name/Artist: "The Little Things," by Big Gigantic, the Kasbo remix.
Beat: Aright beat, not particularly great but also not bad. Fairly solid beat with some nice parts.
Lyrics: Similar to the beat, not amazing but no downright horrible. Mostly forgettable.
RFD 2: Pro:
Name and Artist: Here Pro uses the song, Free by Party Ghost and Restless Modern.
Beat/instrumental: Very pleasant song to listen to in terms of the beat very nice electronic score that plays well with the singers voice. Overall a solid beat.
Lyrics: Lyrics were solid, not exactly all that great but not terrible.
Singing: Singers voice was excellent and relied on only a little bit of effects. Very great voice to listen to.
Rating: Overall another solid song by pro, had a great voice and solid lyrics and beat. On my scale a 7/10.
Con:
Name and artist: The next song Con uses is Nevada by Vicetone, featuring Cozi Zuehlsdorff.
Beat: The Beat was pretty catchy and a wonderful beat that fits the song excellently.
Lyrics: The lyrics were solid like most of the songs on the list.
Singing: Voice, the girl in the track sounded really good and made the song pretty catchy to listen to. This is a prime example of autotune I don’t mind since it’s not overly obnoxious, the singer already sounds good on the parts without autotune, and it overall improves her voice on some parts of the song.
Rating: Overall a fantastic song, a great beat, solid lyrics, and a beautiful voice. Probably going to add this to my study playlist as well. Overall on my scale this would be the best song overall being an 8/10.
Score so far is 13/20 for pro and 15/20 for con.
Moving right along…
Round 3:
Pro:
Name and artist: The song Pro chose for this round was, "Years from Now," by Rameses B
Beat/Instrumental: Very addicting beat to listen to, overall pretty good beat and very catchy.
RFD 1: Greetings I would like to start off by thanking both opponents for a well fought out debate.
I’d also like to thank whichever opponent gave me the honor of being one of the judges, thank you I hope this isn’t the only time i’ll be doing this.
Thirdly I am not very fond of modern music however I will try to remain as objective as possible.
All of that being stated, I will now begin my analysis of this debate which will be conducted through scores for each song and then counted at the end. The opponent with the most points wins! My rating scale goes something like this,
10 - A masterpiece PERFECT
9- A near masterpiece AMAZING but not perfect
8- Very good song, not a masterpiece exactly but very good
7- Pretty good song
6- Solid song, could use some improvement but not bad
5- Average song not particularly great, but not particularly bad
4- Bad song, not terrible but definitely needs improvement
3- Horrible song in need of vast improvement
2- Pure garbage, needs to be completely changed
1- A pain to watch
0- Comparable to the garbage pail kids movie
All of this said and clarified, I will now begin my vote!
Round 1:
When did Bernie ever state he wants a maximum wage? Assuming you aren't joking.
There goes my perfect record due to a tie, oh well it was fun while it lasted.
He puts in his time and donates part of his earnings, I don't see how he isn't leading by example?
Comparing the richest person in the world who pays the most money to charity compared to Bernie who only makes 1 million dollars is a bit of an unfair comparison. Wouldn't you agree?
I couldn't care less how much time it takes for the government to spend their money, people make personal decisions of their own it's only human nature.
You also aren't considering the amount of money that goes to social programs such as welfare, social security, and Medicaid.
Or other services such as the police force, medical services, or the fire department.
The government officials itself only obtain a small fraction of their spending goes towards them anyways.
Besides even if it was a decent portion, I don't see as to why government officials shouldn't get paid a good wage considering the stress and skill a job of that nature takes.
Not to mention the fact you aren't considering time either.
Now which person do you suppose is helping the poor the most,
Billy:
- Is a billionaire who donates 500 million to charity yearly
- Doesn't volenteer his time, and if he does it's very few and far between.
Bob:
- Only makes a million a year so only donates 20,000 yearly
- Since Bob is a popular politician he focuses his time on aiding the poor through financing social programs and services such as healthcare for all, free college, and improving the infrastructure.
Of those two options, it's very obvious Bob is likely contributing more to the overall issue.
Also stating Bill Gates gives half of his money is quite simply not true, he does donate a lot but according to philanthropy.com, Gates only has donated 22 % in the last 17 years.
Firstly, the redistributed money goes to the people. Some goes to the government however not nearly as much.
Secondly I don't know about elizabeth warren however Bernie actually does donate his money to charity. A lot actually.
The delete option doesn't show up currently.
Would you kindly remove the poorly constructed CVB I made?
Fair enough, very well I'll remove my CVB my apologies.
I try to make sure every single debate has at least one vote and every single debate doesn't have an unjust vote thanks.
I couldn't care less what all voters are doing, which they aren't. The rules specifically state that the majority of rounds have to be ff to award a conduct point.
Too clarify, because my opponent heavily implied in the description that he/she will be arguing against socialism, that's what i'll be arguing against. I realize their position is a bit confusing however judging from the description, it's most likely a simple error we'll brush off as a dumb mistake.
No problem
I already provided 3 sources,
However, I can respect your needs.
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/sex-and-relationships/sex
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/all-about-sex/201101/attention-ladies-semen-is-antidepressant
My bad, I fixed it.
Fair point, however, if you're going down this route than by logical extension you'd have to agree that people who are heterosexuals shouldn't have sex since protection doesn't always work.
Assuming they wear protection, I don't see a problem with them having sexual intercourse. Even then however, I feel they should be somewhat limited of how much they have sex and they should tell the person they are having intercourse with that they have a disease.
Are you implying that homosexuals should have restricted rights compared to heterosexuals simply because their AIDS rates would be higher?
If the roles were reversed would you restrict heterosexuals rights since they would have higher STD rates?
It's not absurd that AIDS is common throughout the LGBT community, it's absurd that this is an argument used against LGBT rights.
If the argument is addressed in the debate, I will rebut it.
If it doesn't then I will take the time to respond to it here.
All I will state is that logic would make someone either logically inconsistent or absurd.
Call this is a Mandela effect, but I swear, I remember being able to change RFDS a while back.
I believe you can ask one of the mods to delete your vote so that you may change it, I did it once.
Did you misspell which opponent you were referring to?
Hope this debate goes somewhere
goat
pig
You're a mod now? Congrats man!