You're trying to compare it to concentration camps just to try to demonize Republicans. Don't be so intellectually dishonest. Honestly, you're almost as narcissistic as Rational Madman:
Evidence:
"If you don't understand how Steven Crowder is propaganda I can't help you".
"I don't think I need to waste my time to show the statistics when I pretty sure I am right."
"I either get too frustrated with the awful arguments he makes mixed in with the bottom of the barrel jokes or stick till the end wondering where my brain cells have gone."
You sure are opinionated, but that is about all I can say. Never back anything up with facts, but you claim to rebut my points. Bravo, my dude, bravo.
Context matters when using certain words, so I don't know.
If you called yourself words, yes you should expect the same from others. If you can't respect yourself, why should anyone else?
Swear words are inherently bad, my dude. They are negative no matter what.
Ok, lemme fix the typo. Should have been obvious from the typo because I said that Autism was inherently bad without using connecting words like both x x and autism are bad.
Lemme find those statistics, and again: typo.
"Why do you care about what people do with their own time that isn't impacting others in a harmful way unless of course you harmed by Mexicans and gays being represented by media" you said I must be against their representation because i think it is somehow harmful to me. You ignored my point entirely, but okay
Three brothers, all grow up in the same town and go to the same school. Let's name them Jake Blake And Arnold. They all have the same economic position.
Jake has a full ride scholarship to an in state school because he was an athlete. He starts doing drugs, drops put of school and decides he doesn't want to work. He makes $10k gambling
Blake gets a factory job and works 40 hours each week, not a minute longer, and he doesn't put any money into a savings account. He makes $60k
Arnold studies 20 hours each week in high school and scores high enough on his SAT to go to Harvard business school. He passes with a 4.0 GPA and he helps invent new, more efficient ways to construct automobiles. He works 80 hours every week and never takes vacation. He makes $1 million each year for his efforts.
Why under any valid system should we take money from people who works themselves to death to gain their wealth and give it to people who throw out any chance he gets? That's unfair to everyone involved. Redistribution of wealth sets a bad mindset. One that says that no matter what decisions you make, we will take care of you. Don't you think GM would make better decisions if they weren't "too big to fail"? If you promise to bail people out whenever they make poor decisions, they will continue to make poor decisions.
Don't take money from people who earn it. Most people who are rich aren't born into wealth. People move around income brackets all the time
Ok, but in your example, you forget a vital element: charity. Often times, a church or non-profit would send in food to starving people out of their own volition. You don't need to steal from anyone. Yet, the government often likes to crowd out these private sector groups. The thing is, it might be good in the short term to redistribute the food. But, if by doing do you undermine our system of private property, you're going to end up with a worse economy and less motivated workers.
I think that a very limited form of healthcare could be beneficial, but that is questionable. Smart workers helps everyone, but I don't know if thousands of dollars for one person's surgery is always worth it.
Well, it would support the Nazis to kill off political rivals. If they think their policies are the best, what should stop them from genocide?
This isn't a crazy hypothetical. This is how they thought, and they had the power. Under a system where the "common good" is out above personal self interest, you leave the door open for atrocities and violations of rights. Why should the majority be allowed to oppress the minority at Will?
I mean that is a fine example, but that is all it is: an example. It is super easy to justify socialism with these wacky hypothetical that would never happen like the world needing a sacrifice not to end.
I don't quite know about the healthcare example, but education is something that promotes the social good.
Ok, I have a big problem saying that the majority should be out above the majority like that. What about Nazi Germany? If the majority is Nazis, should their interests surpass those of their victims? If you base decisions off of personal liberties, that can never happen
I guarantee you won't advocate for white people when they are a minority. You concede that these groups aren't oppressed, then you bring up the fact they are a minority. So what?.....
I think it is funny that you bring up obama-era "concentration camps" and blame it on republicans. However, they aren't concentration camps. There is no slave labor or genocide going on there. Just detaining people who sneak into our country illegally and try to siphon off of our strong economy and take advantage of our generous social safety net. Detaining criminals...
Okay, inject your personal foolish opinion about Crowder without citing any examples. :)
Carlos is a self describes "queer". Check his Twitter.
Saying something isn't inherently bad means: there is nothing negative about it.... that is my position, thanks for quoting me and proving I'm telling the truth.
Being white doesn't mean I'm less likely to be treated bad based on my race. I challenge you to evaluate hate crime per capita statistics.
Boy, you like to put words in people's mouths and be deceptive, don't You? Cite exactly where I said Mexicans and gays being represented by the media hurt me or anyone. I'll be waiting...
I don't think it is fair to bring up the n-word as a hypothetical like this. Stephen mentioned facts, not slurs. It would be applicable to make that comparison had Stephen called him a sp**k and a f*g but he didn't. My comment literally said the opposite of what you asked me. I said that there is nothing inherently wrong with being gay or Mexican, then you proceed to ask me if I am against homosexuality and mexicans. Don't know how much more clear I can be on the matter....
Yes you cannot change being gay or Mexican or autistic... but being gay or Mexican isn't something bad. Autism is bad. So, I don't think there is an equivalence for making fun of one vs the other.
We shouldn't be so sensitive. I don't care when people make jokes against any race, including my own. No good comes out of taking offense to any joke against any group. I even laugh when people makes jokes against white people if they are clever.
The point is that we culturally sometimes pride people for being gay or Mexican. I'm saying that it shouldn't be considered racist, white supremacist or whatever slur you want to throw out each time someone makes a snide comment. These people aren't in a cultural that oppressed them today, so don't try to victimize everyone that gets their fee fees hurt.
Yes, vox and Crowder go back and forth. I think that Carlos is trying to play the victim to get his political enemy banned. They debunk a lot of his videos.
I don't remember him saying the "n-word". There aren't a lot of times that word should be used, so I probably wouldn't support it.
Ok, being gay and Mexican are inherently bad. I don't think that those are on the same level as autism. If you want to consider ethnicity and sexuality to be the same as mental illness, that is on you. No reason to be so sensitive. People pride each other now for their "diversity", not for autism. We weren't talking about YouTube regulations, so I don't know why you brought them up. We were discussing if it was a joke, which it was.
Not really. If you consider it within the context of his channel, it isn't bad. By mentioning he is gay and Mexican, he is using satire to show how left-leaning news sources like to have a defacto affirmative action program. They try to get super "diverse" pendants. He also adds "not gay" "half asian" before his employees' names sometimes. He is a comedian, and you can't take everything he says at face value
I don't feel like the position you are taking now has to necessarily contradict your stance of migration being a human right (for the most part). Being able to leave a country or move around in a country is a lot different from forcing a different country to take you in and, in America's case, we often have to provide social services. You can't force a country to allow a public charge, but it should let people leave if they want.
Easier to attain I would disagree. You don't need a criminal background check before buying a car. The 86 dead people gives merit to the idea that cars may be more effective weapons.
Also, just curious. What is your stance on immigration? Less regulations on who could come, keep it the same, or something else? What do you think of birth right citizenship, merit-based immigration, ways to keep track of immigrants with work visas?
Don't waste your time with this crack-head omar. He can't comprehend even the simplest of arguments, doesn't make arguments himself, then insults your arguments without giving a reason why he thinks you are wrong.
I guess he is just so nuanced on these topics that he doesn't have to provide his imaginary facts and statistics. We don't watch CNN so we don't know that #OrangeManBad.
Simmer down. I have provided multiple sources, you provided one that I instantly dispatched. You obviously are overly obsessed with this site. That is why you have no life. You probably posted at fifty comments in a few hours in this thread alone. I did say that you supported mass migration, which you defended. Even if it was a strawman, you defended the position. You then strawmanned me by saying I support no immigration. I did not defend that because I don't believe it. You implicitly admitted you believe in promoting mass migration. You need to start thinking before you post comments, bud. :P If you are capable, that is....
I am here every once in a while in my free time. Your uninformed responses lead me to believe you are likely a bot.
487 comments= proving my point that you have no life.
Definition of life: having something to live for. Debateart.com is not something worth living for.
If you want to further this discussion, you will have to debate me. Since you seem so adamant about this immigration business, I will start compiling information for a future debate if you want.
There was a reason that we were the world power facing the Soviet Union: we were wealthy and powerful. We were wealthy and powerful because of previous protectionist practices. BTW we still have thousands of tariffs like the sugar tariff and are still the largest economy in the world, so you're wrong?
I am not arguing for what Trump will do. If his tariffs don't shift money back to Americans, I won't support it. If a country puts a tariff on our cars, we should put tariffs of equal value of theirs. Don't let them take advantage of us.
Research the VA.....https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/16/477814218/attempted-fix-for-va-health-delays-creates-new-bureaucracy
https://www.military.com/militaryadvantage/2017/12/03/va-health-leaders-failed-protect-patients-inept-doctors.html
Stop trying to strawman. I'm not for zero immigration. I think it should be merit based. Only allow skilled laborers. My family immigrated at one point, and they helped build this country. Don't let people in who will go on welfare and won't contribute.
If doctors know best, why do they disagree with each other? They aren't omnipotent and infallible.
I said don't have sex if you don't want to get pregnant. Rape isn't sex. The woman had no choice in that. All abortions aren't justified by marginal cases. Less than 2% of abortions are because of rape. https://www.focusonthefamily.com/socialissues/life-issues/dignity-of-human-life/abortion-statistics
If abortions because of rape and death of the mother are allowed, should the 98% of the rest be banned? Or, do you think killing babies at will is something we should keep? If you were aborted, you couldn't make this argument right now.
Yes, call people anti-science without providing evidence. I'll add you to the list of scientifically/economically illiterate list. If you are so nuanced on climate change, tell me what exact percentage of the change is temperature is caused by humans and how much is natural. Then be sure to provide a reliable source proving what you said.
Ok, the United States was almost always protectionist. It only began using free trade after WWII to economically boost pro-capitalist countries in the Cold War. Japan has always been protectionist over its car brands and they are making much larger profits than our country's. I think we should protect industries that we would collapse without in case of a trade war. My views are not inconsistent because tariff revenue will allow us to lower income taxes, which gives people more freedom. Just a tradeoff.
My empirical evidence that socialism sucks is that every country that has truly tried it has led to economic collapse. If you want to see government-run healthcare in America, check out the VA. Wait times are horrendous in Canada/UK.
"Everyone is immigrants". I think you need to check out the definition of immigrant. I was born here with two American citizen parents. I am not an immigrant. Immigrants should have to pay taxes for 5-10 years if they want something. We shouldn't allow people to come into our country as a public charge.
Yes, the abortion law would allow it for nearly every situation if you just go to the right doctor. If it would lead to the death of the mother, allow it. Otherwise, don't kill babies because it makes you anxious. Don't have sex if you don't want to get pregnant. If you happen to, deal with the consequences of your actions. You liberals are perpetual children that want the government to coddle you and tell you how to live your life while not wanting to take responsibility for your actions. You can't kill people because you decided to be irresponsible.
If government healthcare is so good, how come the US is responsible for most new medical developments that these other countries all benefit from. They don't need to spend money on R&D. We don't fix our prices like those countries do, so people are given the incentive to innovate to make more money.
Free Trade: China is very protectionist and their GDP is growing rapidly. One-way free trade helps the protectionist country at the expense of the free trade country.
Socialism failed(because central planning is always inefficient): https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/28/the-mismanagement-in-venezuela-part-of-its-socialist-system/
Not really an anarchist. Just think we should shift spending to more important things, spend less money, and we should reform and severely limit welfare. No welfare should be available for immigrants.
In response to your article "...or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health". That is so general. Protect health? Protect her from the anxiety resulting in raising a child? Stress if bad for your health, so it is essentially allowing anything depending on the doctor.
I shouldn't be allowed to kill you for convenience, so don't kill babies. Give them up for adoption, or deal with the consequences. You can't kill people because you don't know how to use a condom.
We'd have to have a full debate on immigration sometime to get anywhere with that. There are a few benefits, but they are outweighed by the negatives in my opinion.
Small government is kind of subjective term. It is based off of the level of control government has over our lives: Do they allow us to choose our insurance provider? Can we choose what we do with our income, or do they tax some of it? That kind of thing
There are crazy people that believe in gender doesn't exist. You believe it does, I'm guessing?
Religion isn't really provable or disprovable, so I'm not going to dive into that, really. Climate change is real. Everyone believes in climate change. You Lefties think it is caused almost entirely by humans. We believe that it is occurring, but we don't think humans are the main cause if we are a cause at all. It varies. I think we are playing a tiny part and it isn't an issue.
I think a little protectionism is good for important industries. Free trade hurts developed nations and helps developing nations due to the small labor costs. We need to protect industries with a lot of potential like tech. Poor nations can make shirts for us and do low-skill labor. "Don't even mention wage stagnation.." Don't even mention the mass starvation that results in socialist nations:Venezuela, Soviet Union, etc. Sweden isn't socialist. Their markets are more free than ours:school vouchers/privatized pensions
I am against taxes, but I recognize their necessity. When the government gets enough tax revenues, they start spending on stupid new government programs like cricket teams in Afghanistan. The government should provide courts, police, military, and make investments(such as paying for school vouchers). The government shouldn't arbitrarily take income you earned at the threat of imprisonment. That is called theft.
In terms of killing babies, I would encourage you to look at NY's new abortion law that allows it up until birth. Virginia was very close to allowing abortions after death, with the bill being endorsed by their governor, Ralph Northam. I believe Maryland is passing similar laws. I was just stating that this isn't a fringe concept in the Democratic party now that entire states are pushing for this. Abortion is the murder of a baby for the convenience of the mother. It is not "her body", as you guys proclaim it is. It is completely different DNA.
Mass Immigration is good? You didn't provide evidence. I'm sure you like it because the immigrants we are getting are overwhelmingly pro big government, anti-gun, etc. More than half of immigrants are on some form of welfare. https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households
I could provide more examples if you wish
Infinite genders- The dumb LGBTQ3%$@!$ people and gender studies teach that gender is "on a spectrum". You people have the audacity to call us anti-science.
Perhaps offer a few economic or social issues on which you find conservatives irrational.
I think you liberals(leftists) are irrational for wanting socialism, killing babies(even after they are born), allow mass immigration, think there are infinite genders, etc. All of those things make you feel good but are either evil or don't work. All of those are irrational
Yeah, if you would like we always have the option to add new points, as long as it isn't the conclusion. Just separate rebuttals and new points to make it clear they are new.
Hello! I will hopefully be repeating this debate within the next few days with whiteflame. I will repeat most of the same first round arguments and will provide the links in case you are curious :D
While sanctions are a powerful tool, this will likely never happen either. You have states passing anti-BDS legislation. BDS(Boycott Sanction Divest) is a movement by private companies to do those three things. They often lose state contracts or are punished other ways, so the government is not on board with doing anything anti-Israel at this point in time.
List of states and anti-BDS laws: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/anti-bds-legislation
I am not a Palestine supporter, I support America. I believe that Israel is a terrible ally, but that no ground can be gained in the Islamic community in terms of an alliance. We made a mistake by continuing involvement in the Middle East after the Cold War, and it would be best for us to stop wasting money on unending conflicts.
We discussed other topics, of which he was blatantly wrong. I haven't done any research on Steven being a racist, but I might if I get bored.
You're trying to compare it to concentration camps just to try to demonize Republicans. Don't be so intellectually dishonest. Honestly, you're almost as narcissistic as Rational Madman:
Evidence:
"If you don't understand how Steven Crowder is propaganda I can't help you".
"I don't think I need to waste my time to show the statistics when I pretty sure I am right."
"I either get too frustrated with the awful arguments he makes mixed in with the bottom of the barrel jokes or stick till the end wondering where my brain cells have gone."
You sure are opinionated, but that is about all I can say. Never back anything up with facts, but you claim to rebut my points. Bravo, my dude, bravo.
Context matters when using certain words, so I don't know.
If you called yourself words, yes you should expect the same from others. If you can't respect yourself, why should anyone else?
Swear words are inherently bad, my dude. They are negative no matter what.
Ok, lemme fix the typo. Should have been obvious from the typo because I said that Autism was inherently bad without using connecting words like both x x and autism are bad.
Lemme find those statistics, and again: typo.
"Why do you care about what people do with their own time that isn't impacting others in a harmful way unless of course you harmed by Mexicans and gays being represented by media" you said I must be against their representation because i think it is somehow harmful to me. You ignored my point entirely, but okay
Let's tell another story.
Three brothers, all grow up in the same town and go to the same school. Let's name them Jake Blake And Arnold. They all have the same economic position.
Jake has a full ride scholarship to an in state school because he was an athlete. He starts doing drugs, drops put of school and decides he doesn't want to work. He makes $10k gambling
Blake gets a factory job and works 40 hours each week, not a minute longer, and he doesn't put any money into a savings account. He makes $60k
Arnold studies 20 hours each week in high school and scores high enough on his SAT to go to Harvard business school. He passes with a 4.0 GPA and he helps invent new, more efficient ways to construct automobiles. He works 80 hours every week and never takes vacation. He makes $1 million each year for his efforts.
Why under any valid system should we take money from people who works themselves to death to gain their wealth and give it to people who throw out any chance he gets? That's unfair to everyone involved. Redistribution of wealth sets a bad mindset. One that says that no matter what decisions you make, we will take care of you. Don't you think GM would make better decisions if they weren't "too big to fail"? If you promise to bail people out whenever they make poor decisions, they will continue to make poor decisions.
Don't take money from people who earn it. Most people who are rich aren't born into wealth. People move around income brackets all the time
Ok, but in your example, you forget a vital element: charity. Often times, a church or non-profit would send in food to starving people out of their own volition. You don't need to steal from anyone. Yet, the government often likes to crowd out these private sector groups. The thing is, it might be good in the short term to redistribute the food. But, if by doing do you undermine our system of private property, you're going to end up with a worse economy and less motivated workers.
I think that a very limited form of healthcare could be beneficial, but that is questionable. Smart workers helps everyone, but I don't know if thousands of dollars for one person's surgery is always worth it.
Well, it would support the Nazis to kill off political rivals. If they think their policies are the best, what should stop them from genocide?
This isn't a crazy hypothetical. This is how they thought, and they had the power. Under a system where the "common good" is out above personal self interest, you leave the door open for atrocities and violations of rights. Why should the majority be allowed to oppress the minority at Will?
I mean that is a fine example, but that is all it is: an example. It is super easy to justify socialism with these wacky hypothetical that would never happen like the world needing a sacrifice not to end.
I don't quite know about the healthcare example, but education is something that promotes the social good.
Ok, I have a big problem saying that the majority should be out above the majority like that. What about Nazi Germany? If the majority is Nazis, should their interests surpass those of their victims? If you base decisions off of personal liberties, that can never happen
I guarantee you won't advocate for white people when they are a minority. You concede that these groups aren't oppressed, then you bring up the fact they are a minority. So what?.....
I think it is funny that you bring up obama-era "concentration camps" and blame it on republicans. However, they aren't concentration camps. There is no slave labor or genocide going on there. Just detaining people who sneak into our country illegally and try to siphon off of our strong economy and take advantage of our generous social safety net. Detaining criminals...
Okay, inject your personal foolish opinion about Crowder without citing any examples. :)
I generally don't support using the n-word.
Carlos is a self describes "queer". Check his Twitter.
Saying something isn't inherently bad means: there is nothing negative about it.... that is my position, thanks for quoting me and proving I'm telling the truth.
Being white doesn't mean I'm less likely to be treated bad based on my race. I challenge you to evaluate hate crime per capita statistics.
Boy, you like to put words in people's mouths and be deceptive, don't You? Cite exactly where I said Mexicans and gays being represented by the media hurt me or anyone. I'll be waiting...
I don't think it is fair to bring up the n-word as a hypothetical like this. Stephen mentioned facts, not slurs. It would be applicable to make that comparison had Stephen called him a sp**k and a f*g but he didn't. My comment literally said the opposite of what you asked me. I said that there is nothing inherently wrong with being gay or Mexican, then you proceed to ask me if I am against homosexuality and mexicans. Don't know how much more clear I can be on the matter....
Yes you cannot change being gay or Mexican or autistic... but being gay or Mexican isn't something bad. Autism is bad. So, I don't think there is an equivalence for making fun of one vs the other.
We shouldn't be so sensitive. I don't care when people make jokes against any race, including my own. No good comes out of taking offense to any joke against any group. I even laugh when people makes jokes against white people if they are clever.
The point is that we culturally sometimes pride people for being gay or Mexican. I'm saying that it shouldn't be considered racist, white supremacist or whatever slur you want to throw out each time someone makes a snide comment. These people aren't in a cultural that oppressed them today, so don't try to victimize everyone that gets their fee fees hurt.
Yes, vox and Crowder go back and forth. I think that Carlos is trying to play the victim to get his political enemy banned. They debunk a lot of his videos.
Greetings.
I don't remember him saying the "n-word". There aren't a lot of times that word should be used, so I probably wouldn't support it.
Ok, being gay and Mexican are inherently bad. I don't think that those are on the same level as autism. If you want to consider ethnicity and sexuality to be the same as mental illness, that is on you. No reason to be so sensitive. People pride each other now for their "diversity", not for autism. We weren't talking about YouTube regulations, so I don't know why you brought them up. We were discussing if it was a joke, which it was.
I don't think "harmful to society" is a very good measure. Who is society? The majority of the population? Is this confined to a single country?
Not really. If you consider it within the context of his channel, it isn't bad. By mentioning he is gay and Mexican, he is using satire to show how left-leaning news sources like to have a defacto affirmative action program. They try to get super "diverse" pendants. He also adds "not gay" "half asian" before his employees' names sometimes. He is a comedian, and you can't take everything he says at face value
Mmm.... science
Ok, cool!
How does this work? Does each member write one argument or do we just collaborate?
We got this :)
I am waiting til after work. Might join as pro
You don't want me on your team, boy?
Do you want corn chips to count?
I support pro, but sure, why not? Lol
Thanks, my dude. Even though I'm rooting for "Mr. Watergate"?
This debate could use some comments :P
I don't feel like the position you are taking now has to necessarily contradict your stance of migration being a human right (for the most part). Being able to leave a country or move around in a country is a lot different from forcing a different country to take you in and, in America's case, we often have to provide social services. You can't force a country to allow a public charge, but it should let people leave if they want.
I would consider joining Pro's side. I don't feel strongly enough about the topic to be the person who joins, however.
"I don't believe in charities"-Bernie Sanders
I'm a little curious. How will you "role play"? Does Stalin just say "comrade" a lot?
Easier to attain I would disagree. You don't need a criminal background check before buying a car. The 86 dead people gives merit to the idea that cars may be more effective weapons.
Also, just curious. What is your stance on immigration? Less regulations on who could come, keep it the same, or something else? What do you think of birth right citizenship, merit-based immigration, ways to keep track of immigrants with work visas?
You were making statements about the effectiveness of guns and cars as weapons. I was giving examples of cars being used for that purpose.
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/nyc-terrorist-attack/least-one-person-dead-incident-lower-manhattan-n816166
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/2016-nice-terrorist-attacks
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/world/europe/barcelona-catalunya-van.html
Don't waste your time with this crack-head omar. He can't comprehend even the simplest of arguments, doesn't make arguments himself, then insults your arguments without giving a reason why he thinks you are wrong.
I guess he is just so nuanced on these topics that he doesn't have to provide his imaginary facts and statistics. We don't watch CNN so we don't know that #OrangeManBad.
Simmer down. I have provided multiple sources, you provided one that I instantly dispatched. You obviously are overly obsessed with this site. That is why you have no life. You probably posted at fifty comments in a few hours in this thread alone. I did say that you supported mass migration, which you defended. Even if it was a strawman, you defended the position. You then strawmanned me by saying I support no immigration. I did not defend that because I don't believe it. You implicitly admitted you believe in promoting mass migration. You need to start thinking before you post comments, bud. :P If you are capable, that is....
I am here every once in a while in my free time. Your uninformed responses lead me to believe you are likely a bot.
487 comments= proving my point that you have no life.
Definition of life: having something to live for. Debateart.com is not something worth living for.
If you want to further this discussion, you will have to debate me. Since you seem so adamant about this immigration business, I will start compiling information for a future debate if you want.
Later, Libtard, Democretin, etc.
:D
Dude. Get a life. You have been doing this non stop for like three hours.
There was a reason that we were the world power facing the Soviet Union: we were wealthy and powerful. We were wealthy and powerful because of previous protectionist practices. BTW we still have thousands of tariffs like the sugar tariff and are still the largest economy in the world, so you're wrong?
I am not arguing for what Trump will do. If his tariffs don't shift money back to Americans, I won't support it. If a country puts a tariff on our cars, we should put tariffs of equal value of theirs. Don't let them take advantage of us.
Research the VA.....https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/16/477814218/attempted-fix-for-va-health-delays-creates-new-bureaucracy
https://www.military.com/militaryadvantage/2017/12/03/va-health-leaders-failed-protect-patients-inept-doctors.html
Stop trying to strawman. I'm not for zero immigration. I think it should be merit based. Only allow skilled laborers. My family immigrated at one point, and they helped build this country. Don't let people in who will go on welfare and won't contribute.
If doctors know best, why do they disagree with each other? They aren't omnipotent and infallible.
I said don't have sex if you don't want to get pregnant. Rape isn't sex. The woman had no choice in that. All abortions aren't justified by marginal cases. Less than 2% of abortions are because of rape. https://www.focusonthefamily.com/socialissues/life-issues/dignity-of-human-life/abortion-statistics
If abortions because of rape and death of the mother are allowed, should the 98% of the rest be banned? Or, do you think killing babies at will is something we should keep? If you were aborted, you couldn't make this argument right now.
They think that gender isn't biologically based**
Yes, call people anti-science without providing evidence. I'll add you to the list of scientifically/economically illiterate list. If you are so nuanced on climate change, tell me what exact percentage of the change is temperature is caused by humans and how much is natural. Then be sure to provide a reliable source proving what you said.
Thank you :)
Ok, the United States was almost always protectionist. It only began using free trade after WWII to economically boost pro-capitalist countries in the Cold War. Japan has always been protectionist over its car brands and they are making much larger profits than our country's. I think we should protect industries that we would collapse without in case of a trade war. My views are not inconsistent because tariff revenue will allow us to lower income taxes, which gives people more freedom. Just a tradeoff.
My empirical evidence that socialism sucks is that every country that has truly tried it has led to economic collapse. If you want to see government-run healthcare in America, check out the VA. Wait times are horrendous in Canada/UK.
"Everyone is immigrants". I think you need to check out the definition of immigrant. I was born here with two American citizen parents. I am not an immigrant. Immigrants should have to pay taxes for 5-10 years if they want something. We shouldn't allow people to come into our country as a public charge.
Yes, the abortion law would allow it for nearly every situation if you just go to the right doctor. If it would lead to the death of the mother, allow it. Otherwise, don't kill babies because it makes you anxious. Don't have sex if you don't want to get pregnant. If you happen to, deal with the consequences of your actions. You liberals are perpetual children that want the government to coddle you and tell you how to live your life while not wanting to take responsibility for your actions. You can't kill people because you decided to be irresponsible.
If government healthcare is so good, how come the US is responsible for most new medical developments that these other countries all benefit from. They don't need to spend money on R&D. We don't fix our prices like those countries do, so people are given the incentive to innovate to make more money.
I think this omar guy has autism(or is a leftist, it is hard to tell the difference). Perhaps I should stop wasting my time on him.
Free Trade: China is very protectionist and their GDP is growing rapidly. One-way free trade helps the protectionist country at the expense of the free trade country.
Socialism failed(because central planning is always inefficient): https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/28/the-mismanagement-in-venezuela-part-of-its-socialist-system/
Not really an anarchist. Just think we should shift spending to more important things, spend less money, and we should reform and severely limit welfare. No welfare should be available for immigrants.
In response to your article "...or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health". That is so general. Protect health? Protect her from the anxiety resulting in raising a child? Stress if bad for your health, so it is essentially allowing anything depending on the doctor.
I shouldn't be allowed to kill you for convenience, so don't kill babies. Give them up for adoption, or deal with the consequences. You can't kill people because you don't know how to use a condom.
We'd have to have a full debate on immigration sometime to get anywhere with that. There are a few benefits, but they are outweighed by the negatives in my opinion.
Small government is kind of subjective term. It is based off of the level of control government has over our lives: Do they allow us to choose our insurance provider? Can we choose what we do with our income, or do they tax some of it? That kind of thing
There are crazy people that believe in gender doesn't exist. You believe it does, I'm guessing?
Religion isn't really provable or disprovable, so I'm not going to dive into that, really. Climate change is real. Everyone believes in climate change. You Lefties think it is caused almost entirely by humans. We believe that it is occurring, but we don't think humans are the main cause if we are a cause at all. It varies. I think we are playing a tiny part and it isn't an issue.
I think a little protectionism is good for important industries. Free trade hurts developed nations and helps developing nations due to the small labor costs. We need to protect industries with a lot of potential like tech. Poor nations can make shirts for us and do low-skill labor. "Don't even mention wage stagnation.." Don't even mention the mass starvation that results in socialist nations:Venezuela, Soviet Union, etc. Sweden isn't socialist. Their markets are more free than ours:school vouchers/privatized pensions
I am against taxes, but I recognize their necessity. When the government gets enough tax revenues, they start spending on stupid new government programs like cricket teams in Afghanistan. The government should provide courts, police, military, and make investments(such as paying for school vouchers). The government shouldn't arbitrarily take income you earned at the threat of imprisonment. That is called theft.
In terms of killing babies, I would encourage you to look at NY's new abortion law that allows it up until birth. Virginia was very close to allowing abortions after death, with the bill being endorsed by their governor, Ralph Northam. I believe Maryland is passing similar laws. I was just stating that this isn't a fringe concept in the Democratic party now that entire states are pushing for this. Abortion is the murder of a baby for the convenience of the mother. It is not "her body", as you guys proclaim it is. It is completely different DNA.
Mass Immigration is good? You didn't provide evidence. I'm sure you like it because the immigrants we are getting are overwhelmingly pro big government, anti-gun, etc. More than half of immigrants are on some form of welfare. https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households
I could provide more examples if you wish
Infinite genders- The dumb LGBTQ3%$@!$ people and gender studies teach that gender is "on a spectrum". You people have the audacity to call us anti-science.
Perhaps offer a few economic or social issues on which you find conservatives irrational.
I think you liberals(leftists) are irrational for wanting socialism, killing babies(even after they are born), allow mass immigration, think there are infinite genders, etc. All of those things make you feel good but are either evil or don't work. All of those are irrational
You can't lose what you don't have.
Yeah, if you would like we always have the option to add new points, as long as it isn't the conclusion. Just separate rebuttals and new points to make it clear they are new.
So, how do you want to do each round? Round 1 will be arguments, then 2 is rebuttal, 3 can criticize rebuttal, then 4 restate main points?
Hello! I will hopefully be repeating this debate within the next few days with whiteflame. I will repeat most of the same first round arguments and will provide the links in case you are curious :D
Hello. PM me
While sanctions are a powerful tool, this will likely never happen either. You have states passing anti-BDS legislation. BDS(Boycott Sanction Divest) is a movement by private companies to do those three things. They often lose state contracts or are punished other ways, so the government is not on board with doing anything anti-Israel at this point in time.
List of states and anti-BDS laws: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/anti-bds-legislation
I am not a Palestine supporter, I support America. I believe that Israel is a terrible ally, but that no ground can be gained in the Islamic community in terms of an alliance. We made a mistake by continuing involvement in the Middle East after the Cold War, and it would be best for us to stop wasting money on unending conflicts.
I am arguing that Israel is a bad ally not worth that money.