Honest and poor is better than being dishonest and rich

The Honesty ContradictionThis is not even an important issue in this debate. However, clearly there is a contradiction. According to google. com, honesty is: the act of being free of deceit and untruthfulness, sincere. http://www.google.ca...Also according to google, a lie is: an intentionally false statement. http://www.google.ca...;Now Pro says that you can be honest and lie at the same time. This clearly makes no sense. How can you be sincere, free of deceit and untruthfulness, if you are intentionally telling a false statement? If you are intentionally deceiving others? It is clearly a contradiction. You can't be sincere and deceitful at the same time. When Pro says " I can tell you that you make good points and your going to win this debate. First part is honesty, second parts a lie. ", obviously Pro was not sincere about the first statement, because if I have good points, how can I not win this debate? Is dishonesty profitable? A major point of the debate. If you look at round two, Pro says: "You brought up insider trading which is a dishonest practice and yes it brings money". Clearly Pro agreed with me here. How bad are the consequences of dishonest? Pro says: " if a person committed a crime, scandal, or robbery the money would have been returned and the companies would have been insured and when they catch the person who has done the crime, the money that has recently been put onto their account regardless of if it was an offshore account would have notified the companies of this act therefore would have no money to get out of jail or bribe officials like you say". Really longwinded sentence, but basically, Pro says if you're caught, the authorities will take all your money and you can't bribe people anymore. The second part is related to the first statement, so if I can prove the first statement, I have also proven the second. The whole point of an offshore account is so that the money is untracable. In accounting scandals, the money is always sent to an offshore account so that authorities will not be able to find the money and trace it back to them. Therefore, an offshore account would not be found. Therefore, you would still have money. Therefore, you would be able to bribe people to get out of jail. Therefore, the consequences of being dishonest are not bad at all, as you still get to keep some of your profits after bribing to get out of jail. As Pro says, "Humans may be greedy. " Therefore, Pro agrees with me that officials will take a bribe to release the criminal. Trustworthiness of a dishonest person? Pro thinks that not being trusted with money ever again is a huge deal to someone who has millions of dollars in his back pocket. So what if people don't trust you with money anymore? You already have so much money, it doesn't matter to you if people don't trust you with money. .Pro also thinks your money will disappear easily, however pro does not provide any evidence to back this up. How will it disappear easily? "Your money will be gone in no time? " How foolish. With hundreds of millions in the bank, you earn millions a year on interest alone. The money would not be going anywhere soon. Money = Happiness ? Pro says that the point where money can't buy happiness is: "when you have all the cars in the world, and the millions of dollars of houses, boats". First, it is not possible to have all the cars in the world. As it is impossible, it would never happen at all. Therefore, you would never reach that point in life. Therefore, money will always be able to buy happiness. Furthermore, as to your yahoo source: it says that 10-12% of happiness comes from money. There is not enough information here. IT does not detail the other factors that cause happiness. For all you know, 10-12% may just be the biggest percentage of your happiness. For example, 12% would come from money, 8% from family, 10% from health, 10% from work, 10% from hobbies, etc. All under 12%, but in the end, adding to 100%, your total happiness. Thus, in this case, the highest percentage of happieness would come from money. Therefore, the source is not a credible source as it does not give you enough information. Honesty = feels better? Pro says that: " it would feel much better knowing you didn't have to lie to get somewhere in life" and that somewhere is "where a person will want to be and somewhere that makes a person happy. " The thing is, when you are honest and poor, you want to be rich and live nicely. Howvever, that isn't possible because you are honest and poor. Therefore, you would never reach where you want to be in life. Therefore, you would never feel much better knowing that you didn't have to lie to get somewhere, as you never got where you wanted to be. And yes, all poor people (poor as being below the poverty line) live in slums and ghettos located in cities around the world. They wouldn't be living in slums and ghettos if they weren't poor. Pro says, in response to my argument that living in a suite will make anyone feel better, with "it is an unrealistic fantasy, and although it looks like people who are rich live great lives I can promise you they are not as happy as it may seem. "Yes, it is an unrealistic fantasy for some, however, it would still make anyone feel better. And I don't know about you, but rich people certainly do look very happy and live great lives. Honesty, a big deal? resume: yes, you can lie all you want on your resume. But the point is, because you lied, you got hired, you got somewhere in life because you were dishonest. IF you were honest and told the truth, you might have been hired and you would never have gotten where you wanted to get. false advertising: yes, but it works. It certainly gets much more consumers that if they were advertising the truth. Therefore, again, the benefit of being dishonest. Pro drops my argument about CEOs exagerrating profits. Therefore, the benefits of being dishonest outweight those of being honest, proving that honesty is not a big deal. Cheating and family? Pro does not seem to know what a family is. Family always back you up, no matter how lying, deceitful, and mean you are. That is just what families do. There is really no argument on this, as families always tend to support you no matter what. Dishonest jobsPro drops this point completely and ignores it. ConclusionTherefore, because of several dropped points, I have won this debate. The main clash in this debate, I have shown above. On each of these major clashes, I have won. I have proved my points and disproved Pros. I have shown benefits of being dishonest, and Pro attemtped to show the benefits of being honest, however I refuted those completely. Therefore, it is obvious that I have won this debate.