BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
This work is a great piece of impressionistic description

con says "So I know Impressionism when I see it. No, this does not contain any impressionistic description qualities" ok gives us an example impressionist poetry con says "you still have burden of proof. Your opinion is not valid evidence." here is my proof so tell us why it is not impressionistic-based upon your example of impressionist poetry "splashed on a creamy cloth "a delightful painting of refinement against light dark against dark light in pigments soft and warm against a background of pale light curving rhythms of drapery infolded her form colors transparent and light like Veronese-like "
This work is a great piece of impressionistic description

I found this work is a great piece of impressionistic description Femmes-Fecondes http://www.scribd.com... an example quote "on a couch a femme f"conde lounged in sweet idleness splashed on a creamy cloth a delightful painting of refinement against light dark against dark light in pigments soft and warm against a background of pale light curving rhythms of drapery infolded her form colors transparent and light like Veronese-like "
all trade barriers should be removed to foster competition

The idea of more jobs and more opportunities is a great idea. However the difference between Free trade deals and fair trade deals is the overall GDP of the largest consumer based nations will be the winners, not the smaller nations with large export economies. Here's why, large free market economies have the money for subsidies, which are lobbied for. These subsidized markets will not go away with tariffs, in fact they may increase. The reason why is, without financial trade barriers, and the potential for profit (because now the government is footing the bill for enough of the costs to turn most sales into pure profit). This means an unchecked, non-tariffed, subsidized industry in one large nation can completely low-ball smaller nations without the same government bail subsidies. Inevitably this shuts down the economy sector of the said smaller nations economy, because they can no longer compete. In the industrialized countries with free capital trade job quantities may increase. However, these jobs are not sufficient or significant enough to create a substantial increase in tax revenue or overall quality of life. Thats because free trade deals open up opportunities for the service industry and little else. We are talking about a trade off between quality of jobs and quantity of jobs gets thrown way away from quality and more towards quantity. The same can be said for the goods produced. Granted we may have more 3000 cars in our market but now we might have less choices of cars because American companies can't compete; and in order for China to give us 3000 dollar cars our automotive standards might have to be lowered. The end result leaves the lower and middle class citizens of the world with a poor outlook, with low quality 3000 dollar cars, soy-laden meats, tons of retail and service jobs with little room for advancement, and putting out of work people in non-subsidized industries.
all trade barriers should be removed to foster competition

I believe that if all tariffs were to be simultaneously removed internationally, the global economy would strongly benefit. Every nation has some resource or product that some other nation needs, the removal of protective tariffs would simply make the importation of these products and resources much more available. As for the harmful effects of globalisation, we must not forget that no tariffs means more jobs for people in smaller, third-world nations. People in Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, survive on less than a dollar a day. Any employment, including slave labour, would be a major improvement for them. Even slaves are fed everyday. Is not food a form of pay? Meanwhile the American poor would be able to drive cheap cars from china, cars that only cost $3,000, and have an easier time finding employment with the companies who would be benefiting from the eliminated tariffs. People will always vote with thier wallets, and will ultimately decide what the better product by buying it. This should not be done be the government.
all trade barriers should be removed to foster competition

You have a great point, however Free Trade agreements bring a lot of economic stress to those involved. Removing tariffs on goods that tax payers subsidize, not only takes money out of the tax payer to produce the goods in it's own country, but now threatens the economy of another country if it doesn't subsidize the said good even though it can produce just as much. Protection tariffs prevent immediate collapse of a large fully grown economy sector, and are essential to a free market economy and protects other smaller nations from the worst aspects of globalization.
all trade barriers should be removed to foster competition

I disagree, the United States government employs a variety of taxes and fees on many goods and services to function. Tariffs are just one of the many opportunities to raise money for the government. Although, I must say, the type of tariffs you are describing are not the ones I take issue with. My main concern is the protectionist tariffs, enforced not for profit but rather to protect companies unwilling or unable to change. These companies should be forced to ether sink or swim, and not expect a government handout. As for your argument regarding agriculture, I must also disagree. In the United States of America enough food can be produced annually to feed our entire nation many times over. Not only do we have an advanced network of transport systems, but we also strictly regulate the food consumed in the United States. An ear of corn, for example, would be much easier to produce in Iowa and send to California than to produce in South America and ship there, even if the labour and production costs are slightly lower in South America. Our government already subsidizes farmers not to grow food, thus inflating the value of the food to marketable prices. This same system of subsidization could be extended to farms which are further from the destination of their crops. This would most likely be unnecessary, however, as the transportation systems in the USA render the price differences in transport distances negligible. Not to mention the fact that without tariffs, farmers would benefit from cheaper equipment, parts, and feeds imported from other nations.
all trade barriers should be removed to foster competition

Certain tariffs can ostracize the US from better products at a lower price. However, lowering or removing said tariffs would be an economic disaster as they are a no cost way (as the tariff creator) of creating new revenue and sustaining businesses in the process. Removing tariffs would collapse the US agriculture economy. What happens when farms start going under because coastal states are closer to the source of trade, and now farms in South Dakota can't compete with the farms in South America when it comes to selling corn in California?
all trade barriers should be removed to foster competition

The world is rapidly becoming a borderless conglomeration of large companies, who both compete with and depend on each other to survive. It is time we stopped looking at the world like it was a hundred years ago. Commerce is entirely global now, and things such as trade regulations only hinder the flow of money into the hands of those who need and deserve it. A good example of this is the American automotive industry, whose cars are, shall we say, terrible at the moment. it is the policies of the United States government that drive up the prices of the much better European and Asian cars, which are not only more efficient, but also last far longer than any vehicle coming out of Detroit. Tarriffs fail to benifit workers for two reasons: 1. No car is truly made in America anymore 2. Only a small portion of American workers make cars As is stated in No. 1, no car is truly American anymore. Ford hires Turkish workers to produce parts in Germany which are then shipped to Mexico and assembled by Mexican workers and finally shipped back to the United States. Tarifs on Asian cars unfairly reward the American companies, who hire less Americans than Toyota. As for No. 2- Tarifs on imported cars benefit only a small portion of the American labour force, while they harm the rest of its lower and middle class citizens. Tarifs of any kind are unfair. American companies would not have to fear foreign goods if they would simply produce better products. I believe that a tariff free economy would strongly benefit the average American citizen/ consumer. Very few Americans actually produce things in factories anymore, and America as a whole is moving away from the old factory economy to a newer, more modern service based economy. Lower tariffs would benefit many retailer and support companies, and open the doors to new products from around the world. To put it simply, America is not, nor should it be, a major producer of goods. It is a seller of goods, and an improver of goods. The closing of a factory in any American city should be celebrated as a sign of positive change. We now live in an age where the Walmarts and Burger Kings are more vital to our economy than the Fords and General Motors, and our trade policies should reflect that.
AOW war debate, the european version!

I think i'll pass on the peace offer. I am again voiding the attack on my fleet in Swedish waters for the same reason as before. I am also voiding everything after November 16th, as that would be over 60 days. I am also voiding the capture of an aircraft carrier again for the same reasons as before. November 17th: France starts propaganda against the Germans for the use of a wmd. While most of the world currently is anti France, the UN publicly decries the attack, and as a result, Spain and the U.K. decide it is best to withdraw from the German world bank November 18th: France realizes that the German economy is too strong at the moment and something must be done. Francs signs a secret treaty with China. The term of this are: France will pay 50 Billion dollars worth of gold to china, china will suddenly pull out of the new euro, china will publicly blame Germany. November 19th: China suddenly pulls all support from the World Banks, and causes a sudden drop in the values of the European currency. China's own currency skyrockets in value as they have the only strong currency left. Germany receives all of the blame for this, as the world saw Germany as the general manger of the Bank. November 20th: Germany is in a full blown economic collapse. Europe begins to break apart. More Nations look to the French liberty note as it is a guaranteed currency as a potential alternative. November 21st: Germany sees a massive strike in the army. With the collapsed Germany economy, Germany can no longer afford to pay it's army. Moral is is significantly dropped. November 22nd: France turns to hack the electrical grid of Germany. November 24th: France relates the Germany of today to the monster it was in ww2. Nations begin to distance themselves from Germany. November 25-27: Europe as a while decries Germany for it's war crime, and blames Germany for economic collapse. November 29th: France and Germany sign a temporary cease fire for 96 hours in order to treat the wounded. The World watches. December 5th: France succeeds in breaking through into the German electric grid. This was easy as Germany was only focused on military aspects of cyber war. France sends a massive surge through the grid destroying the power plants, and infrastructure and setting mass fires across Germany. Without electricity is is hard to coordinate efforts to end the fires. Germany is dark. It'll take months to fix and hundreds of Billions of euros. December 6th In order to break Germany, France starts to fire bomb crops. Without electricity, radar is useless and Germany is too late to prevent the attack. December 7th: France targets and bombs airports and airfields harming Germany's ability to launch plains. December 9th: France firebombs forests. Germany is completely in flames. Riots break out nationwide. December 11th: France starts the Systematic bombings of key transport facilities (train stations, ports, railroads, highways) That's where i'm going to leave it. Good luck in the next round!
AOW war debate, the european version!

I well thought out response, though regretfully,Ii have to void your attack on my fleet. There was no way you could have taken a decisive victory to the extent of what you claimed. You also would have declared war on Sweden in the process, as your attack on my fleet in Swedish waters would have been an act of aggression against Sweden. There also is no way the treaty of the euro would pass, as Norway, Sweden, and Denmark are granting me military access, therefore i is no leap of logic to say that they are at least somewhat siding with France. August 29th: Market Meltdown. The United States angered by Germany's unilateral push to end sanctions on Russia, as well as their declaration of war on France, causes the United States to call no confidence in the euro. Billions are pulled out of Europe and all economies are under pressure. Germany is under severe pressure as their financial obligations of aid begin to outpace what they can afford. Germany manages to pull it together for now, but they are under pressure. (Kicking France out of the euro was one of the worst things you could have done. This means the euro is unstable and it's value will drop accordingly) August 31st: While Germany aimed their cyber war campaign against my media, i aim mine at the banks. Within hours, billions is funneled away from German banks. Anger ensues as most of the money was stolen from the poorest brackets of income. (A cruel move, yes) September 2nd: The German economy is over extended and with the new market crash, Germany cannot afford to fight a war, and give military aid. Something Has to give. (this, i leave up to you.) Germany also faces riots from the poor people who lost all of their money in cyber attacks. September 4th: France calls for a total media blackout September 11th: France ceases media blackout. During this time, France fixed their networks, and lifted censorship. September 13th: In order to take advantage of an incredibly weak euro, France creates a new currency, the Liberty banknote, guaranteed by French gold reserves. This bolsters the french economy, and allows for a faster economic recovery. September 15th: The EU is forced to dissolve, with a divided Europe, and loss of U.S. support, it can no longer perform it's functions. Germany is hit the hardest by this as they are the most heavily dependent on the euro's strength. September 16th: With the German economy incredibly weak, France proposes a peace treaty. The treaty of the Rhine 1. The war will end 2. The French Liberty Note will replace the Euro 3. Germany will pay France 15 Billion in Reparations 4. Both sides will demilitarize zones within 25 miles of the border. Summary: While i accomplished nothing on the military front, i made a good deal of progress on the economic front. Germany is weakening it's own economy by expanding the military. (Paying more to serve, while having less working back home to fund the war). French morale is still somewhat lower that that of their German counter parts, but both sides are still at decent levels.
AOW war debate, the european version!

"France can only attack with it`s border, and Luxembourg." I'll have to disagree with that. July 6th: In order to expand the fronts that Germany must defend, France, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark sign the North Sea Organizational Treaty. This will allow the french military access to their territory. In return, France pays 50 million euros to each nation. France will pay a further 20 million to each nation should France win the war. France also starts mass production of fighters and tanks, as well as small arms. July 7th: France starts cyber warfare July 8th: The elite strategist Luharis convenes a secret meeting in order to break the German economy. The following plan is drafted and enacted Operation Bank Break Publicly declare no confidence in the Euro and threaten to withdraw Spread propaganda regarding Germany's sudden lift of sanctions on Russia Spread propaganda on how Germany is the aggressor, and is starting yet another world war. July 12th: France launches operation Double Take France sends 70,000 personal backed with 100 fighters and 200 tanks, along with 20 MLRSs, and 100 SPGs, to the German city of Freiburg. This offensive is somewhat successful at first, but Germany quickly responds and stops the French 10 miles from the city. The French navy deploys to the Baltic Sea. They are escorted by 150 Fighters and 250 fixed wing aircraft. ( the blockade was easily broken, as this was deployed during peace time, and therefore had little firepower. if it was an actual military blockade, the ear would have started on June 8th, as that is an act of war.) July 13th: As Germany is completely fixated on their western front, (Germany had only deployed on the the French Border.), France launches a massive bombing campaign against the Germans (launched from the Baltic). Within hours, Berlin is in flames, and German fighters arrive too late. They do manage to take out several fighters though. Aftermath of Berlin. 970,00 civilians dead, major infrastructure either severely damaged or destroyed. Germany loses 12 fighters, France loses 23 July 14th: French army attacking Freiburg is defeated and retreats into France. The army is left with: 29,000 personal, 57 fighters, 112 tanks, 17 MLRSs, and 74 SPGs Germany loses 34 fighters, and 14,000 men, along with 76 tanks. July 15th: Operation Bank Break is successful, not only has war weakened the Euro, but with the threat of France abandoning the euro, and the news of Germany lifting Russian sanctions, the euro as a whole plummets. While this hurts France and the rest of Europe, Germany is severely effected, as they are at the most susceptible to weakness in the Euro. July 17th: France starts drafting more men in order to fight the war. Deployments: I have a defensive line on my eastern border with my army, and i have my entire navy, and most of my air force in the Baltic. (yes i know I'm supposed to be attacking, but i'm waiting for when the time is right.)
AOW war debate, the european version!

Okay, here are my numbers (France) Total Population: 66,259,012 Available Manpower: 28,802,096 Fit for Service: 23,747,168 Reaching Military Age Annually: 773,889] Active Frontline Personnel: 202,761 Active Reserve Personnel: 195,770 Tanks: 423 Armored Fighting Vehicles (AFVs): 6,863 Self-Propelled Guns (SPGs): 325 Towed-Artillery: 233 Multiple-Launch Rocket Systems (MLRSs): 44 Total Aircraft: 1,264 Fighters/Interceptors: 283 Fixed-Wing Attack Aircraft: 257 Transport Aircraft: 689 Trainer Aircraft: 264 Helicopters: 601 Attack Helicopters: 46 Total Naval Strength: 113 Aircraft Carriers: 4 Frigates: 21 Destroyers: 0 Corvettes: 0 Submarines: 10 Coastal Defense Craft: 22 Mine Warfare: 18 Oil Production: 70,800 bbl/day Oil Consumption: 1,865,000 bbl/day] Proven Oil Reserves: 85,180,000 bbl/day Labor Force: 29,940,000 Merchant Marine Strength: 162] Major Ports and Terminals: 14 Roadway Coverage: 951,200 Railway Coverage: 29,640 Serviceable Airports: 464 Defense Budget: $40,000,000,000 External Debt: $5,371,000,000,000 Reserves of Foreign Exchange and Gold: $198,700,000,000 Purchasing Power Parity: $2,276,000,000,000 Square Land Area: 643,801 km Coastline: 4,853 km Shared Border: 4,072 km Waterways: 8,501 km my WMD is VX nerve gas 15 parts-per-million Because Germany is defending, I will not make any moves during turn. Good Luck!
Sin does not exist people! Don't believe on some buffoonery that the bible says! Believe in yourself

Don't say "hi there" when you don't know what you are talking about and clearly guessing and shouldn't have taken on a debate because you are guessing and don't know what you are talking about and you thus have to invent excuses and you are a punk kid and you know it. After all you did use the word "perhaps" meaning you don't have the foggiest clue and thus you MUST invent excuses instead. Then you mention the storybook character of "god" in which you cannot even prove exists. No one can. No one has ---ever--- been able to. You only assume that he does. Bad assumption which is only based upon faith and gullibility until you can absolutely 100% test and demonstrate that in fact your god does exist. Faith is not truth. Faith is not evidence.
Sin does not exist people! Don't believe on some buffoonery that the bible says! Believe in yourself

Believe in yourself and not the corrupted totally insane babbling baby brained bible looking over your shoulder. You are far too good for that! Sin is contradictory and hypocritical in your bible. Thus sin does not exist. Does every man sin? Yes. There is no man who does not sin (I Kings 8:46; see also 2 Chronicles 6:36; Proverbs 20:9; Ecclesiastes 7:20; and I John 1:810) No. True Christians cannot possibly sin, because they are the children of God. Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is a child of God.. (I John 5:1). We should be called children of God; and so we are (I John 3: 1). He who loves is born of God (I John 4:7). No one born of God commits sin; for Gods nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God (I John 3:9). But, then again, Yes! If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (I John 1:8) Matt Dillahunty "What is sin and why should I care about it? I understand why I should live an ethical life and treating people in certain ways, we have secular foundations for moral systems. But sin from the christian perspective is a crime against god or god"s nature itself - right? If god makes the rules and you violate it, that"s a sin. Well what if god makes a rule that you should kill your child, does that make it good? Caller " Yeah that"s where I do things that are not aligned in what the bible says." Matt "Yeah. But are they good things? Do you have good reasons to have that the things you are doing are not immoral? Like do you have an example? Like don"t confess to a crime or anything. For example the bible is opposed to homosexuality. Do you think there"s something immoral about those who are homosexuals?" Caller "Uh there"s none that I can think of." Matt "Yeah me neither. And so if the bible"s opposed to it add the bible is the word of god, and the Koran is opposed to it as well and the Koran is supposed to be the word of god as well, and there are two holy books and let them argue over who god is and what god thinks and until they can come up with a sound secular justification for homosexualiy being immoral then I don"t need to pay their views any money because its just an opinion at that point." Now you go right ahead and and prove that sin exists in this world because it doesn't. You cannot even prove god exists. dsjpk5 will not be allowed to vote in the voting process.
Animals deserve rights in spite of their intelligence compared to humans

Thank you for your support, Dylan. Okay, back to business. Have you ever had a dog or saw a dog and thought it was adorable (unless if it was aggressive)? Well...I'm saying dogs are called man's best friend for a reason. Animals have been proven to be like dogs, who can reflect their behavior off of ours. Animals are, in a way, like babies; they make noise, do things they shouldn't, but they don't know any better. But unlike a baby, they at like this forever. But animals have a way of living that is much smarter than a baby's. If you take a look at how animal society is, you can see they can be like us in some ways, wrong, right, or just neutral. I would only want an animal to die to put it out of its misery, or if it could not be controlled at all, no matter how much effort to help it. Other than that , animals should live in a balanced population- some animals to be eaten, some to live on. We must keep balance of species. Overpopulation is never good. But animals cannot help but not know any better. They may not be as smart as we are to rationalize, but they are not intended for malice.