Factory Farming Should Be Banned

I have to say that I am insulted by my opponents presumptuous and radical claims that state that I did not read his arguments, a claim that doesn't even make sense considering I have addressed all of his points. My opponent tries to cover his mistake of trying to switch the debate onto a track which implies that it should be adapted for future use while the resolution and his arguments clearly point to a view in which factory farming should be banned. Video evidence: from PETA via Youtube. Once again PETA is the worst place to obtain this sort of information from if you want neutral facts. This would be like asking the Democratic National Committee for information about the Republican party. It's ludicrous to think of it. My opponent once again clings to the fact that this price change is "few" or "slight" while I have clearly shown that this is not the case for much of the world and over time this "slight" price difference takes its toll on the consumer economy. As to your apparent attack on my use of Wikipedia. .. On this site Wikipedia is generally accepted as a reliable source and unless stated otherwise is to be considered valid based on precedent. Also editing Wikipedia is a thing of the past, you can no longer edit with free reign as you used and everything put onto their site has to be sourced with a footnote at the bottom. Nice try with the attack however. Next my opponent goes on to list all of their previous arguments as if you and I have not already read through them extensively. So, as not to be rude or unfair, I will also just repost my previous arguments that refute his. Low monetary cost — Intensive agriculture tends to produce food that can be sold at lower cost to consumers. This is achieved by reducing land costs, management costs, and feed costs through government subsidized agricultural methods. Standardization* — Factory farming methods permit increased consistency and control over product outputEfficiency — Animals in confinement can be supervised more closely than free-ranging animals, and diseased animals can be treated faster. Furthermore, efficient production of meat, milk, or eggs results in a need for fewer animals to be raised. Economic contribution — The high input costs of agricultural operations result in a large influx and distribution of capital to a rural area from distant buyers rather than simply recirculating existing capital. Food safety — Reducing number and diversity of agricultural production facilities may or may not make oversight and regulation of food quality easierAnimal health* — Larger farms may or may not employ greater resources to maintain a high level of animal health. Larger farms can potentially employ expert employees * Note these items are things that he kept refering back to in his assertions but have already been addressed. Humans>Animals - This is a generally accepted term and even if its not the benefits to all of humanity outweigh damaging conditions to a small population of the animals on Earth. Farm animals affected + all humans affected = worth it. The banning of factory farming would be catastrophic for the human population and while some of its practices are distasteful other practices taken from factory farming have benefited the agriculture buisness, the efficiency of farming while keeping the animals in mind. In the end is worth it to both the economy and world food security. I congradulate my opponent on his first debate and thank him for the challenge. Thank you.