Occupy Wall Street

Now let's get to the debate. My opponent's ENTIRE opening case is negated as we can see that he has escentially dropped the entire case by the de facto point that my 2nd Contention escentially negated it. My opponent raised the violence of police against the OWS movement, but as I have already have shown we can see that movement targeted the minority police officers at it viewed them as "Fools of the System" and of course the Leftist media in the United States and even on Youtube made several examples of this to point it out. Just like at the 2008 Republican National Convention an undercover activist turned in two protesters that were going to bomb the building. [1] Instead of the national headlines being about the bombers it was about the Undercover Activist betraying the people. My opponent then in his second round brings up the factor of education, but the fact is that it is not so simple in the US. I'm not sure who owns what in Australia, but a majority of the media is owned by the left. This is one of the only nations to censor Stalin's Ukrainian Genocide and even Ho Chi Mihn's Massacres. The Leftist media and public protested to get the US out of Vietnam, but when the US left over 4 million were massacred under the new Communist regieme. [2] BUT where was the leftist coverage on that? So we can see that there is a Leftist issue when it comes to the US, meaning that said educations are impossible without hearing a Leftist purposal while you're at it. If we observe the above graph we can actually see that income inequality actually worsens under the Democrat solutions. Now you may wounder why, but the simply the matter of fact that the Leftists are following the same economic plans and all of these things hurt the economy. We can see that these things based on Price controls and the regulations of the business are all things that harm the economy and that's one thing that the Democrats champion themselves on. In the current system, the industries have always been free and open. We can see that Entrapenuers have been free to do as they please and they have set reasonable prises and entry fees for the consumer. We can see that without a great amount of high internet regulation by the federal government that the internet has thrived in the current situation. Without this regulation that this resolution is purposing we can see that current industries like the internet have thrived “"due in large part to private investment and market-driven innovation, broadband in America has improved considerably in the last decade. More Americans are online at faster speeds than ever before. " [3] So we can see that regulation would kill inovation and it does this by ending and placing a cap on speeding up the internet. [4] As economist Milton Friedman argues in his book Capitalism and Freedom, we can see that if we abolish these price controls we permit the market to show us the scarce resources and these resources cost more, but with these controls it limits the company’s fixture to this issue and once again harming the economy. My opponent brings up Austalia as an example. It is said to be a Penal Colony full of Criminals, but this is simply not true. The main reason that they were a "Penal Colony" full of "Criminals" was that many of them were actually Irish POWs from the Brittish conquest of Ireland. That is one of the reasons that the steroetype of the Irish is that they're criminals. Just a fun fact for you there. Now, I am not arguing that this movement should be abolished, but we must see that this needs to be closely observed and there are some that need to be jailed. I AM arguing that the Occupy Wall Street Movement is harmful and does way more harm than good. Sources1. (. http://www.infowars.com...) 2. (. https://www.hawaii.edu...) 3. (. https://www.fcc.gov...)4. (. http://www.usnews.com...)