In the U.S current income disparities threaten democratic ideals

Hopefully, we'll both learn from this experience. ==DEFINITIONS==As the PRO side of this debate, I hold the right to define this resolution. I define. ..1) Income Disparities as "differences in the amount of money people earn, in which they have to at least earn some amount of money. "2) Threaten as "to be a menace or source of danger to"3) Democratic Ideals as the beliefs in which that our democratic state was founded upon. ==REBUTTALS== In their first argument, Con states. .. . " First the American dream. america was made to were anyone could come from nothing to become everything, i will use bill clinton as an example, he didnt have much growing up his dad died before he was born and his mom was a student so he live with his grandparents most of the time. He was poor as a child, but he became president of the untied state " However this reasoning if flawed. Con doesn't look at the larger picture here. Do most people recover from poverty? Often times, being born into a poor household puts you at severe disadvantages than rich people. 1) Worse Education-- The poor have less access to education and less options compared to the rich. They cannot afford the high prices of college, and sometimes are forced to drop out of high school in order to support their families. 2) Mental Health-- A study by the APA has shown that there is a correlation between a person's socioeconomic status and a person's risk for mental disability and psychiatric hospitalization. Furthermore, this was true no matter what kind of economic hardship the person went through. [1] 3)Food Problems-- You address this in your second argument, so I will expand there, but for now. .. People living in poverty have problems affording proper and nutritious food sometimes. And even if you aren't in extreme poverty, those living near the poverty line have a strong incentive to buy cheaper foods, and in turn damage their health. Long term or short term, people still have food problems that impact their health. In Con's second argument, con states that "there are government programs created to help and assist people who dont make enough money to make sure that they have enough money to feed and cloth them, and there children. " 1) Rep. Jim Jordan said in a committee meeting that, "Only seven of 18 federal food assistance programs have been associated with positive health and nutrition outcomes, while the remaining 11 have not been effective. " I believe this almost speaks for itself. Even if some food programs work, almost 2/3 of them failing is simply too much.2) Even if, some poor people were receiving money, they are still limited to lower quality things than rich people. Con also said that "Third it will hinder job growth. simple if everyone is at the same finacil level. then then noone can run or open a business. but if everyone is rich then there is no reason for anybody to work. "1) How in anyway, would people at the same financial level hinder other people? Can middle class workers nowadays not start their own businesses? Furthermore, according to . http://dictionary.reference.com..., a business is defined as: an occupation, profession, or trade the purchase and sale of goods in an attempt to make a profit. a person, partnership, or corporation engaged in commerce, manufacturing, or a service; profit-seeking enterprise or concern. volume of trade; patronage Logically.1. If everyone was at the same financial level, they are earning the same amount of money.2. If someone is earning money, they have an occupation, profession, or trade that allows them to earn that money.3. Therefore, if everyone is at the same financial level, they all have an occupation, profession, or trade that allows them to earn money. Through this, we see that in people must have a business.2) Wealth doesn't last forever, and apparently CON does isn't aware of this. The situation that he presents, in which "there is no reason for anybody to work" is unrealistic, which is why I will not address this part. ==MY ARGUMENTS==1) Burden Of Proof-- As the Pro side of this debate, I hold the burden of proof. So, I shall devote this argument to prove that inequalities do exist. .. (lol this is obvious) According to ABC News, While the top 1% population's income went up by 275% in the last 30 years, the middle class's income levels only went up by 40% and the poor class only went up by 18%. This is solid proof that there exists an inequality between income levels in America. . http://abcnews.go.com...Further more, according to the New York Times, 46.2 million people are living below the poverty line, the highest number in 52 years. . http://www.nytimes.com...2) Influence -- Everyone has heard of this before. "Money talks" Guess where else money talks? Within our political system. Although the US's foundation includes equality and equal voices among the people, that is simply no longer truthful. The rich and the poor simply no longer have equal voices. The rich, often with plenty of money to spare, can afford to campaign. They can afford air time, advertisements, attack ads, and they can afford to skip work. Nowadays air times can cost sometimes up to or over $468,000 for just 30 seconds of airtime on some popular T. V. channels. Now I ask you this. Who gets their opinions heard? A group of wealthy people paying for advertisements or a group of poor people struggling to survive? The answer is clear here. One group of people have a bigger voice than another. This is a clear violation of our democratic ideals of fairness and equality.3) Education-- 1) People who are educated to college level have a much higher chance of voting.2) Poverty hinders and affects a person's education.3) Therefore, those living in poverty are less likely to vote. This simply furthers my point on fairness. Are these elections fair? Poor and struggling people often don't vote. Consider this. It is perfectly fine for a rich person to ask if they can leave work and go vote, since they can afford the slight loss in income and their bosses often don't care (if they have any lol) However, it is far less likely that someone who is desperate and falling into poverty will go vote, because they need the money and it is probable that they are working labor and that their boss is a lot less accepting. I don't have much time to make any more arguments. .. (I'm busy right now) So I will probably expand and make more new arguments in the next round. Maybe. .. Other than that, I await your response, con! ===REMINDER==I'd like to remind my opponent to use proper spelling and grammar, as it helps makes your arguments more comprehendable. SOURCES: . http://mentalhealth.about.com... . http://www.wn.org... Rep. Jim Jordan, June 1, 2011, in a house committee hearing