Our youth is our future.

Thank you for your points. I too will also offer some rebuttal.RebuttalMy opponents state these, in which I disagree. "a) a recent education, therefore having the most recent facts accessible"Facts are accessible to anyone, any time. In most jobs facts which are viable and needed will be taught to you, or will be learnt if they are that important, and if not, then you can visit one of endless amounts of resources to get new information, no matter your age. This point is invalid. "b) a wider capacity to reform what needs to be reformed"The only way to know what needs to be reformed is with experience, then you have seen it run and know what to do. I would certainly rather listen to someone about reform who has had more experience with it. Knowledge only takes you so far, in practice things are different. There is a reason the average age of politicians in the UK is 50[1]. Their experience gives them more capacity for reform. "c) great innovative skills"I let the other two slide as they were marginally sensible, but you simply have no proof of this. Innovative skills are a personal thing and a fifty year old could be more innovative than a twenty year old. Someone who has innovation who has been working in a media/IT based field for years however would have the experience on top of that, so not only are his/her products innovative, but with a higher chance to succeed. "Today's youth is the future generation, which means they will populate the world one day. They are more intelligible about certain things, like technology, which makes them great for innovation, which will drive is towards a bright future. This my opponent has chosen to ignore fully."The intelligibility of technology is dependant on the person. Innovation can be carried on by anyone, and nothing shows that the youth is anymore technologically advanced. If we take "youth" as "the period between childhood and adult age"[2][3], then these statistics show that technology is actually run by adults, those between about 25-34. A bright future is run by those who are skilled and experienced, as education is open for all. Here in these statistics and a majority of statistics you will find will show that men who are old enough to have had experience, but young enough to accept new technology. You also state education becomes better and better. Well why? Because new things are discovered, found or realised. And who are these people? Not the youth. In fact, 48 is the average prime age for a physicist[4], and with the new cosmic inflation discovery, I can tell you that physics isn't something to be conceded. These are the people the future rely on, the youth can only advance if people actually build the technology, if people actually do the research and if experienced men help develop the world. This cannot be contested. The latest data first of all can be found out by anyone, but only the experienced find them out. Your next point isn't too relevant. Information passed to the youth is brought on by the experienced. Innovating markets are done by those who know how to, and the people who build these markets set the foundation. Saying that elderly people cannot have these skills needs proof, but even accepting that you are forgetting the middle ground, those who aren't youths, or elderly. The adults, the ones who populate the market, the ones who use the most technology. The adults who earn more as they age as their experience gives them wanted skills: And the statistics for this are endless. Saying Conservatism cannot accomplish this is a whole new debate, which does not need to be mentioned. Even if Liberalism was a better ideas, those running it would be those who were experienced. Those to innovate and rule are those who know how to. The youth are taught to, and do, but only when they aren't the youth anymore. Yes, the youth now will run the world, but that's because they won't be the youth anymore, and they would have been helped by those who aren't the youth.I disagree with the statement that Conservatives do not lack the capacity to develop. Politics and technology aren't the same. Again, excusing the lack of proof, and excusing the fact that this capacity is dependant on the person, you can be a Conservative in politics and progressive in development. I am a huge advocate for technology, but the experienced will need to do it, control it, and they as I've proven above, seem to buy it more. "The youth learns from previous mistakes and innovate and plan for the future. Imagine what this nation and this world would be without innovation and reform. It would be dark. It would be dangerous. It would not be the world we recognize." You state that the youth earns from previous mistakes, and adapts. But those who are experienced are easily better than this, and that goes easily without saying. If you have more experience, you've seen what works and you don't have to take a leap of faith, but rather still produce quality, safety and dependant on the person, innovation. And it will be the world we recognise, because as we speak the experienced are making it run, the youth are being educated so they can eventually make the world run, under the help of the experienced.We live in a world, which people are endlessly working to make it function. Who are these people? The experienced. The youth will come to fill their roles, but they won't be the youth. So let's focus on those who work tirelessly, so they can help the youth even more. Helping the youth more is a constant pull, but helping those who do is a push, one that creates the momentum of experience, which only helps to benefit the youth, even more.Sources:[1]http://www.parliament.uk...[2]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...[3]http://www.unesco.org...[4]http://www.livescience.com...