What to study in college & why? [Career Challenge]

For our concluding messages, I need to first apologize to my opponent for stating additional careers in the last round. I had misread the original Round 1 post to be "Post 6-9 careers each round" and was further confused by the fact that my opponent chose to select 7 in one round and 2 in another round. As such, I kindly ask the audience to strike the later careers from my last round. *** Audience, I believe my opponent and I have had a wonderful exchange. Like you, I did feel the happy energy brimming with each post my opponent makes. However, we must consider that this is not a motivational seminar. This is a debate. As such, we need to consider who won this debate on the following factors: 1. Who proposed the best fields of study? 2. Who did the best job defending their study fields? To answer the first question, we must simply consider the following fact: Every single characteristic that my opponent touts about one his choices has been surpassed by a numerous amount of mine. Whether you are talking about personal fulfillment, salary, or creativity, the choices I have provided have exceeded those of my opponent by far. My opponent himself has praised four out of my nine choices: "Section 5: Supportive of opponent"s other 4 careers 5a. Pharmacist: Well"someone has to give out the medicine. 5b. Registered Nurse: It is a very good choice for its high employment rate. It is actually a pretty good choice. 5c. Software Developer: In this economy, I have nothing to complain about this field. 5d. Nurse Anesthetist, Nurse Midwives, & Nurse Practitioners: I actually don"t have anything bad to say about this. " Furthermore, my opponent has levied not a single rational point against any of my other five choices, preferring instead to demean millions of individuals working these so called "blue-collar" jobs and ignoring the practical benefit there is to mastering a craft, working with your hands, and taking advantage of that job security to propel yourself to success. In terms of defending their arguments, I believe the choice is also clear: Whereas my opponent struggled to cope with the negative realities of every fact I pointed out, with the improper citation of salary, and with stating obvious lies, I have defended all of my opponent's irrational accusations with nothing but rationality and practicality. Examine: "May I remind you, one year of education will start you off making well over $50,000 annually! " My opponent attempts to evade being called out upon his lie by saying that he quoted the wrong source, and posts another one with a $53,000 salary. However, he lies again because the salary is a MEDIAN salary (after many years experience), and he never addressed the fact that it takes far more than a single year of education to get to that point! And with all the opportunities my opponent had to defend his points, he squanders it with a semantic argument that I have not listed "study fields", but "career paths". This is simply ludicrous and desperate. Pharmacists study the field of Pharmacy, Plumbers the field of Plumbing, Nurses the field of Nursing, and it continues with Sheet Metal Working, Elevator Installation and Repair, Software Development, etc. The fact that my opponent has absolutely failed to defend the particular examples he listed for each study field, without lack for trying, is evidence that my opponent was not focused on the semantic difference until now. Note that my opponent never defends the study fields, only the examples. I am not fooled and the audience most definitely is not fooled, and I respectfully request the audience to deduct the conduct point for this obvious attempt at deception, as well as for his *two* attempts at distorting facts about Massage Therapists. *** Audience, let me conclude by pointing out the single thing my opponent has said that destroys his argument. "Practicality is a sin. " I have spent an enormous portion of my last round showing you, the audience, what the job market looks like. Even given the reality of the situation, my opponent scents all of his time talking about fantastical idealism. My opponent obviously lives in a much different world in which there is no unemployment, no hunger, no need or necessity for housing, clothing, or shelter, and one's only goal is to do whatever they like and they shall be rewarded immediately and to the maximum. If you too live in that world, please vote for my opponent, for his arguments are perfect for that utopia. However, if you, like me, live in reality, please consider that my choices are the ones better fit for living a happy, healthy, and ultimately successful life. Audience, I have nothing against having passion for your job, or striving for success. I only disagree with my opponent's destructive optimism and fanciful delusions. I believe practicality can protect people while they pursue their passions and strive for success, while my opponent wants to ignore practicality out of fear or ignorance of the benefits of keeping a clear mind about something as important as your future.