BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Obama Care is a disaster

If you're going to need money to get by, use private charity. It works better because it's their money. They don't have to worry about getting votes. Racism isn't as bad as it was before the civil right area. Minorities like Hispanics, Native Americans, and African Americans are usually the victims of their own decisions whether that was based on past racism or not, but it's not the White person's fault. Asians are considered a minority, but they do better in life that Whites. If Obama was supposed to close those gaps whether that would be racial, economic, or corporate versus small business, it has gotten worse under his watch. [1][2][3][4] We're still 2.2 million short of the projected goal of 3.3 million by the Obama Adminstration. I support privatizing Social Security, but that's off topic. Despite the claims that there are no "death panels" that Sarah Palin was mocked for saying, there was. Anthony Strokes was denied a heart transplant because of her history of law breaking and poor grades. [5] Ellie Porter, a six year old girl was unable to afford health care insurance or keep her doctors. [6] Senior citizens are being denied, delayed care, and cheapened the quality of their medicare coverage because of Obama Care. [7] An obese girl with a rare hypothamic obesity condition in Texas is being denied a gastric bypass surgery, who's covered by the military, won't pay for the surgery because she's too young. [8] Because of the coverage for pre-existing conditions, costs are being increased to cover them. Out of pocket costs are going up for each person with preexisting, so those with preexisting conditions are being rationed or denied. [9] Most doctors don't like Obama Care. 83% have considered quiting and 90% say that healthcare is going onto the wrong track. [10] The Senate Democrats cut the "grandfather clause" that Obama said would be in there. This would allow people who already like their insurance to keep it. [11] Medicaid related companies are making a lot of money off of the Patient Protected Affordable Care Act while private medical companies are not. This is a monopoly devoid of competition and work ethic. [1]http://www.nytimes.com... [2]http://www.huffingtonpost.com... [3]http://www.businessinsider.com... [4]http://smallbusiness.house.gov... [5]http://www.foxnews.com... [6]http://www.mrconservative.com... [7]http://socialsecurityinstitute.com... [8]http://www.nbcnews.com... [9]http://cnsnews.com... [10]http://www.ijreview.com... [11]http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com... [12]http://www.ijreview.com...
Obama Care is a disaster

Unemployment insurance or subsidized coverage run by the government is destined to fail. It encourages laziness, has no accountability, and wins the voters' vote who is receiving it. There are better alternatives like mutual aid societies where workers pay part of their salaries to the organization and later use it when they need it. [1] If you don't work and don't plan on working, you shouldn't be allowed to have it. Government allows this to happen. Subsidies cause an extra burden on those who have earned their health care. A lot of young and healthy people were counted on it enter the exchanges, but they can't afford it. This causes the system to collapse, because those who are paying for it don't want to get it anymore. It would hurt the economy. [2] The free market isn't 100% fair, but not everyone is equal. Some jobs pay more or are more important then others. It turns out that when time passes for the working poor Americans, their income increases in mobility in larger steps than the wealthier born Americans. This is in spite of the more affluent Americans growing faster than the less fortunate. [3] People give more when they are not taxed. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis proved this. [4] The 1.1 Million people that have health care coverage according to the White House recently. [5] This is This is lower than the 3.3 Million that Obama Administration projected. [6] Health care maybe increasing at a slower rate than ever, but that's still a big price you have to pay. The creation of Medicare and Medicaid, not paying the doctor directly, longer life span, and government subsidies is the likely source of the problem. [7] [1]http://mises.org... [2]http://www.newsmax.com... [3]http://www.stlouisfed.org... [4]http://research.stlouisfed.org... [5]http://www.foxnews.com... [6]http://www.theblaze.com... [7]http://mercatus.org...
Obama Care is a disaster

I forgot to add another problem. The problem with Obama Care is that it thinks everyone can afford health care insurance. This is not true. You can't expect the employer of a low wage, full time worker at McDonald's to be able to pay for all the health care coverage. If they could afford it, they would do it. They force you to buy things that you personally wouldn't need just to pay for the collective. There's not some greedy capitalist conspiracy going on. The health care purchase mandate fails. Obama has delayed the federal "SHOP" or Small Business Exchange Program until November 2014. Even though the State exchanges are still running, some are not completely working or cover you throughout the entire state. [1] CBS show, "This Morning," still finds out that the recieving end of the insurance companies relating to the healthcare.gov website (Obama Care) haven't got any information yet on it. [2][3]][4] Applications have nothing to do with the complexity of the bill itself. We would cut spending, but the Democrats won't allow any cuts to Obama Care, Entitlements, or education. Actually, when you cut taxes, you get more economic growth that leads to more revenue. Not everyone kept their doctor. It's plain not true. I don't approve of a government shutdown like some Republicans did, but that's besides the point. Obama refuses to negotiate with Conservatives or Libertarians on health care. [5] [1]http://www.shrm.org... [2]http://freebeacon.com... [3]http://www.cbsnews.com... [4]http://www.hhs.gov... [5]http://canadafreepress.com...
Obama Care is a disaster

Obama Care, also known as the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act, is a disaster for several reasons. One, working Americas usually pay me in premiums for other people to get subsidies. [1] This is eliminates the incentive to work. Two, some companies, especially small businesses, can't pay for all of their full time workers to have a certain amount of care so they have to fire full time workers and hire a lot of part time workers. [2][3] Third, the website for using Obama Care failed. [4] Fourth, the bill is so large that not many people read the whole thing in Congress. [5] Fifth, the people that run the IRS, the public schools, the post office, and the Federal Government run the health care system. A lot of those programs are into a lot of debt, have no competition or accountability and have too much power to run our lives. [6] Sixth, it adds to our debt. [7] Seventh, there is a doctor shortage with the increase in demand coming. [8] Eighth, some people couldn't keep their health care plan unlike what Obama promised. [9] Ninth, Obama Care implementation has terrible effects on the economy. [10] Whatever the solution for health care is, it's not what we have currently with the Affordable Care Act. [1]http://www.cbsnews.com... [2] http://www.advisorperspectives.com... [3]http://www.reuters.com... [4]http://www.huffingtonpost.com... [5]http://union-bulletin.com... [6]http://www.creators.com... [7]http://www.nationalreview.com... [8]http://www.cnn.com... [9]http://www.politifact.com... [10]http://www.wnd.com...
It is more likely than not that an afterlife does not exist

C1. Skepticism and Experience.David Hume famously forwarded the epistemological theory that we could only have ideas of three things: (a) what we directly experience, (b) what is logically necessitated, and (c) what we can logically deduce from objects of experience (ex. we understand the concept of a centaur because we have experience of both men and horses)[1]. As far as knowledge is concerned, we can only *know* (in any reliable sense) to exist, things which are either confirmable by matter of fact (non-logically necessitated empirical observation, and even then these propositions are vulnerable to the problem of induction) or by logical necessitation (such as mathematical proofs).This is the problem of experience. The concept of an afterlife necessarily lends itself to experience which is not possible while we are alive. Thus, unless one has an argument about it in the Heavens, there is no relevant sensory experience to draw on in order to epistemically justify its existence to someone. Now one may admit to the experience critique but maintain that an afterlife is deducible through logic or reason instead. As of yet I can see no contradiction necessitated by the denial of the existence of an afterlife. Therefore if this be the route Con wishes to take I implore him to show so in his R2.C2. Presupposing Dualism.The concept of an afterlife contains within it an important presupposition, that the mind and the body are distinct entities. The definition of an afterlife agreed to consists of some aspect of a person living *after* their body. Obviously for such a thing to be so, there would have to be something other than the body that exists. Therefore, since dualism is a necessary presupposition for the existence of an afterlife, it can also be refuted by refuting dualism.C2.1. Interaction.Dualism fails to provide a coherent explanation for how exactly the mental and the physical actually interact, being separate and distinct substances. The problem lies partially in the fact that mentality as a substance would (if it exists) exist distinctly from physicality. While physical substances are material and extended in space, mental substances would be just the opposite. To take an example, consider the concept of a non-psychico-temporal soul. Dualism can't provide an explanation as to how it would interact with physical substances like the human body. Therefore dualism runs into a problem of epistemic justification since there's no reason to suppose (or explain) how a non-material, non-extended substance could interact with physical matter.===Sources===[1] http://www.philosophypages.com...
It is more likely than not that an afterlife does not exist

===Resolution===The Pro will have the primary burden of proof in formulating and defending an argument against the existence of an afterlife. Con's burden will be to deconstruct and refute Pro's case. ===Definitions===An afterlife is defined as "the concept of a realm, or the realm itself (whether physical or transcendental), in which an essential part of an individual's identity or consciousness continues to reside after the death of the body in the individual's lifetime. According to various ideas of the afterlife, the essential aspect of the individual that lives on after death may be some partial element, or the entire soul, of an individual, which carries with it and confers personal identity."[1]An afterlife, in the scope of this debate, is not limited to any specific conception in religion or philosophy, such as the Christian conceptions of Heaven and Hell for example. An afterlife will be defined in the most generic sense.===Rules===1. Drops will count as concessions. 2. Semantic or abusive arguments will not be counted. 3. New arguments brought in the last round will not be counted. 4. R1 is for acceptance. Argumentation begins in R2. 5. BoP is shared between Pro and Con. ===Sources===[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Democrats Don't Understand Economics

Although, this may sound like a blatant attack on the Democrats, this debate is not an attack but an observation. Democrats seem to believe taxing the rich or those more fortunate just sounds like a good idea, but fail to address the ripple effects it will have on the economy. You don't just take away tax dollars from people or entities without them missing their cash and a bit upset at the same time. Furthermore, Democrats don't seem to grasp what "futures" or speculation in investments work, because if they did, they would see that certain decision like say "Oil Drilling" has an immediate effect on prices. They refuse to acknowledge that drilling will bring relief, however, they don't realize that just saying the words, "Drill, Drill, Drill!" will bring down gas prices. Why do you think prices are falling for oil right now, demand is down, and everyone is talking about alternative forms of energy, and drilling that speculators and analyst are taking all that into account in the markets. Isn't interesting that President Bush first announced the executive ban on oil drilling and oil fell nearly 10 dollars in the next three days, for that matter started falling as soon as he held the news conference. Democrats don't seem to get this aspect of the economy or just ignore or it, since it doesn't help them. Anyways this is just the tip of the iceberg, so this is my conclusion, Democrats don't understand economics.
Fonic the Hedgehog is stupid

I will rebut my opponent's case in this round and introduce a new argument. "Well, the answer is simple kind sir/madam: Yes, yes it may be a lazy design, but it's still a genius Minecraft skin! " Here my opponent concedes that it is indeed a lazy design. Why do I bring this up? We will get to all of this later. "You see, using the Red "Fonic" skin instead of the Blue, "Sonic" skin will completely change the way you view the game and completely change the way other people view you. " And here my opponent shows no evidence of either of the two extreme claims. Claim A suggests that using a Fonic skin can completely change how the player views the game, which is not supported by any evidence and is unlikely. Claim B suggests that people will view you differently. Depending on the context we are using, this claim could be right or wrong. If you mean that by people would view you differently in terms of a technicality, then that is true because unless you are color blind, most people would view red as different than blue. If you're saying people would like the red design better, than this is just another bare assertion with 0 evidence. Both of these claims ought to be disregarded due to its lack of evidence. "Humans prioritize the color red over any other color. (1) This is because red is a color that belongs to many of earth's most dangerous lifeforms and to many of our physical and sexual needs. " First of all, the preferences of colors are indeed subjective. Red may be recognized as a color that easily catches attention from people, but that doesn't mean people will like the color red. Second of all, if red reminds people of danger, they could easily be spooked from it. After all there is a phobia called Erythrophobia, which represents someone who is afraid of the color red. Now I am in no way saying that red is a worse color, but rather that color is subjective. New argument: Fonic is a stupid name. The creator: Arrrgh! What should I name my creation? 15 minutes later. .. . This is so haard! Aha! Fonic because it rhymes with Sonic! Because that is the best you can do when naming a creation.
Fonic the Hedgehog is stupid

Simplicity is not the same as stupidity:Hey you there! Do you like Minecraft, Sonic and the color red!? Well, have I got an ingenious idea for you!Ladies and gentlemen, please allow me to introduce to you... Fonic the Hedgehog! Not only does he let you dawn the super rad look of the speeding hedgehog himself, but he also makes you red!"Why would I wanna be red?" I hear you asking. "Isn't that just a lazy design?"Well, the answer is simple kind sir/madam:Yes, yes it may be a lazy design, but it's still a genius Minecraft skin!You see, using the Red "Fonic" skin instead of the Blue, "Sonic" skin will completely change the way you view the game and completely change the way other people view you. How so?...Red is energizing Humans prioritize the color red over any other color. (1)This is because red is a color that belongs to many of earth's most dangerous lifeforms and to many of our physical and sexual needs. Because of this, we automatically associate the color red with our most physical needs and our will to survive. It exudes a strong and powerful energy. It excites the emotions and motivates us to take action. It signifies a pioneering spirit and leadership qualities, promoting ambition and determination. It is also strong-willed and can give confidence to those who are shy or lacking in will power. (2)It is easy to see how this could possibly give you a tactical advantage in the game... Fonic isn't sounding to stupid anymore is he?A haiku to conclude:I "gotta go fast" But I don't wanna be blueFonic is red... YEAH!Thank you,Sources:(1) http://psychology.about.com...(2) http://www.empower-yourself-with-color-psychology.com...
Fonic the Hedgehog is stupid

The concept of one like Fonic is stupid because it isn't creative to use a Sonic texture and just slap on the color red on him. It is lazy and therefore makes Fonic the Hedgehog stupid and unoriginal. I am no way preaching that the creator is stupid and that he should delete Fonic, just criticizing his or her creation. If Fonic would have had an additional feature, then I wouldn't consider the concept to be stupid, but just taking Sonic and painting him red is a stupid concept.
Does war have an impact on children.

War might not be directly affecting children, war is still apart of the life of a child. Even if they don't know about it, war is directly around their eyes and nothing will ever happen to make them stop it. War is still happening in the world, and nothing will ever change it until war has gone forever. There needs to be peace in the world. Children's toys could influence violence as for guns etc. there will still be guns in the world, wars might not be advertised daily, they are still advertised and guns are still sold, whether it be plastic or real. Parents can have a choice whether or not their child knows about war more than others and they are parents who don't want their children learning about war, but the majority of children know about war. Children born in the time of war were directly affected and nothing can happen to change the fact that war had affected children. Physiological and physical damage has happened on children, whether it be from being at war or having war around their eyes. Your argument is invalid.
Does war have an impact on children.

War had a major impact on war because children had to deal with the loss their parents or family members. Children had to adapt to their new life very quickly and children weren't use to it. Everything around a child's eye was about war, and they never really a break from it. It was like a world full of nothing but war. War is difficult to handle with an adult, but with a child it is so much worse. Education was hard and many children became uneducated very quickly. How would you feel if your comfort around you was just ripped from you. I know I would not like it. The environment influences a child's behavior and if it is surrounded it death and killing people, that is what they are going to do. Nothing says that every child in the war was absolutely fine. War definitely had a major affect on the lifestyle, happiness and comfort of a child. It was up to the parent to protect them, but unfortunatly they were participating, fighting for their country in war. They never had the chance to ask their child if they were okay or if they were happy. They barely got to speak to them.
Commerce is better than Science

Hello, I"ll now post my argument. First the reason why I disagree is actually very connected to my opinion. Part 1: We need to mention that Commerce and Science are both connected to mathematics. Next, science explains thing, it can help, it can prevent problems and predict them,... Commerce isnt needed for survival, except in the damn capitalistic system. For instance it isnt as needed in non-market socioeconmical systems and is not even needed in true communism. We need both, but science is better. You can have a scientific-based economy, and not to forget commerce also needs innovation, thats how capitalism makes development. With physics we can know the true story behind nature (from particles all up to space and energy), with biology (the working of the living nature, the ecological systems and even knowing that a spider isnt evil) and with Chemistry (the processes, functions of reactions and its very connected to Pharmacy that improves health-care). Research and innovation do help. Especially in medicine, that today has a big problem with money, has made a big step through and has prevented many diseases. All sciences are connected, with this you can make a better picture of the environment. Science can help you to survive and to live the life easier, better and safer and healthier. Also if we wouldnt (and actually we mostly dont) connect science with commerce, it could end bad. Commerce has a interest only in economy, that has ignored global warming, pollution and many other factors to both us and the environment. Focusing only on commerce , would mean that we never would go to the moon, make space stations, test the project Diana, make satellites... because it would be cancelled for the better of the economy. But it would make a big impact on development. And automatically our lives. Part 2: "Science is the engine of prosperity. Economists have said that a third to a half of U.S. economic growth has resulted from basic research since World War II." Biology is quite needed if you want to know what that thing outside our garden is and how your body works. Chemistry is also a big explainer. For instance when you throw Sodium (Na) into Water (H2O), there will be an exothermic reaction (leading to NaOH and H2)+ lots of energy (in form of heat). And the H2 will react with O2= burning. Physics are the broad descriptions of how the environment works. For instance measuring speed is very useful. How fast is a object moving, if it moved in 60 mins for100km? Yes, its 100km/h. And Chemistry and Biology can be practical, if you know that the industry is using Monosodium glutamate in your food, while knowing what health hazard it is. But its also fun, especially Chemistry. Part 3: No you dont really need Commerce that much. Your budget and income can be calculated by help of Math. Thats it. You can choose between looking into the graphs of the worth of gold, or you can look about the new discoveries that are going to change our life.
America Does Not Exist

So I was looking through this beautiful website one day. Then I saw it. An article called "Australia does not exist" with countless dimwits presenting their "arguments" on why Australia does not exist. So I have done my research, through the years, and realised that America, in fact, is a hoax. That"s right. America is a hoax. The reason for this is why would a big and rich country such as America steal oil from third world countries? I tell you, America is just a cover-up for the organisation known as the Illuminati to carry out their illegal operations. You say you"ve been to America? Well you"re wrong. It is all part of the Illumati"s advancements with technology. You see, every time you go to "America", you"re actually part of a virtual reality program which makes you believe this hoax. What about those American YouTubers, you say? Well they are all fake identities created by the Illuminati. What I am saying will attract the attention of the organisation known as the Illuminati, as I have just exposed them through my logical arguments. Therefore, I must RUN. Goodbye for now, I must survive the Illuminati.