BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
increasing taxes, as a practical matter, is necessary for the financial well being of the USA

increasing taxes, as a practical matter, is necessary for the financial well being of the USA,,, aside from utilizing government health care to save money. where are the cuts going to come from to balance the budget, if there are no tax increases? background, we have a seventeen trillion dollar debt, and a deficit that fluctuates up to a trillion a year. everyone worth their salt as an expert says we need to do something about the deficit. about ten percent of the budget is spent on the poor, so even if you cut that in half, it wouldn't make much of a difference. even if you privatized social security, we'd still have current expenditures to maintain our promise to current retirees, which almost everyone agrees should be done. and most people dont want it privatized anywaays. perhaps gutting medicare and medicaid would us from having to increase taxes, but is that really what we want, and really necessary? health care is a basic necesssity, a basic right, if you aren't just lazy, no? plus we should be going in the direction of government health care, or tightly regulated private insurance. all other countries spend around ten percent GDP on healthcare, whereas we spend around 17 percent. that's a savings of a trillion dollars in itself. in fact, if we dont want to increase taxes, or gut government health care, the only other way to save the country's finances is via government health care. where else would we cut anything of signfiicance? sure there's plenty of waste and fraud and abuse out there, but as far as i can see, the only structurally significant reform is government health care or increasing taxes. to put it in perspective, roughly, we got 500 billion on defense, 500 billion on interest and debt payments, 500 billion in social security, 500 billion on general government expenses, and 500 billion going on a trillion in health care. most "poor' people and general government expenditures, which are often a rallying cry of conservatives, is not much in way of significance. historically, we had much higher tax rates, and other counties do too, and they all show how a country can do just fine that way. http://newsjunkiepost.com... i grant that im not sure how superfluous government pensions and perks are factored into the whole budget, there's surely places of mention in these areas. as per "growing" ourselves out of the problem, historically the government's revenue is only 18% of GDP, which is back to its historical average. i dont see how one could expect to do much better. so aside from government health care, i dont see how else we can balance the budget other than by increasing taxes.
The Flash Vs Quicksilver

The report is that quicksilver reached speeds of mach 640 on earth once. That is 640 x The speed of sound. In the scene that I was describing, the Flash would have to run at least 23,759,449,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 x The speed of light.(Bearing in mind that the speed of light is so much faster than the speed of sound. The Flash has also trained to deliver a punch with infinite mass. The faster an object moves the more mass it gains. The flash is able to control this power and punch with infinite mass. You said that quicksilver can dodge bullets. Flash could dodge bullets even before he trained to use his powers. The flash is so fast he can go faster than someone teleporting from place to place. You also mentioned that quicksilver can run around in a circle around you and kick you. No match for the flash. The flash to can run in circles around you. This can cause a tornado. Whilst running in circles the flash can also throw lightning at you. Take that. But of course,the flash could never run around a circle around you because if he chooses to reach his good speeds,he'll just create a black hole on the spot sucking you and everything else in. Apart from himself, he can easily outrun that too!
The Flash Vs Quicksilver

Alright. Everybody does tend to delay their posts a lot. Anyways, let's go into depth.Quicksilver is ridiculously fast. He can reach Mach 5 (3,691 mph), and has created time warps simply by running, which, according to Stephen Hawking, takes more than 10,000,000 mph (He says 25,000,000). According to the Marvel Wiki, it's faster than light. Looking at wikipedia, and other sources, Light goes a bit over 600,000,000. But Quicksilver is definitely able to run 10,000,000.He can also survive being crushed. (I wish the wiki was more specific.) What would kill a human, Quicksilver can survive. I don't have much to go off of for durability. The wiki states: "His body is capable of resisting tremendous impact forces that could easily crush and kill a human without suffering any serious external or internal injuries."Quicksilver's other agility factors include enough reaction timing to dodge Cyclops's laser blast point blank range. He is also more flexible than a human, and learns information fast.Quicksilver can benchpress 1,000 pounds with his arms, and 1 ton (2,000 pounds) with his legs. And remember what Newton's 2nd Law of Physics was? Force = Mass x Acceleration. If he runs at you, and he does a jumping kick, that would be like a bullet, but stronger. I don't know the calculations, though, so I'm not sure what exactly his force output would be.And he was also taught martial arts by Captain America.In conclusion, Quicksilver is not someone to take lightly. He'll run circles around you (probably literally), then kick you.Source: http://marvel.wikia.com...(Earth-616)Celebi already saw the outcome. Quicksilver is too quick. And he's silver, but not the metal. If you still disagree with Celebi's verdict, you need research.
The US Won the Vietnam War

The DebateEver since I have taken the side that the United States actually won the Vietnam War rather than lose it, people on DDO have been attacking me because they say I am being entirely wrong. This is a dishonorable assault on my credibility. As the Master Historian of Debate.org, I hereby start this debate to clear everything up.I will argue that the United States won the Vietnam War while it was there. My opponent must argue that the United States lost the Vietnam War.RulesRound 1 is for introduction. No trolling or semantics.
Most Girls Suck

Suck - to take in and consume by or as if by suction [1]Suck - bad [2]Most - Majority ofResolution - The resolution is essentially on balance most girls suckC1) Oral Sex Oral Sex - Oral sex is when you stimulate your partner’s genitals with your mouth, lips or tongue. This could involve sucking or licking their penis (also called fellatio), vagina, vulva or clitoris (cunnilingus), or anus (anilingus). [3]Note : Most commonly this is done by licking or sucking the part in question. How to give oral sex properly (see youtube video)http://www.youtube.com...Now this can be done to the guy by taking the genitals into her mouth entirely , sucking, or licking. Most girls prefer to suck and lick because it hurts less than shoving it in all the wayC2) Most girls like giving oral sexMost - majority ofActually some studies show that half of teens have had oral sex" Slightly more than half of American teenagers ages 15 to 19 have engaged in oral sex, with females and males reporting similar levels of experience, according to the most comprehensive national survey of sexual behaviors ever released by the federal government. " [4]By half of teens this includes both guys and girls but per the source it even states that girls are more likely to participate than guys. This is often because they like to please guys, and oral sex can be apart of their mindset and what they think a guy wants. Sources to show most girls like oral sex[5] [6] [7] This is proven through countless studies" University of Alberta researcher Brea Malacad says results from a study on oral sex indicate there is little doubt that oral sex is becoming a more common activity for young women. Study results show the act has become a fundamental part of what Malacad calls the "sexual revolution of the 21st century". And she concludes that researchers, sex educators and marketers of safer-sex paraphernalia need to catch up with the trend. "[8]C3) Sucking as in BadGirls are bad. This is proven fact as well. Actually most women daydream about rape fantasies [9]. They are literally bad girls, you could probably even call them naughty. [9] C4) Other things that girls suck C5) Menstrual cyclesThis speaks for itself. I mean would you want to bleed out of your penis once a month. This metaphorically sucks so hard. ConclusionGirls suck both literally and metaphorically. Resolution - upheldSources[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2] http://www.internetslang.com...[3] http://www.nhs.uk...[4] http://www.washingtonpost.com...[5] http://www.womens-health.com...[6] http://www.siecus.org...[7] http://health.usnews.com...[8] http://phys.org...[9] http://www.psychologytoday.com...
There are a finite amount of human sexualities.

No rules or structure for this debate. Just debate/comment if you disagree. Definitions: Sexuality: The romantic and/or sexual attraction in regard to the human sexes. Sexual preference: Other variables of romantic and sexual attraction that don't relate to biological sex. Ex: age, Height, Income, Weight, Personality, Gender identity, Etc. The two-sex model: If we were to assume there are only two possible sexes in humans, And only two possible options for each sex (attraction or no attraction), Then there could only be 4 possible sexualities. Straight - attraction to the opposite sex Gay - attraction to the same sex Bisexual - attraction to both sexes Asexual - attraction to neither sex However, If we were to consider intersex or transgenders as a third sex, Since they often display ambiguous sexual characteristics, Then the 3-sex model would go as follows. Straight Gay Bisexual Asexual Intersex + bisexual - attraction to all 3 sexes Intersex + straight - attraction to the opposite sex plus those whose sex is ambiguous Intersex + gay - attraction to the same sex plus those whose sex is ambiguous Intersex only - attraction to only people whose sex is ambiguous There's a simple equation to find out the number of possible sexualities depending on however you wish to measure it: i - possible options per sex (ex: attraction or no attraction) n - possible sexes i^n - the equation for possible sexualities
pedophiles should be put to death

At this point I would rather you pick up a book about grammar and proper sentence structure then lecture me about what could and could not happen to my family. I could not understand your argument to the core, but I will still explain some things. Less people of one type does not make the problem go away. Pedophilia is a sexual orientation. It is very disgusting, and I would have to agree with you on that, but it is still a sexual preference. Just like homosexuality and bestiality (no I am not comparing homosexuality and bestiality), it is all sexual preference. Pedophilia was widely regarded in medieval Europe and there are quite a lot of pedophiles in the Middle East as of today. We have evolved to disregard pedophilia and as a society have accepted that it is rather offsetting. However, that does not equal death. You can have certain feelings or emotions but learn not to act upon them. If you are a pedophile, that means you are attracted to children. If you are a molester, that means you rape and have sex with children. That is the difference. Also, need I mention that lawfully it can be considered pedophilia to be an adult of 18 years and have sexual relations with a "minor" of 17 years. It is wrong to assume that I like pedophiles. We both share the common disgust for pedophilia, I just happen to have a more educated response as to how we deal with pedophiles. If a man or woman has sexual relations or any intimate relations with a child, then they shall be sent to jail. If this problem persists, then a heavier punishment can be placed upon them. You should only every give your life if you take the life of someone else.
pedophiles should be put to death

I accept the challenge. I will state that pedophiles should not be put to death. Let me start off with definitions that I will use throughout my overall argument. Pedophilia - sexual feelings directed toward children. Pedophile - an adult who is sexually attracted to children. Rape - unlawful sexual intercourse or any other sexual penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, with or without force, by a sex organ, other body part, or foreign object, without the consent of the victim. Pedophilia, just like homosexuality and heterosexuality, is a form of sexual preference. It is by no means something that all pedophiles act upon. What you are describing is child molestation, which is unlawful sexual intercourse or sexual activity with a child as an adult. My previous statement will be the main basis for my argument from now on. I await your response and opening argument. Then I shall state my rebuttal.
Resolved: The US Federal Government should remove military presence and economic aid from S. Korea

I will accept the amendment and I do understand that my opponent has not the time to construct an argument. I understand the conundrum and instead will ask my opponent to post an argument for next round if possible. Keep this in mind judges: The forfeit should not be the reason I win this debate. Vote on who convinced you more and maybe just dock him for points against conduct if you feel it is necessary. This debate is not over, I will continue with a short rebuttal so that my opponent at the very least can respond to it and possibly not my monster of the last rebuttal. Thank you. Rebuttal 1: Nuclear program What I have not refuted so far is the power of the nuclear program that North Korea maintains. However, let us look towards a very basic idea in the Cold War, which is referred to as Mutually Assured Destruction. This concept basically states that because two nations have nuclear weapons, there are going to be tensions. However, when one launches a nuclear bomb, they know that the response to the nuclear warhead, will, in fact, be another nuclear warhead aimed at their state. This response will warrant more responses and ultimately, would result in destruction. . http://www.nuclearfiles.org... Of course, according to the previously cited article, this was then replaced with mutually assured security, a doctrine which depended on all nations acting for the global security of all nations. However, the basic principle of Mutually Assured Destruction has made inaction occur in the past with the Cuban Missile Crisis where the Soviet Union sent nuclear bombs down to Cuba to threaten the US to get rid of the bombs in Turkey, which was close to the Soviet Union. The Navy was sent in to block the Soviet Union from delivering the missiles to Cuba, which resulted in a threatening stalemate where each side had nuclear weapons at a stand-off. The result was that each side withdrew the nuclear weapons from the nations they were asked to remove them from. Why is this? Because it could have resulted in a nuclear conflict that could have killed millions. in their respective home countries. . http://www.history.com... This type of coercing has worked in the past and it will work again. Vote pro. This will be my only other rebuttal. I was planning on just doing an entire case, however, that does not seem necessary or feasible. Tell me next round if you would like me to forfeit the round after that. Thanks, blamonkey
Resolved: The US Federal Government should remove military presence and economic aid from S. Korea

With that established, I will highlight the key voters and how I have won on all of them, while continuing refuting the responses against my case. ==Overview==He continues to concede to all of it. What does this mean for the round? I began to write this argument but I unfortunately do not have enough time to finish it. I apologize to my opponent and thank him for a wonderful debate. I will post a round 4 but this lost round will guarantee him victory. I do wish to debate this topic again at a later time.
PE courses should be mandatory for NC State students to complete in order to graduate

The PE courses that even offer beginner, intermediate, and advanced levels are only a select few of the sports. Some are offered at just the beginner level while others are offered at a level that is more strenuous. For example, I feel I am an athletic person and work out on a daily basis. I enrolled in a 100 level aerobics course at N.C. State and though it was not difficult for me by any means it did challenge me. Some other students in my course who were not as athletic could not keep up and by the time they realized they were in over their heads they could not drop the course without penalty. So if courses are being offered at different levels to help students then the courses need to be explicitly outlined, which they are not at this current time. Different levels should be offered for all the sports and students should be warned about the levels of intensity in more detail then just beginner, intermediate, or advanced. Well if N.C. State is requiring students to take physical education courses to understand why they should exercise and stay healthy, why if they had the means would they not provide nice facilities for students to work out without any requirements aside from being a student? There should be no hour requirements for a student to be able to use the workout facility, because that would go against what N.C. State is trying to impress upon students by requiring them to take PE and understand physical health. Furthermore, you cannot assume weather students in the summer courses are taking 6 hours of summer school or not, therefore you statement cannot be deemed as true or fact. Although you're supposed to gain understanding of general education PE courses, you have already covered that in most high school curriculums. Since college is supposed to broaden your education as you said, then why would you be required to be re-taught something you have been taught since elementary school? Naturally for those who have not been taught Physical Education they can enroll in the courses. But for those who have already taken and passed the courses, shouldn't they be allotted more hours for other subjects they have not yet had the chance to take. Therefore, it seems quite redundant and a complete waste of time to require PE courses that most students have a solid history with.
PE courses should be mandatory for NC State students to complete in order to graduate

The PE courses that are offered at N.C. State can provide for students of all athletic levels and abilities because of the PE requirement. Courses are offered at the beginner, intermediate and advanced level for different sports and therefore a student can enroll based on their known capabilities. Furthermore there are so many different sports offered due to the requirement, making it so that students most likely have interest in at least a couple of the options available and be comfortable will the difficulty level of a specified course. Therefore, a freshman could take a course with a senior because they athletic levels may be the same. To be able to engage in the activities offered at Carmichael Gym you have to be enrolled in 6 hours at N.C. State. Rarely are students enrolled in less than 6 hours during the a school semester, which enables them 9 months of a free place to workout. Furthermore, students usually go home for the summer and therefore it would not matter either way, but those who do stay are normally enrolled in at least 6 hours. By taking only 6 hours during the summer they are allowed to use the gym facility. Therefore, the students that actually stay for the summer are likely taking full advantage of summer school and are in turn admitted to working out in the Carmichael facility. How is six hours of your college career really taking away from course objectives in your major. The point of college is to get a broad understanding of a lot of different subjects, which is why all of your required courses are not in your major curriculum. That is why you are required to take general education courses such as English, math, or science. Taking a physical education course will give you a basic knowledge on health issues and only provide you benefit as I have previously stated.
PE courses should be mandatory for NC State students to complete in order to graduate

Although students may gain some sort of knowledge from having a required PE course, students can also gain nothing. First of all, in most PE courses that are required there is a very broad variance of physical abilities between the students enrolled. Some may have never worked out in their lives and others could be on a sports team for the school. Therefore, it is really difficult to say that a course is definitely providing some knowledge for all people enrolled, because the course is targeting such a range of athleticism. For example, academically classes have a very level system which indicates the courses expectations and difficulty. A freshman would not want to take a high level course with a senior whose almost completed her college career, because the difference in the education background on that subject would be so far astray. What is the reasoning behind the building of the Carmichael facility. Was it to benefit students who are taking PE courses or was it to benefit the reputation of the school. The Carmichael facility and the perks offered with it are just for any N.C. State student. This student must be enrolled in a certain number of hours at a particular time. For example, N.C. State students who are not enrolled in a certain amount of on campus courses cannot partake in the gym facility. So, partaking in PE courses does not completely pertain to getting the benefits of a workout facility, because under certain conditions you will not reap the benefits of the facility. Is the point of going to a university to make sure you get a beginner's knowledge of health issues or is it to all the possible time allotted to mastering in your chosen major. If the PE department is so concerned with spreading a basic understanding of how to work out and be healthy, then a more extensive, structured program should be enacted. For example, more classes should focus on how to workout in an actual gym including cardio machines, free weights and weight machines, not how to play badmitton or beginner soccer. If people want to engage in a sport they will, and until physical education structures itself around offerings the people would conceivably engage in throughout their lives, then required courses offering how too's on sports should not be required for students.