New Yorkers PWN

To refute my opponent's refutations: 1) "'No state is "perfect.' I agree, but some are better than others," he has stated. We're not debating over states, we're debating over the people! Plus, the Pro side has not yet answered my question: How can you determine which state has the "better" people? The definition of "better" is VERY broad, and there are so many ways you can measure it; just not as a whole with the word "pwn." 2) "Yes the terrorists attacked New York BECAUSE the icon of america, New Yorkers had to endure this terrible tradegy first hand, they made it through, Mayor Juliani said on the day when asked how may dead he said 'More than we can endure'" Since when did having a terrorists attack your state make you any more superior? The people of New York weren't the only people who endured the tradgety first-hand; my mother knew someone who was in one of those hijacked planes which crashed. A few family friends which I knew also perished. I don't live in New York; I live all the way across the country in California. 3) "New York is more of a center of commerce than SF, even since the collapse of the world trade center NY has had more Economic Input." Source? Reasoning? Evidence? the Pro side has stated in his definition of terms that we were debating New York as the state, not just the city. So, what happened to all those other cities besides NYC? =========================================================================== To refute my opponent's main points: 1) "New Yorkers are taking advantage of public transit." What does this exactly have to do with New Yorkers being better? I thought we were debating New YorkERS, not New York. Other states take advantage of public transit. There are railroads. Subways. Ferries. Trolleys and buses. Taxis. So, taking public transit makes you better? Sitting in traffic every day during rush hour in huge, gas-guzzling buses helps the environment? 2) "New Yorkers DEFINE city life" Just because there are many major cities around the globe does not mean that they are all modeled off of New York City! And I would like to remind you, we wre debating about the people, not about the cities! And we are debating about the people in the states, not commercialization of the cities! ========================================================================= Now onto my own points: 1) New Yorkers aren't any different than the common person; in fact, they ARE common people. New Yorkers go to work. Eat at home or in restaurants. Shop. Sleep. Use the restroom. Etc. What's the difference? For example, on a college sports team, people root for the winning team. Well, in this case, how can you root for New Yorkers? You can sure be proud to be a New Yorker, but you really don't have an advantage over anyone else. There are still people who live on the streets. There are still people without jobs, i.e. my aunt. 2) New Yorkers do NOT define city live For the 100th time, we are debating all of the state, not the main huge city! San Francisco/ all California residents do the same things that New York City/ New York residents do. What's the difference? New York has a huge city, but there are huge cities other places, too. What you see in Beijing is not going to be the same kind of deal you would experience in New York City or San Francisco. What you see in Bangkok isn't going to be the same cultural perspective as Sydney, Australia. New Yorkers define New Yorkers, and that's final. There is nothing that shows that ALL New Yorkers are far beyond superior to all other citizens of the globe. I will expand later on my next constructive speech.