The British Government should provide all adult males with free beer vouchers

We meet again, Brian, and thanks for the debate! I only have an hour to write this, so here we go... 1. Tax payers should not be responsible for keeping other people happy and healthy. 2. The resolution discriminates against women. While women don't benefit from alcohol consumption to the same degree as men, the reality is that women who drink in moderation still live longer lives and have a lower chance of heart disease, which is also the #1 killer of women [1]. As such, it's unfair and illegal even in Britain to discriminate based on gender when it comes to public funding. 3. JoAnn Manson, chief of preventive medicine at Harvard's Brigham and Women's Hospital has analyzed alcohol's various risks and benefits over the years as a researcher in the Nurses' Health Study. She has said, "First of all, no one should begin drinking alcohol in order to reap health benefits, since it's very difficult to predict whether risks will outweigh benefits and vice versa" [2]. In other words, while there are some health benefits to drinking alcohol, there are some risks as well and you never know which will prevail: the good or the bad. Therefore this is a gamble with no guarantees that may even pose potential problems. Why make the government responsible for that? If England is anything like the US, there would be lawsuits left and right costing the government a whole bunch of money, even if the plaintiffs lose. It's best to let people make their own decisions when it comes to their health. 4. Speaking of which, is alcohol the only thing that's good for you? Nay. England's very own BBC reports that meditation alone decreases death and heart disease by 47% which is just about the same effects as alcohol that you provided. Does that mean the government should be responsible for giving everyone vouchers to the gym or yoga seminars as well? Or how about other food, even? Researchers have found that flavonoids found in apples, strawberries, bran and even chocolate can reduce cardiovascular disease and coronary heart disease [4]. If these things all have the same effects, then it logically follows that the government would help buy people these things too. If you think that's unrealistic, non-sustainable or just silly in general, then you should reject the resolution too. 5. Pro brings up the point that people who live longer pay more in taxes. The government should not make their decisions solely on cost benefits alone. Further, there's a detriment that comes with a higher and longer living population as well. In addition to population issues, remember that more living people puts more demands on the community. Tax payers will actually be responsible for a lot of these individuals (health care, etc.) as opposed to the seniors giving back. In other words, they would be both physically and economically burdensome most likely overall. 6. Pro said that new jobs would emerge in breweies and pubs as a result of this legislation; however, that is an a claim without any merit. There's no proof that (a) Englishmen will utilize these vouchers or (b) that more employees would be needed. This is mostly because vouchers for just 1 or 2 beers - which is what is meant by moderation - might not excite people a whole lot or have such drastic and dramatic effects that all of these new people will suddenly be hired. 7. We can assume that a fair amount of people would be encouraged to drink by this who usually wouldn't. As such, you'll have a greater chance of there being people who are drunk and/or who can't handle their alcohol. This will increase things like the drunk driving death rate and the accidental pregnancy rate. These realities combined with other potential negatives such as an increased risk of liver disease, alcohol abuse, etc. are enough to at the very least combat Pro's ideology to the point of neutral, thereby negating the resolution. Keep in mind that the resolution also specifies ALL adult males, including those who are already sick and/or abuse alcohol. 8. While Pro specified that these vouchers can only be used for beer, that won't stop people from selling them illegally. Food stamps are only good for food and yet people sell them for cash. The same would happen here, this encouraging illegal activity among British citizens. With that in mind, I'll end it here for now. Back to ye. [1] http://yourtotalhealth.ivillage.com... [2] http://health.usnews.com... [3] http://news.bbc.co.uk... [4] http://www.naturalnews.com...