BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
creation of stocks should be banned

"it's a gambling institution and it already crashed before. that is not just my opinion"It is much safer then it was back in 1929 when it first crashed, and after every recession we learn a little bit more about how we can take care of the stock market so that it is as safe and profitable as it can be. Its not something that cannot be controlled no matter how hard people try, the stock market can be made safe, has been made safe, and compared to what it used to be is much safer then it has ever been before. "but it poses a threat to everyone"So do banks but we shouldnt ban the creation of new banks just because banks can pose a threat..."the stock market in particular is unpredictable. and even if it was the best option, that doesnt give them the right to jeopardize the well being of the whole country. and a depression would affect everyone, even stock traders. a ban is for their own good, and ours."You cant justify banning something just because its for everyones own good... Car accidents are one of the leading causes of death in the world, but we shouldnt ban cars for 'the greater good', thats just stupid..."it's better for 1000 people to lose their jobs for a couple months, than for 1,000,000 to lose their jobs for a decade."The stock market though does a whole lot more then just create jobs, its a path to success for middle class Amerixans and small businesses who otherwise would have far elss options and chances of making it big. ". the crash was in late 1929, and according to encyclopedia Britannica, history.com, and Wikipedia, the Great Depression started around 1929/1930 and ended around 10 years later, so the crash did almost immediately result in the great depression."If you read your own sources you also would have noticed that the Great Depression was also caused by1) A massive breakdown in overseas trade2) Banks giving out high risk loans and investments left and right3) Overproduction of goods combined with low wages eventually causing industries to crash4) Poor decision making by the FEDAnd other things as well. The Stock Market was just one of many, many different things that led to the Great Depression, it most certainly was not the smokign gun that caused the Great Depression to break out..."if it was that easy, most small businesses would be big corporations by now."The reason Apple is as big as it is now is because people had the chance to invest in it and give it some needed early capital to do business. Apple started in someones garage and if people didnt have a chance to invest in it and allow the company to grow, it could have easily died within that Garage too. The Stock market serves a valuable purpose to average Americans, businesses big or small, and over time has only grown safer and safer. New stocks shouldnt be banned for the sake of 'the greater good' just because it carries some risk to it. All great things carry risk to them, that doesnt mean they should be banned.
creation of stocks should be banned

"Unstable is just your opinion though."it's a gambling institution and it already crashed before. that is not just my opinion"People should be able to do whatever they want with their money if they think it keeps it secure and safe."but it poses a threat to everyone"Where else can people invest their money and get a massive turnout in a short time like you potentially can on the stock market? Just because people can invest it somewhere else doesnt mean they should be forced to by taking away arguably their best option..."the stock market in particular is unpredictable. and even if it was the best option, that doesnt give them the right to jeopardize the well being of the whole country. and a depression would affect everyone, even stock traders. a ban is for their own good, and ours."if thousands of people lose their jobs, then suddenly its ok just because you dont like people in that profession?"it's better for 1000 people to lose their jobs for a couple months, than for 1,000,000 to lose their jobs for a decade."The stock market crash of 1929 didnt even cause the Great Depression"that is false. the crash was in late 1929, and according to encyclopedia Britannica, history.com, and Wikipedia, the Great Depression started around 1929/1930 and ended around 10 years later, so the crash did almost immediately result in the great depression. there are other factors that made things worse later on, but the stock market crash was the trigger that led to things like a banking crisis.http://www.britannica.com...http://en.wikipedia.org...http://www.history.com..."If you ban the creation of stocks then new small businesses lose a huge means for expanding and becoming more profitable which would then allow existing big companies to maintain their power."if it was that easy, most small businesses would be big corporations by now."The Middle Class and small businesses benefit from the stock market the most, which is why we shouldnt ban the creation of new stocks"no, those involved most directly in the stock market have the most to gain by the stock market. and again, a depression is not an ideal scenario for the little guy.you seem to not even care about the threat of a great depression. you are acting as though the stock market crash didn't even contribute to the great depression.
creation of stocks should be banned

1) Stability of the Stock Market"our economy is delicate enough, without letting an unstable gambling institution have so much influence over the well being of everyone."Unstable is just your opinion though. The way the economy works is through a boom and a bust cycle, and banning new stocks from being formed isnt going to change that for the better. 2) Road to wealth for the middle class"they can invest their money in other ways. better ways, actually."Thats just your own unsubstantiated opinion again, and people dont have to live by how you would manage your finances either just because you think its the safest way. People should be able to do whatever they want with their money if they think it keeps it secure and safe, and for millions of people, a valid option is the stock market and investing in growing businesses. Stock markets also are a great option for people who want to grow their savings quickly, which is something you cant do just by shoving it all into a bank or under a mattress. Stocks is a great way for people form the middle or lower class to protect their savings or grow them depending on which one you prefer, and not many other options exist that are as easily available to the middle class either. 3) Banning the creation of new stocksWhere else can people invest their money and get a massive turnout in a short time like you potentially can on the stock market? Just because people can invest it somewhere else doesnt mean they should be forced to by taking away arguably their best option..."so what? banning smoking would put people out of work. i say good riddance! if they are forced to get a real job"Ok now youre just being stupid.... You are arguing that banning new stocks would be for the best, yet if thousands of people lose their jobs, then suddenly its ok just because you dont like people in that profession?" it's better for a few people involved in gambling to find new work, than for our whole country to go into another great depression."The stock market crash of 1929 didnt even cause the Great Depression, the Great depression was caused by a host of factors that didnt kick in until years after the stock market crashed, most predominantly the numerous bank failures that crashed everyone's credit. 4) Way for new small companies to grow fast" if you ban stocks, the worst that happens is that small business growth makes up for the growth of big corporations"Thats the exact OPPOSITE of what would happen. If you ban the creation of stocks then new small businesses lose a huge means for expanding and becoming more profitable which would then allow existing big companies to maintain their power. Pro's arguments for banning new stocks are based entirely on his warped and ill-informed view of how the stock market actually works and who all benefits from it. The Middle Class and small businesses benefit from the stock market the most, which is why we shouldnt ban the creation of new stocks
Winter Season is Better Than Summer

Winter is ugly Pro seems to be very priviliged in the fact that she lives in a rural area where there are large, unmolested sheets of alluring snow. For us who live in more densely populated areas, Winter only brings black ice and sludgey snow thats an ugly gray colour. I assure my opponent that if there is ever a patch of pristine snow it will be quickly soiled by a dogs urination, or by a child scribbling fowl words on it.
Winter Season is Better Than Summer

"Its easier to keep warm in the winter"False. It's easier to keep warm in Summer because the temperature is always substantially higher than in winter, no matter where you are. And also the great thing about summer is that you don't have to wrap yourself in up a blanket and walk around like a Lunatic freezing his pants off. One is never cold during summer so one never has to do such a socially repulsive thing. Winter Bevrages are better False. Name me one Winter beverage that isn't scalding. Be it hot chocolate, tea or molten fudge, one always has the risk of attaining first degree burns over ones tongue. In summer however the drinks are just as appealing, smoothies, Ice-caps and what-not, but the drinker does not have to worry about burning his lips off, only getting a brain freeze. "In the Summer its harder to keep cool" True. Mainly because the temperature isn't minus 40 degrees outside, and one is able to retain ones body temperature. But have you ever heard of Air Conditioning? Swimming? Ice? A cold shower? Point is there are many more resources available that can cool one down, rather then warm one up. In the summer one can become more attractive Exercise is facilitated by the summer warmth, and one is able to tan. This makes one more attractive, and one can find love easier. In the Winter, Homeless deaths rise significantely Cold is the main killer of the homeless. It is during the Winter months where we see a drop in our lovable beggers. People contract frostbite and other unsightly cold related ailments.
We need to get rid of homework

I'll take this argument. Best of luck, Pro! I suppose for now I'll construct my argument. Homework as it stands is an integral part of being at school, and I believe that it should stay that way. There are two particular perspectives as to why I believe this. 1) From a student's perspective, homework offers a wide variety of advantages in return for doing it. As is its primary purpose, homework offers a way for students to review the material that they have learned in class. This is critical as it tests whether or not a student has understood what has happened in class, since most teachers will not have the time to do so during schooltime. There are also wide variety of useful skills that can come out of doing homework, such as time management, improving study habits, reviewing material, more opportunities to improve grades, etc. 2) From a teacher's perspective, it allows the teacher to evaluate how their students are performing in class. This allows the teacher to see who understands the material, and who needs more help. This is especially crucial during lesson planning; there is no point moving onto new material if a teacher discovers that 90% of the class did not understand what happened previously.
Albert Wesker Vs

https://m.youtube.com... In this video you clearly see that he is running so fast that he seems to be tell spotting . You can also see that he is clearly able to fight to armed men and still unarmed able to beat them while dodging bullets aimed at him . https://m.youtube.com... In this video you can clearly see wesker dodging bullets at point blank range and the ability to backflip while he still doges them . https://m.youtube.com... As you clearly see after Albert Wesker is injected by the serum 1 time he still has super human abilities which is shown y when he hits a metal wall and it is seen clearly bending and after 2 injections you can clearly see he is till stringer then an an average human quite stronger even in he's weaker forms . You can also clearly see that Wesker was stabbed by a knife with no affect to him once ever and that is in his weaker form and still after the 2 injection he is still string enough to brake metal when he tries to stop Chris and misses he is shown braking the metal . While yes he might be weaker by the first injection you can clearly see that he is still able to doge bullets without effort . https://m.youtube.com... In this video you can clearly see that Albert Wesler has the ability to pierce a human being with agin little effort . While I must say Albert Wesker only has one true weakness I see one weakness in Bruce lee that all humans they get tired eventually which is not the case in Albert Wesker .
Albert Wesker Vs

I would like to start off by stating a few rules that I would like my opponent to agree to. 2&3 rounds are for arguments only- no rebuttals 4 round is for conclusion/rebuttals only- no new arguments no swearing Thank you. Now: BUCE LEE "Bruce Lee (Chinese: 李小(845; was born Lee Jun-fan, Chinese: 李振"281;; 27 November 1940 " 20 July 1973) is widely considered as the father of mixed martial arts. He was a Hong Kong American martial artist, Hong Kong action film actor, martial arts instructor, filmmaker, and the founder of Jeet Kune Do. Lee was the son of Cantonese opera star Lee Hoi-Chuen. He is widely considered by commentators, critics, media and other martial artists to be one of the most influential martial artists of all time, and a pop culture icon of the 20th century. He is often credited with helping to change the way Asians were presented in American films." - Wikipedia (1) Sounds pretty good right? I will post 2 points only. More to come next round. The first one will be about the weaknesses of Albert Wesker. Argument 1: Weaknesses of Albert Wesker: "The virus, however, was also unstable, which also led him to utilize a specialized serum to keep the virus at bay at specific intervals. Ironically, his own serum was also his greatest weakness, overdoses of the serum would cause him to be poisoned" The side effects overdose include, but are not limited to: "vision to deteriorate and blur, his agility seemed to be slowed slightly...blood veins to pop out on his head, which also caused him to experience debilitating headaches." So, should Albert Wesker find Bruce Lee a bit challenging and his virus getting unstable he might just take a little more serum than he should. Though that may be rare, Bruce Lee would cream him if that happened. Vision deteriorating? Bruce Lee could then place an expertly placed shot when he can't see and knock him out. Someone can't heal themselves when they are UNCONSCIOUS!! Anyways: Argument 2: The Video Just watch this: Ok after you have watched the video especially number 4, don't you think Bruce Lee could react in time to Albert's quickness? And dang, he could beat a whole DOJO! He could easily have enough strength and smarts to be Albert. Thanks, Jacobie1121 Resources: (1) http://en.wikipedia.org... (2) http://residentevil.wikia.com...
Albert Wesker Vs

We'll this turned out to be easy Albert Wesker has super human speed so Bruce lee wouldn't be able to lay a hand on him and his super strength would mean that one of his punches will probably kill him and with that all albert wesker would do is snap his neck or punch him so hard he he dies because no matter how hard or strong Bruce lee is he can't compare to someone who survived rocket launchers aimed at his head and bullets and still recovers pretty fast so while Bruce lee is a great fighter Albert Wesker is stronger then him and more resistant to punches so even if he punches albert wesker he would just laugh at him .
the blind

I would like to go through a few things with you. First, you have not explained anything abut the topic so I would like to go against your arguments. You said "believers are unequal by lack of intelligence and awarness.. like a blind man" First of all, this makes no sense. You give no evidence why believers lack intelligence and awareness so you have failed to prove your point correctly. And I do not understand how you are using the lack of intelligence as a blind man. For your definitions., you said that blind is unreasonable. According to Dictionary.com, the definition of blind is 'unable to see or lacking the sense of sight' You have not given me and the viewers any reason why and how your value is valid. Believers all all different. As you said, some may be blind. Some are not. Just because someone is blind, it does not change how much a individual is worth. For these reasons. you have no proof at all. I will respect all your opinions when you respect mine.
For and against learning international news at school

What exactly,is so costly,about learning News? It's about eliminating the issue of illiteracy in America,which is a rare problem in most 1st World Nations. What exactly is so detrimental,to a already failing education system,about reading and learning how to read international news,it will keep kids,involved in the happenings of other nations,and not utterly ignorant of what's going on outside of America. We are looking to improve the Education system,not to take away things that are a benefit to literacy. Kid's need to comprehend stories,and reading the news,is an easy way to comprehend stories,kid's may not even care about the issues happening in other nations,but guess what? When I was 14 in 1999,do you think i initially cared about the happenings in other nations? No,but guess what,i became an informed individual,do we just want to keep our children oblivious to the happenings of nations abroad? That's not the key to success in an already failing education system,not in my opinion.
For and against learning international news at school

1. This debate is not about whether be aware of globe issue is good or bad. This is only about whether it has to be learning at school. 2. My opponent said he read news every morning, as a result of papers on international news stories he did when he was young (or younger). A lot of people, who did not learn international news at school, enjoy reading news everyday too, Also, Learning news at school does not mean kid would read news often in the later stage of life. 3. In the same way, learning this subject does not necessary lead to literate individuals, as reading classes and writing classes do. 4.News will lost its value when time pass. It is undoubtedly that when kids grow up news that they learnt in school will out of date. Education is cost a lot each year. So it is unnecessary to waste education resource on such subject.
For and against learning international news at school

Isn't the purpose of Education,to learn? Isn't reading International News learning? Isn't reading a fundamental part of the education of our children,which are the future of our country,and if we are going to raise illiterate,uninformed children,isn't that where our education system has failed. We need to improve our education system,and for me,learning international news keep's children informed,and literate,besides most news stories are written at a 6th grade level. Back in the 90's when i was growing up,we did papers on international news stories,and that made me a informed individual,who today reads the news every morning. This is a great thing,especially in a country,with pretty high illiteracy rates ,for a first world Nation
For and against learning international news at school

Well, there are differences between academic language and language used by journalists. . Academic English is much more formal and structured. Journalists in America are often trained to write to the 4th-grade level of education as some adults are not so literate. In other words, keep your words as simple as possible. Even if, reading international news could really keep literacy rates up to some extent, I believe reading books is more helpful and national news should has the same influence. Since national news are more meaningful to us, why do we or students need to learn international news at school? For me, studying international news in school is a waste of time. Students who are interested in contemporary issues can easily find access to obtain international news. For those who have no interest in news, passive learning would do more harm than good. Reference http://insights-into-tefl.blogspot.com.au...
Anime music is a bad joke

In conclusion.... 1. Not once did pro give any sources for anything. 2. Pros arguments were all based on his own preference which makes it an opinion. Opinion: a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. https://www.google.ca... 3. Con failed to rebut my last round. Which is important since I claimed that it is an opinion that he has and he failed to rebut that this round. So based on evidence and the fact the burden of proof should have been on pro, yet he never made a solid argument, it stands to reason who your votes should go to. The fact of the matter is "Anime music is not a bad joke" thank you for making this debate. I hope to see better ones to come. My name is Brian N. Johnson and this debate is now over.