BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Socialism is evil

" As a few examples; Venezuela, North Korea, And Russia. This has been tried many times before without success. " - These are 3 of many countries that have gone socialist, And historically and recently there have been very successful countries with socialization. The United Kingdom, Norway, Germany, Denmark, Portugal, Switzerland, Canada, And Sweden also have high levels of socialization in their countries and are prospering and some of which are arguably better than the US. " Capitalism has historically raised the living standards of the majority of the world's population. " - While the US has raised the standard of living, Socialism has helped it. Capitalism in it's purest form is not viable for sustaining a country. The most accurate example of a purely based capitalistic country with little to no socialism is during the industrial revolution mainly in Europe and America. During this time there were little to no regulations or socialization, And in this time the working conditions were very poor, The vast majority of people lived in poverty, The environment was in shambles, And disease ran rampant. - More socialized countries according to US News, Have higher median wages than the US does. For example, The US's median wage was around 59, 000. Switzerland had a median GDP per capita of 62, 000, Norway has 72, 000, Ireland has 73, 000, And Luxembourg has around 105, 000 all of which have higher levels of socialization than the US does. So stating that more socialized countries don't have higher standards of living if not HIGHER standards of living are inaccurate. " Redistribution implies the seizure of money and spreading it; this makes more government control a necessity. " - And in a capitalist system, All of the power goes to greedy corporations that would rather see people die than to see their profit margins drop. Statistically, 45, 000 people die in the US from being underinsured and people everywhere are going bankrupt from privatized college. - I would rather see a government providing these services since the government at least does these for the good of the people are not for profit. Countries such as Norway, Japan, And the United Kingdom have socialized medicine and have higher life expectancies than the US. In fact, Spain is actually leading in the worlds life expectancy and has national healthcare. - Redistribution of Wealth occurs in America as well based on the definition. This is basically what taxes are. Taxes essentially take some wealth from others and create socialized programs such as the military, Education, And healthcare. So unless you are going to be arguing for an anarcho-capitalist country, You have to have some level of redistribution. SOURCE, h t tp s: / /w ww. U snews. C om/n ews/be st-c ountr ies/ov erall-ra nkin gs
Socialism is evil

I will be arguing that Socialism, Under the definition he posted, Is harmful to society (evil). My pointsSocialism has a historically high failure rate. As a few examples; Venezuela, North Korea, And Russia. This has been tried many times before without success. Socialism isn't viable as an economic system. Ties into my prior point, I believe everywhere a purely socialist economy has been attempted is a failure. Socialism is less efficient as an equalizing agent than capitalism. Capitalism has historically raised the living standards of the majority of the world's population. Socialism centralizes power and incentivises corruption. Redistribution implies the seizure of money and spreading it; this makes more government control a necessity. I look forward to this debate and the arguments.
Socialism is evil

Due to the nature of this topic, I do not have to prove why anything is moral, You have to prove to me why it is immoral. However before we begin I would like to define Socialism, Redistribution of wealth, And evil. Also pro will waive the last round since I am using this round to establish rules and definitions. Socialism: The state owns the common means of production and redistributes wealth Redistribution of Wealth: Redistribution of income and redistribution of wealth are respectively the transfer of income and of wealth (including physical property) from some individuals to others by means of a social mechanism. Evil: Harmful to society
The Benefits of a Wall with Mexico

In closing, I've demonstrated that the wall is not only possible to build, as I've listed numerous avenues of funding it. I demonstrated how it could breed new growth for the economy through infrastructure development, jobs, and even tourism. Not to mention reduce illegal immigration and the crime that comes with it. I proposed a cost-effective way in which we can kill two birds with one stone and even incentivize Mexico not through intimidation or coercion but in benefit to them as well. As the opponent continues to forfeit (unfortunate for my first debate), obviously he has done little in the way of dissuading you from my opinions. Thank you
The Benefits of a Wall with Mexico

As there is no counter-argument to rebuttal. I will continue with this thought. The IRS is sitting on $1 billion dollars of uncollected tax returns for 2012 that expire this year if unclaimed (1). This is an example of funding that could be used towards this wall. With the previous creative ways of paying for this wall mentioned above. The benefits of making the wall not only a wall but making it infrastructure. The estimated earnings from the great wall of china in 2010 were the $2.88 billion (2). That easily offsets the costs of maintenance, and would pay for itself quickly. This is not to mention that the Government collected $2.4 trillion dollars in income taxes (3). That is $0.005 per dollar to fund this at the estimate of $10-12 billion. If the majority of tax payers support which the poll numbers in round 3 suggest. A transparent 0.1% tax over 5 years imposed (to reach 12 billion) is menial. (1) https://www.irs.gov... (2) http://regiosuisse.sswm.info... (3) http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com...
The Benefits of a Wall with Mexico

Since 1990, the US has been erecting barriers to disrupt illegal immigration into the US from Mexico(1). This is not a new concept, and will continue to be an issue as majority of American support this idea 62% say that border security needs to be top priority in immigration policy (2) Currently, 3.7 billion being asked by the president to combat illegal immigration (3) We already have bills that are going to span $9 billion from 2016-2025. In 2006 the Secure Fence Act allocated 10.4 billion towards border security (4). We are already spending the money, why not make our money go further. We spend an exuberant amount maintaining in the amount of 6.5 billion over it's lifetime (5) the 600+ miles of fencing as it is with more than 4,000 breaches in 2010 alone (5). The wall would reduce the number of breeches, it would minimize maintenance (it's concrete vs fencing that can be cut). If we're going to spend the money why not make it beneficial to the US and maybe even to Mexico. With the out of box thinking mentioned in previous arguments, alternative energy projects. The benefit of the Environmental Protection Act that cost $65 billion is estimated to benefit of $2 trillion dollars (health improvements and the effects of this). So how about we make the wall or parts of the wall with pollution eating concrete (6). This could clean up the air for both Mexican border cities as well as the US. We could also make part of the physical barrier water treatment facility to clean up shared polluted water (secured facility). This will once again benefit both Americans and Mexicans. This means we can start allocating funding for it from other avenues on the US side, and it might become mutually beneficial for the Mexican government to aide funding it. If we allowed them to assist in building it we are creating jobs for their country which has a growing unemployment. This could strengthen ties with our neighbors to the south which would avoid the potential for stirring up war as you mentioned previously. By reducing illegal immigration to only those that overstay their welcome in the US. We are reducing the costs the US incurs from educating illegal immigrants both federally and at the state level. As well as reduce healthcare expenditures as a result of illegal immigration. Law enforcement of illegal immigration crimes would be reduced. The federal assistance that illegal immigrants would also be reduced drastically. Through the previous described methods of funding (alternative energy funds mentioned above) we could use that for solar. The EPA funding that is already allocated for the border could go to make this a pollution reducing wall. A water treatment facility (secured) on the border could also be used. And any of a number of out of the box forward-thinking physical barriers that would provide security and have alternative benefits as well. All of these things create more jobs as well. (1) https://ntrl.ntis.gov... (2) http://i2.cdn.turner.com... (3) http://www.nytimes.com... (4) http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov... (5) http://www.nytimes.com... (6) http://precast.org...
The Benefits of a Wall with Mexico

I mentioned the current political argument surrounding the wall, I did not however take a position that the Mexican Government would pay for said wall. However, in the interest of good fun, I will defend that position as well as my own. In order to explain how to pay for it all, an estimate of the cost must be agreed upon. The most common amount thrown around is 10-12 billion. Trump's Plans to Get Mexico to Pay Include: Tariffs on trade - The US imports 294.7 billion dollars worth of Mexican goods. The US to Mexico balance of trade per the Census Bureau reported that the US imports 58.3 billion dollars more than we export to Mexico. So this is clearly in Mexico's favor (1). This alone with a little over a 4% tariff would reach the magic number of 10-12 billion. Impound Remittances - The US sent nearly $24.8 billion in remittances to Mexico in 2015 (2). By halting that or putting a tax on that we are placing economic hardship on Mexico as well as potentially keeping that money circulating in the US economy. A 10% fee over the span of 5 years would accrue the 12 billion or even a 5% fee over the span of 10 years. There are other economic sanctions we could impose to cause economic strain for Mexico, which don't really require further explanation as the above are more than enough to pay for this venture. --------------------------------------------------- Now back on topic for my original argument. I think that the 10-12 billion is underestimated as far as a wall we should build. I think innovative 2-birds with one stone ideas could make this a feasible and beneficial feat. If we were to spend some of the $39 billion dollars annually(3) on alternative energy in perhaps making a secure alternative energy wall Or if you agree with the above premise of getting Mexico to fork over money for a wall and we spread the budget over 5-10 years. We are looking at a massive budget for this wall. One that could be such an impressive display of human development that it draws tourism, creates jobs, increases energy independence, and helps secure our borders. In Response to your mention of a "premature war". If you look at the budgets of both countries for defense spending as well as the size of the military for each, not to mention the above economic sanctions we could impose. This event doesn't seem likely to cause such a war. Suppose we do make a massive wall that attracts tourism and Mexico did end up paying for part of it, it wouldn't be a bad idea to give them some of that money. So the wall would reduce illegal immigration and crime that comes with it, increase US jobs (both for building the wall as well as replacing illegal immigrants), decrease the cost of government benefits, healthcare costs associated with illegals, and many other cost reductions. (1) https://www.census.gov... (2) http://www.nbcnews.com... (3) http://humanevents.com...
The Benefits of a Wall with Mexico

While there is a lot of debate surrounding the claims of Trump to get a wall built between the US and Mexico border, many question the practicality as well as the feasibility of getting Mexico to pay for it. I will argue that a wall is both enriching for the economy as well as a necessity to mitigate the harm that comes from illegal immigration, drug/human trafficking, terrorism, and a plethora of other negative ramifications of loose border security.
The united states' defense budget should be decreased by at least $200 billion

Please don't accept if you're going to forfeitThe past two times I tried this debate, the contender forfeited. I suspect this might have been the case because they found that they couldn't refute my points perhaps, since they were online during the time it was their turn to post. So, please, don't accept if you're going to forfeit. Take a look at what I argued previously for this debate: http://www.debate.org...If you think this is something you can't argue against, then don't accept. I would like to debate someone who can argue against it and doesn't forfeit. If you don't have the time within the next week to do this debate, also don't accept please.Now, I will be arguing in favor of the above proposition in the title. My opponent may take any of the following positions:1) That the current defense budget should be decreased by a smaller amount than I propose2) That the current defense budget should remain the same3) That the current defense budget should be increased.I believe we should both share the burden of proof, but I am willing to settle for something else if my opponent convinces me I should have the burden of proof(tell me in comments before accepting the debate that you think the burden of proof should be on me and reasons why). What I believe my opponent should prove is that the United States currently needs to spend the amount they propose. What I will try to prove is that we don't need as much of a defense budget that my opponent proposes, and that we should at least decrease it by $200 billion and that we can afford to do that in terms of not being too weak if we had it lowered by that much.Current facts:The current US defense budget for fiscal year 2017, is $582.7 billion[1]Rules of this debate:1) No ad hominem, personal attacks, or insults2) The total number of rounds used for argument should be the total you see here minus 1. This is to keep the total number of rounds used for argument between us even, since I am not using round 1 for argument. My opponent may begin their arguments in round 1 if they choose, but should waive round 4 if they do that. They may do the opposite if they wish though.3) The last round of argument should just be rebuttals and/or conclusions. No new arguments in this round. New facts and statistics can be shown, but only in rebuttal to your opponent's arguments.4) The first round of argument should just be main arguments, no rebuttals this round. So, if you are second to post, you should not rebut what your opponent said directly. Violation of the above rules is justification for voters to give the person who did not violate these rules the point in conductSources:[1] https://www.defense.gov...
Rap Battle : Batman(Pro) Vs Superman(Con) (Explicit not for Kids)

He keeps calling me bird ,over and over like it is my profession the only bird I resemble is larry, because Im mvp of this session. You may be faster than me, but not when I have kryptonite I will swallow that sht hole and watch you bleed, that will be a site See your only as fast as your weakness lets you be, and that is a weakness in itself How do you claim to be the best, when just a glance at kryptonite puts you on the shelf I have bullets infused with kyrptonie, and even armor made of it too How do you expect me to beat me when I am a better version of you I am going to run my blade down the middle of your skull and put you in your place Make you my new Harvey dent, they can call you the new two face. I don't know how this tool hopes to win, it was hopeless from the start all it takes is one bullet lined with kryptonite, and a precise shot to the heart. He wasted both of his rounds calling me birdman and bragging about his speed If you cant even tell the difference between a bird and a bat, how super can you be I am going to follow the jokers lead and cut his face from east to west and leave a permanent smile on his mouth Every since this battle started, it has constantly been heading south. How do you expect to win, this is a hopeless battle cant you see? Kryptonite is your weakness, and my only weakness is me It is survival of the fittest, Darwins theory is actually true No matter how much you try you will never beat me, because I have evolved way past you
Rap Battle : Batman(Pro) Vs Superman(Con) (Explicit not for Kids)

Bruce Wayne is my name, and I rep Gotham because this city is real This guy doesn"t even have a farther , Fuk kryptonite daddy issues are his Achilles Heel His first farther put him on a shuttle and he never got to see him in real life In Small Ville his second dad died by getting hit in the face with a meteorite This guy has super strength, laser eyes, and he can even fly How does it feel to get murdered by just another average guy Even if you tried to hit me, I would just shoot you in the knee with kryptonite Put a bullet in your head and make it become a dome because I own the fukn night Most people never see me coming, I am the definition of quiet Your just a homo with a cape, that sht is a really weak sight I have got a suit made of kryptonite, and a gun to bak it up too You can"t even harm me, I am a God compared to you How does it feel to know that humans surpassed your race That even without superpowers I can still put you in your place I have got a basement full of kryptonite just in case I need it Blow that sht up like a bomb and kill your azz, call it Hi ro shi ma Clark Kent I think it is about time that I extinguish your flame Split your body in two with my blade and have it match your name. This battle is over and this btch has lost, his time has come to an end All it takes is for him to look at kryptonite, he made it too easy for me to win. I was not going to do it but now I have to rebuttals his lines This btch keeps calling a bird man, I guess he is fukin blind You just called a bird a bat, you really are something else I don't even have to kill you because you just killed yourself The joker and the village that line was actually pretty nice Just remember what I did that clown, Ill do it to you twice See you should take a lesson from the joker, because he went straight to hell After this battle you can follow his lead ,probably will decide to take your own life as well You spit out one or two good lines, I will give you your props The sad thing is one or two lines, still doesn't stop you from being a flop Did you read the rest of the sht you wrote, what were you trying to do? Half the sht didn't even make sense, you just gave me a free pass to body you He thinks simple villans can match me, but how true is that? How super are you, if you get your azz kicked by a bat I am about to make this btch suck on my raw bat hide Then when I blow my load, he can swallow some of my gotham pride. I was going to try to be nice, and limit the amount of harm I probably funded this guys loan to pay for his own fukin farm. Want to know something Clark, I am your daddy and that must be hell I am going to slap your azz so hard you"re are going to start calling me Jor-El
You are more evil than I am crazy REDEMPTION

Ok, so in this argument, my opponent makes no argumentation whatsoever. He doesn't prove why I am more evil than he is crazy. i have shown that this is simply not true. If we were to look at pure win ratios, I am winning in that. My opponent has stated that himself, I am winning 2 of them. So for those 3 I urge you, the vote to look carefully at it, and tell me what you think. Am I more evil than CRAZYpenguin is CRAZY, or is he more CRAZY than I am evil?
You are more evil than I am crazy REDEMPTION

!! So, It actually appears that even though you have won 2 of those 3 debate because someone just voted for burningpuppies101 I still have won one of them in which burningpuppies101 must redeem himself for the astonishing defeat in which I won. Also on the debate of "vote bombing" I state that is ridiculous and my opponent merely needs an excuse for the losses of poor debating (no offence).
You are more evil than I am crazy REDEMPTION

SO my opponent has decided to post all the same links as me. But he is being selective, and only saying we should look at the one that he won. However, we actually have to look at all of them, since they all include my arguments. My opponent believes that he has fulfilled the burden of proof, and shows the links to prove it. However, if you will take a look, I do believe that I won, and close analysis will show that I was actually vote bombed, and I should have won those debates.
You are more evil than I am crazy REDEMPTION

I'll do this one more time, but only because these debates are entertaining for me to read. My arguments can be found: http://www.Debate.org... http://www.Debate.org... http://www.Debate.org... This refutes anything you might say, and since you have burden of proof (look to debate 5415), I win. Thanks for the debate, and I await your response.
the bible should be under fiction in the library

INTRODUCTIONI'm going to continue developing my case even though Pro forfeited his second round.My CASENonfiction does not necessarily mean factualAs defined above, if a book is considered factual by its author or readers, then it is listed under nonfiction regardless of its factuality. These two conditions are satisfied here, although only one is enough.1- A large portion of the Bible's readers believe it is nonfiction.2- The authors of the Bible's new testament treated what they wrote (regardless if it was based on legends and truth) as factual occurrences. For instance, St. Paul says in Gal 1:11-16 that he received the gospel from no man but "the revelation of Jesus Christ." If the book was fictional, such statement would not be written as fictional books to not include a meta-explanation about the book in the fictional story itself.I extend the other points I made in previous rounds, waiting for Pro to participate in this debate which he started.