azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

Why would ISIS come through the toughest vetting process this country has ever had, when they could come through far easier methods such as marriage or student visas?
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

They would because they want war and they wouldn't be able to come in as easy because they have to get permission from those other things
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

Why did you dispute my comment? Your comment seems to support what I was saying.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

So you're insinuating that ALL Syrian refugees are terrorists and supporters of ISIS? These people are being murdered, killed whether or not they supported a PEACEFUL protest for democracy, and you're willing to let them suffer even more because you're ignorant of the fact that NOT ALL Syrian refugees are ISIS supporters?
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

If we let them in we could be put in the same place as Syria is right now in the future
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

Syrian operative got more than 4,000 ISIS gunmen had been smuggled into western nations hidden with innocent refugees.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

And there would be more to come if we let refugees into the states
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

If you think that, can you point to the ones that have snuck in within the past 5 years of us letting in these refugees?
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

Allowing in refugees will bring in ISIS militants. I think we should focus on creating a safe zone for the refugees outside of the US. Therefore we wont have to deal with more terrorist
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

youre dumber than the mud..... we aint got land outta america, we are america
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

😤!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

........................................................................................
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

...........................................................................................
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

.....................................................................................
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

If i were president, I would never allow the Syrians to come in. I would want to save my country, not risk bringing syrians and isis's in. According to ABC News if we allow the 10000 syrians in we are setting our selves up.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

What happens if American need help and countries don't let us on because they are protecting themselves?
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

but you're not sooooooooooooooooooooooo..........................
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

ISIS announced that they are going to enter with Syrians.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

Right that's why i would never take the chance of letting any of them in
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

So are you saying that you would let no refugees in? Because of a little fear.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

We already let in 1,200 refugeees/.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

Shyam you are right but they have been doing that for awhile.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

I dont know about you but i'm worried of letting even just a couple terrorist into this country. You should too.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

There are so many great organizations such as UNICEF, FINCA, International Children's Fund. We can just donate money, or even our time to those organizations to help out. I think that that would help in many more ways than taking them into our country. Taking them in could just cause more problems
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

What could is money if they do not have a place to live?
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

Learn how to type........................................... ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

1st of all please get an education. Your crude use of wording is damaging my Intellectual Class.2nd- They would have a place to live if Americans stopped being so spoiled so why don't you try that??
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

1st, it was an auto-correct issue. You guys seriously need to calm down.2nd. That is my point. If we stopped being so spoiled and let them in they would have somewhere to live.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

Why don't you open your home and let them live with you? Why don't you try that?
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

what could. I was right you are a moron you cant even type a correct sentence
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

It was an auto-correct issue, so calm yourself down. You really shouldn't be calling someone out on grammar whilst employing improper grammar yourself, by the way.Makes you look both hypocritical and rude.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

ITO TELL YOUUUU IM SORRY FOR EVERTHING IVE DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

America is for Americans, all we are trying to do is stop people from killing us. Plain and simple.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Do NOT allow them in the US

Lets use common sense and screen them prior to them coming into our nation. Our citizens deserve that much at least.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

We have been doing that from the very beginning.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

The head of the fbi says we can't properly screen. We don't have the data.
Debate: Syrian Refugee Crisis 2
Side: Allow 10,000 in to the US

The head of the fbi says we can't properly screen. We don't have the data.Which is why almost nobody is being accepted.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

To a certain extent, it sure as hell can be. Yes, taxes are necessary for maintaining the state (security). But then there's an over amount of taxation that IS theft. The government seems to think that if you're alive and doing things that living people do, you must be taxed for it. Hell, you get taxed for dying. You get taxed for buying shelter. You get taxed for buying transportation. Taxed for having a job. Taxed for buying shit. Taxed for just about anything these days.One of the reasons why I hate the whole "legalize it and tax it" arguments. Taxing things seems to be so mainstream now a days that even stoners want their pot to be taxed.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

The government seems to think that if you're alive and doing things that living people do, you must be taxed for it. Ronald Reagen said, "if it moves, tax it; if it keeps moving, regulate it, and if it stops moving, subsidize it."
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

if a man comes up to you on the streets and says give me your money. you would say no. if he comes back and with a threat, and you scared, paid him you would consider it robbery and theft. now if this man forms a group of people and call them selves the IRS and say that all people have to pay to this group or face consequences, does it still make it theft? yesno matter how many people steal does it make it right?no a robber is a robber, statistics does not make right. we don't live in the world of Orwell's 1984.it is wrong for a man or group to take you hard earnings, regardless if it s for good or not. if the gov wants to help the poor, it should set up charities, not forcefully take money form others to help them. a noble end does not justify a illegally wrong means. period.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: No

While I'm no fan of government or our government especially, this is a gross oversimplification. The final man is not simply some random person with no authority. You, the voter, have a (small) amount of control over the tax system. In exchange for all citizens paying taxes, the government provides benefits and uses it to, you know, govern. You probably vote, so I assume you want to be governed?Is this the best system? No. But it's not theft if there is collective authorization to take the money. If you find that too terrible, I encourage you to give up every single government benefit and challenge the government on that. Good luck, if you really bother. I doubt it.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

can you name a government benefit that has helped and progressed your life being? if so, imagine that same service, privatized, meaning instead of one monopolized service. you have numerous ones competing to get you to join their social service. when there is competition for clients, benefits tend to increase. its like in bidding, it starts at 100, then it goes up to say maybe 500. but with government interference the cap price is say 110 and they have the choice of increasing or decreasing it because they monopolized it.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: No

Doesn't matter. Most people support taxes and authorize the taking of the money by the government. If you disagree, you are able to campaign, disobey, vote, or opt out entirely (and by that I mean the typical conservative argument of "if you don't like it get out!").
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

just because it is supported does not make it right. was the killing of Jews right because Germans supported it?and yes what do you think i am doing? disagreeing and forming debates to oppose it.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: No

Of course if it's supported it doesn't mean it's right. It does mean, however, that you're a citizen of a government and because it's a democratic form of government, you have to deal with what the majority rules.Don't like it? Hey, now you know how gay people feel! Because you choose to opt in to the government (by not opting), you opt in with all the benefits and problems that come with it. The government is not technically stealing from you because you as part of the voting mass gave consent.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

Most of us do not ever choose to opt into the government, a social contract is a nice theory but inaccurate model without a viable escape clause existing in actuality. We are born into government with little means to escape it, in many ways the government, gangs, and mafias operate the same; by threat and force. They will take away your property, and they will take away your life either piecewise in prisons or all at once with a gun.It is often times join them and suffer under them, or try to travel to a place without them, but all the world is owned, and all the world is claimed: government you can not escape (not permanently, temporar'y yes). Government should be nothing more then an expedient, many of the same objections against a standing army can be made against a standing government unfortunately a standing government, stands everywhere. we may be born naturally freemen, but as soon as we are out of the womb chains fiercely grab at us and though out our lives we have little means to cast them off. It is natural to resent these chains, even if some of them are currently necessary, for without them much worse ones would clamp on. Unfortunately some people think their chains are the only things holding them up sometimes, never thinking that they are also the very reason they are so tired. Democratic processes can be as evil as any process of government, but evil can sometimes be a means of good. Theft is illegal, government defines what is legal; so unless the government defines itself as a illegal entity(which it won't do) it technically isn't theft. Taxation has benefits, so long as these benefits outweigh its problems is it not desirable?
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

all of your first paragraph is right, but i must dispute you on your belief there is no better option.we can have privatized police to stop crime and even a privatized army for protection. we don't need government doing it for us.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

The history of firefighting teaches us a lot about privatizing basic services. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_firefighting.  Poor people and rural areas weren't able to pay for fire protection, and as a result either had no help when a fire did happen or if possible formed their own volunteer, community sponsored fire-stations. Stopping People from becoming homeless and stopping fires from spreading is in the best interest of the entire community. fire can leap from house to house when uncontrolled and in large crammed cities can result in thousands of homeless which then puts a larger strain on everyone. If the local mechanics garage burns up in a small town, the next one is miles and miles away and its in the interest of everyone who owns a car or a tractor to make sure it doesn't burn, i can continue. People are more focused on the short term though, and likly will put off on what is necessary in the long run(since short term expenses seem more urgent) and thus things like fire-stations won't be properly funded with only donations, and having firefighting be private leads to problems; it seems taxes are the best means of gathering funds for firefighting. At least to a certain extent, my family has a lot of firefighters in it and the volunteer fire-station many of them were a part of held bake sales and festivals to make money; once a year there is a awesome fish fry but I doubt those actives are close to covering what they need to cover in order for the station to operate. Those activies just bring in a little extra, i can ask my uncle, he was the firechief for awhile. Maybe a mixture of entrepreneurship and taxes is best, i'm not sure how much the fish fry saves the town in taxes if any.  Privatized armies and police would have to be tightly regulated by the community(government of some-type, avoiding mob rule but still democratic) and their services unavailable to individuals or else they would result in the market(money) and not weather someone is seriously violating rights, determining who gets the gun pointed at them. I would rather have a police force, with all its problems, then mercenaries taking their commands from the highest bidder.Also If you have the guns, you don't need money; and these mercenary groups would take over and act as a tyrannical government and likly wage wars for territory/capital. The free market would quickly be gone, and mercenaries would be our rulers.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

so far the best argument against me. Finlay instead of the whole, i am baby and like gov doing every thing for me, i get a reasonable response to why it may be hard. but yet i must dispute you on some things.i am a conservative libertarian. meaning i believe in if necessary, minimal government. what i want would be a centralized protection force and representative for us. thats all. thats all we need gov for.yes you are right, there's the chance of people resulting to mercenary warfare. but what you realize. is that the second the army is used to infringe on people's rights. its no longer libertarianism, its government. the problem libertarians face, is to stop people from returning to government thinking. using the army to make people obey me, is a government type thinker. a libertarian thinker would not think of using the army for selfish purpose, because we believe in only ruling our self's, some thing we can barley do, so there fore we our entirely uninterested in telling some one else how to rule theirs.being a libertarian requires intense maturity and responsibility, only a ideology for people who really want progress and freedom.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: no

It would have to be in everyones immediate and clear self-interest not to resort to government-type thinking. The material conditions are such that coercion is more profitable and useful then most alternatives. I think for anarchy to work, at least basic necessitates would have to have a very decentralized production system or ones where democracy is inherent in the production methods. Right now because of economies of scale it is much more profitable to have monolithic production methods which result in power imbalances. So long as there is a check or balance against this power imbalance it can work out pretty nicely for everyone. Democratic government is this check against these economic imbalances. Eventually i want it to be unnecessary, which means the means of production will need to change. They currently are, the computer your at is one of those production methods necessary for an anarchist society. Now we need to make it so some other production methods shares some of computing qualties, the market is currently driving this change and i hope it won't be long till we have things like desktop manufacturing, and effective renewable energy systems everywhere among many other things. Government should also help kickstart things which are not economically feasible for a company at the moment, like it did with the internet and space exploration.A system must be based on more then morality, it must be based on self-intrest. So long as coercion is advantageous, and it will be intill every individual is mostly independent, coercion will occur.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

If you move fast you can get a piece of Antarctica that isn't yet claimed. Maybe you can start a nation without taxes.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

yea, but who wants to live in Antarctica, 98% of it is ICE. I guess that explains why I could move slow and and claim a piece of it.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: No

(1984-creepy disturbing book :) ) Sure, if you look at it that way, I guess you could say theft is wrong, but I don't consider it to be theft. The government is not just using your money to help the poor, but you as well. They provide the roads you drive on, the police force you call when someone is breaking into your house, the fire department, the army to protect you, the list goes on and on. Poor or not, as a citizen, you need these things.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

Well, first, I am not a conservative libertarian aka borderline anarchist.Therefore, some forms of taxation is legalized theft through the form of social programs such Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.However, minimal taxation is required in which law and order must be maintained through police and and protection from military.Other public institutions must be established in order for a stable infrastructure such as access to water, electricity, plumbing and schooling.Lastly, the most regressive form of taxation and legalized theft is inflation.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

i don't entirely support you. that is, if water stopped coming into your house, wouldn't you pay some one to bring it back? thats the thing, make services private, this encourages competition and always for more reliable services because the company is paid by the people on their success.but in government they don't give a damn if you get no water or to much. they tax you the same. if companies became local and sufficient for our needs, we would not need a government official 3000 miles away telling us what to do with our money. theft is theft. if we liked taxation then it would not be called that, it would be called donation. which if the government needed, for say security i would be happy to give according to what i think i feel giving, not the standard they put on you and punish you for if you don't fallow it.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

I grew up in a small town of 5000 people, so it was impossible to maintain a strong local public government, which means all police service was done by the county and town government really didn't have many responsible except roads.Furthermore, water service is already private, except that non profitable.Water utilities is considered as natural monopoly. Therefore, the water was owned by a private company but it was heavily regulated by the government either state or county.So, yes, private ownership of the water utility was beneficial because it provided water yet at a discounted price because it was still regulated by the government.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

lol. we won the debate, look at the chart, more people say its theft then not, so why does it say that taxation is not theft when more people agree it is?
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: No

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that everyone paid separately for all utilities including water. You may have to pay some taxes in order to get the pipes fixed or something, but you pay for the water that goes into your house.
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

100% true. If you don't let the government take your money, they'll just empty your bank account. It's win-win! =D
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

I was down voted by someone without any dispute being written? o.OWell, I suppose anonymous cowardice is the next best thing to proactively announcing ones ignorance and stupidity like an inbred walrus ardently crying its mating call...=/
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: no

If you had no welfare, that would massively cause wages to drive down despite the fact that we would have to pay for loads of things we don't already, such as schools being private, roads being private etc. This would lead to massive increase in crime but no police force, and reduced people going to school would cause on the long term, literacy rates to drop and on the short term, people not being able to have qualifications, so despite being incredibly pro-rich people, it is as anti-aspiration as you can get. A decreased literacy rate and more uneducated people would lead to people only being able to offer manual labour jobs and the inability to rise up the social ladder due to decreased education opportunities would drive down wages further meaning higher cost of living, and any extra money in tax is lost through decreased wages. This again creates mass poverty, mass crime which damages businesses so even rich people would suffer financially as a result of this. This in in addition to all the public sector workers losing their jobs offering extra supply to the private sector pushing down wages further in addition to all the damage from an increased unemployment rate on the short term. No taxes would only give the illusion of more money.It is also not legalized theft as for taxes like income, you only pay if you "voluntarily" get a job; VAT, you only pay if you "voluntarily" buy the goods; Stamp Duty, Only if you "voluntarily" buy a house; Corporationtax, no-one forced you to have a business etc
Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

The prompt is in essence an oxymoron, and slightly a paradox. There is no such thing as legalized theft because theft is illegal. I guess the question is really asking whether or not taxes are good. And for that, like most things, I believe the key is moderation. (I'm not going to go into specifics.)