azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

The Soviet Union managed massive gains in health and living standards while in the midst of invasions, civil wars, major disease outbreaks, a famine, a global depression..etc, in the span of decades. Why is it this new economy hasn't managed to do the same in the same time period? It's had nearly 20 years and it still lags behind its "stagnant", socialist, "totalitarian" past.If anything, this situation should be a breeze. The breaking up of a huge country into a slightly smaller country, and the disruption in production and services, should be a rather easy thing to deal with compared with its past problems. Whole cities and towns were demolished in WWII, millions upon millions of people died while its standard of living continued to rise. How many millions died during the economic transition? Hmmm?""They were behind the United States and many other western nations..."This is all I wanted to hear."Again, they were behind by a very small amount (and Czechoslovakia and East Germany had closed the gap). I've also shown that Cuba, a Socialist nation, outdoes the United States in health care despite its size and resources. They were also behind the United States by about the same amount the United States is behind the top nations of today. But, again, declare your hallow victory; I wouldn't want you to feel insecure. "All additional information you can find in previous posts."Really? You have backed up your claims at some point? That, again, is a lie. I have yet to see any information backing up your claims that the average Russian lives better than they did in the Soviet era. They eat less, they are dramatically less healthy, and their pay is actually less in real terms. None of what you have stated has been born out by the facts, none, yet you have decided you've won. You've been shown to be extremely far away from reality; while I have been shown to be slightly incorrect. But let's not let trivial facts get in the way of your arrogant, presumptive stance. Go on and down-vote this as well, it's all you have left it seems. You don't have anything intellectually to stand on; you won't accept where you've been wrong.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism alleviates poverty

I'll respond using only quotes from prior posts. Your quotes are in bold, mine in italics.Why is it this new economy hasn't managed to do the same in the same time period?A reccent study done by the World Bank on the topic has found that from 1999-2007 income per capita has raised more than 50%, while lifting 50 million people out of poverty.Again, they were behind by a very small amountFrom the paper, "These data paint a picture of a society far behind other developed countries in the health status of its population in the prewar period. For example, even in Moscow and St. Petersburg children reached no more than the 20 percentile of U.S. childthgrowth prior to World War II, suggesting widespread stunting of children during that period. But substantial and rapid improvements in child height and birth weight were recorded in subsequent years; as a result by the late 1960s children in some regions reached the 50 percentile of U.S.the child growth."The peak of child growth for the soviets only reached the US's 50 percentile."[the] USSR at one point surpassed US consumption growth, growth being the key word, for their actual consumption was not in parity with the US's by any means: "While the consumption growth record seems clear, it should be kept in mind that this growth took place in the context of a relatively low initial level of consumption, particularly incomparison with the U.S. and the OECD. As a result, even with rapid growth the absolute level of household consumption remained well below that of the United States throughout the postwar period."But, again, declare your hallow victory; I wouldn't want you to feel insecure...None of what you have stated has been born out by the facts, none, yet you have decided you've won.Instead you chose to use rhetoric, and a surprisingly amount of it too.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

"A reccent study done by the World Bank on the topic has found that from 1999-2007 income per capita has raised more than 50%, while lifting 50 million people out of poverty."That is not in context, it does not compare with what the poverty rates were prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union. You are, in fact, telling me that 50 million people were raised out of poverty but not how many people were put into poverty after the collapse. From the data that I provided, it looks as though poverty has dropped but not far enough to have increased living standards above the Soviet level for the average person.In other words, you are being intellectually dishonest. Only if the poverty rate is lower than it was under the Soviet era would you have met my arguments and successfully countered them. "From the paper, "These data paint a picture of a society far behind other developed countries in the health status of its population in the prewar period......."The infant mortality rate was higher than the west's, that's true, but, as with the adult rate, after WWII it was at the Median, that is what the 50 percentile is; the median percentile. You, apparently, don't know what a percentile is. That paper was telling you how well the Soviets did, it talked about major developments in children's health after WWII. You've made a very large number of claims and have not backed any of them up with direct, contextual evidence. I am still waiting for the facts to back up your confidence. Is that really all you have? Work a little harder next time.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism

That is not in context, it does not compare with what the poverty rates were prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union.You're moving the goal post. You were asking why they hadn't had a productivity boom since the reforms, when they have. This trend is stable and will continue and will eventually surpass whatever it was before.The entire study is linked below. From the other paper: ""Schroeder and Edwards (1981) estimate Soviet consumption per capita at 34.4 percent that of the United States in 1979." That 33 percent, before it "fell it 22 - 26 percent by 1980." Their consumption barely passed 1/3 of the States at its peak. This is not parity. As for the median child growth, the 50 percentile is its peak before it fell rapidly, and this was only in "some regions." It's pretty sad when a Soviet success is getting a few kids to grow fully.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism

Another bunch of baloney. The standard of living in Cuba is on par with the US? Really? Do you even know where Cuba is? Cuba's standard of living is about 1% of what it was prior to the revolution. The Soviet economy was not just marginally less productive it was spectacularly less productive and the standard of living was so low that is should have been renamed to the standard of barely surviving. You wanna to see the difference between capitalism and socialism, just look at the difference between 1975 USSR and 2010 Russia. There can be no Democracy in socialism, there can only be totalitarianism, it is the only way to control the resources. The standard of living in Venezuela has not increased since Chavez started confiscating private assets. Unemployment is up, productivity is down, there is no free speech, and is now one of the most corrupt countries in the world. http://en.mercopress.com/2011/03/17/gustavo-coronel-the-four-hotbeds-of-corruption-in-venezuela
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism

How ridiculous. Chavez and Castro exercise sole and complete control over the army and police. How does that promote personal freedom, democracy or anything positive? Their states are just as totalitarian as the USSR and North Korea. Chavez has improved his nation's prosperity by stealing . . . I mean nationalizing, assets of US Corporations which would never have existed in his country without capitalism in ours. Cuba's standard of living is skewed upwards by high literacy and good health care. The financial situation is a disaster since the Soviets stopped subsidizing the economy in 1990. Buying power of the average Cuban is negligible by US standards. If the US was wiling to destroy our financial structure as Cuba has, we could elevate any of our problem areas too. If our infrastructure was in the state of Cuba's, we could pump all of that money into our schools or health care systems. You can look at all the websites and quote all the numbers you want. I was in the Soviet Union. My mom lived in Cuba before Batista and was back on a mission two years ago. Ask her the difference in the standard of living. What hasn't changed is the people. They still smile, they still play baseball and music and dance and are happy. The Cubans are wonderful people. And they were just as wonderful in the 40s and 50s. They are just a little more beat up today than they were then.Your assertion that the average citizen in the Soviet Union was as well off as the average citizen in the West is utterly unsupportable. By all accounts?? I am here to tell you I was there and by MY account, that is pure bunk. I met with and spent time with Soviet citizens in 5 different cities as part of my mission. I spent days with them each. Again, if efficiency is your measure of value, we should be discussing monarchy vs dictatorship. If human welfare is the measure, there just isn't any comparison.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

More Humane & TrueThe effort to make everybody equal in economic, social, and political terms makes socialism more morally worthwhile than capitalism. It reinforces the fact that everyone was created equally and it was only through human actions that disparities arose.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism

So stealing and spreading it is humane. Stealing from people is less humane.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

Eliminates Social EvilsSocialism reduces poverty with eatable wealth distribution. It also eliminates ill health, as it lays the foundation for the availability of proper health facilities for everyone. Socialism eliminates other forms of social deprivation too, by caring for everyone.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism

The rich can give money to the poor put you should not force them .If they have more money they will give more.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

Improved Standard Of LivingThe idea behind socialism is to bring up the living standards of the poorest. It actually works towards raising the living standards to similar levels, as the better-off members of the respective societies.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism

Capitalisam promotes the poor and the rich to make more money. Not destroy the rich.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism

Socialism. hurts the rich. If you were rich how would you like socialism. Socialism hurts people who work hard and saves lazy people.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

"Socialism hurts people who work hard and saves lazy people."You have no idea what socialism is.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism

Then how does it works ?
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

Socialism has voer the last century been dragged true the mud to the piont where the word barely represents what it once did, its content has been usurped by various ideologies and twisted to suit their agenda e.g. the Societ Union was called a socialist society, by both the US and the Russians themselves, the US called it socialism in order to defame socialism and associate it with the police state the USSr became, the USSR called themselves socialist in order to benefit from the moral appeal of true socialism among the world population but it was not a socialist society.In essence true socialism means that ordinary working people must be in control of their own work (i.e. production), and communities must be in control of their own destinies. This is natural consequence of democracy, poeple should have control over their own work, the people working in the mill should have control over the mill.Please refer to the following sources for further info.:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0AiVASUZzU http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/1999----.pdf
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Capitalism

How do you make a price? two things: How long it took to make, and the value of the material. Imagine it took you 8 hours to make a jacket. you sell the jacket for 150 (100 for the value of the material and 50 for your labor). you keep the 50 to buy luxuries such as an mp3 player. the 100 goes to the government to share it among EVERYONE but only for food, shelter and healthcare. The rest they have to work for. And it is not only you who is giving the money to be shared, its almost everyone.
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

Sooo true. god some peole just state stuff without thinking
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

socialism ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

The only reason that capatilist cosieties are more common is cuz people are unwilling to change or if they do people are to selfish to share power. socialism could work if people were less selfish and were more open to eqaulity... capatilism does not work well a sthe wall treet protests show!
Debate: Capitalism vs Socialism
Side: Socialism

I prefer democratic socialism. It provides for the needs of everyone and still respects the right to individual ownership.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Loving kitties

Dogs amy be smarter but at least you don't have to take them outside in a rainstrom for a bathroom break since msot cats hate rian and getting wet.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

What does that have to do with anything? Dogs hate rain just as much. There are things called puppy pads where they can poo and pee on the pad without hurting your floor... people have porches so the dogs dont get wet, and people have doggy doors so they dont have to get up and do it themselves.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Cats are self sufficient. Dogs need constant attention. With cats you can put food out and come back home 24 hours later. If you go on vacation all a family member or friend needs to do is stop over put out some food and clean out the cat box, it's much easier.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Loving kitties

Cats are largely independent animals so when one loves you and shows it than it just means more than when an animal of naturally social disposition does the same. Of course the love shared between owners and their pets being cats, dogs, or others is wonderful no matter if they are born shy or outgoing.Cats are territorial creatures unless where they are living is in their view dangerous they will not run away. I currently have three cats and they constantly get out or are let out. once it starts raining or around 8:00 or 9:00 pm they always return and wait at the door. One of the nicest things about cats is that they don't demand attention but freely receive and give it. If you are sick they come and rest with you, they are just very sweet and nice to have.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Dogs can get out of your yard and kill your neighbor's chickens. Then your neighbors could sue. It happened to a friend of mine.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

It happened to me too! Our dog got into our neighbor's chicken coop and stole a chicken, when we found my dog she was thrashing the chicken around in her mouth but since my dog isn't that big she kept letting go of the chicken then chased it down and thrashed it around some more. Luckily we got to it in time and the chicken was unharmed. . . for the most part. [;
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

cats are more likely to kill chickens, given the fact that they have free roam to go where they want
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs vs cats kinda hard to say

Cats are really lovable (though not easy to train) and loyal. They are more affectionate to hold. Cats are just plain cute! But then so are dogs.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Well, I'm pretty sure you can guess. Yep.... well yeah...cats are less maintanance and what not...
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Cats don't pee everywhere. Well, at least well-trained ones don't. :D
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

Dogs can be trained to not pee everywhere too. And dogs can be trusted to watch themselves outside whereas cats might run away or be eaten.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Cats don't run away any more than dogs do. Just sayin'.As for the getting eaten part, I can vouch for that as of a month ago :(EDIT: Wait, guys. We're debating the wrong thing; look at the subtitle. "Is it raining cats or dogs?"So the new debate is set: which animal is falling from the sky?
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

Sure, but when they do they tend to not show up afterwards. and i'm very sorry about your cat. ): i know how you feel. my dog just got put down because it was attacked and its lungs collapsed."EDIT: Wait, guys. We're debating the wrong thing; look at the subtitle. "Is it raining cats or dogs?"So the new debate is set: which animal is falling from the sky?"hahaha. yup! we have been debating the wrong thing. xD i'd say dogs still because they drool more!
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: raining animals

I'd say that it's raining frogs. Not cats or dogs.See also: Raining AnimalsEDIT: Maybe the debate creator meant "reigning" and not "raining." In which case, I'd still say that cats reign. :D
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

In a recent poll, 100% of people said they'd feel more comfortable letting a cat outside on its own than a dog. Also, 78% of all statistics are made up on the spot.No, seriously. You think dogs can be more trusted to watch themselves outside than a cat? Cats are let own alone all the time. Who exactly lets their dog walk itself?
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: inaccurate polls

Lolllll. Nice poll. Accurate numbers aren't useful. :P
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: inaccurate polls

Lol. that's great statistics there. And yes, yes I do. I let my dogs outside to go and walk themselves and its not because I'm too lazy to take them on walks its because its what they like. How should I know where my dogs like to go? But they know where they like to go and play around in. They are very smart and capable animals. Letting them outside to go and frolic around wherever they please is the optimal way to "walk a dog".
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

I wonder if that's an American thing? It's highly unusual over here (UK) to allow a dog out by itself.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

People with fenced in yard!
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

It is a proven fact that cats will make you live longer. You don't have to walk cats or worry about them being outside.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

not true. get your facts strait. IT HAS BEEN PROVEN PEOPLE LIVE LONGER WITH PETS IN GENERAL, NOT JUST YOUR PRECIOUS CATS!
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Its raining cats because people tend to kick cats out of windows more than dogs. And that's the truth. There are several instances where cats have been kicked or thrown out of windows from the upper stories on houses and land on the ground below. Its really sad, but like it happens, which is why it rains cats.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Cats require less maintenance.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

Not true! You have to change out their litter box. With dogs you just feed them, play with them once in a while, and let them outside if you have a closed in back yard or live on a private drive like i do.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

And so you're right, case in point. Dogs do require more maintanence.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

If it is an outside cat all you need to do is put food and water out, and a box to sleep in.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Cats have the perfect balance of taking care of themselves and giving you company at the same time. Dogs require attention ALL THE TIME, cost a lot more, and are dirtier.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

well if they take SUCH good care of themselves, then why even buy them at all?
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

i have a cat that likes water and everyday week, i have swimming class with it
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

I think cats are better because-1.They are independent. You won't have to spend all your time with them; you can leave them alone.-2.They poop and pee in a litter box. A dog will have to be trained to go outside, but they will still have accidents, and then you step in the poop in your yard.-3.Cats are quieter. You know how your neighbors tell you to shut your dog up? That never happens with cats.-4.Cats don't have to be trained. You have to train your dog for several weeks to be a good pet, but a cat simply does not have to be trained.-5.No walks with cats. A dog demands a walk, no matter how inconvenient for you, but a cats is happily playing or sleeping.-6.Cats are hilarious. Cats can be extremely facetious, even though they don't know it, whereas a dog is just boring.-7.Cats are smarter than dogs. Cats have 300 million cortical neurons compared to a dog's 160 million. Cats are more sly and independent than dogs, cunning, and refuse to be dumb enough to take commands.In conclusion, I believe cats are better than dogs.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

GUYS GUYS GUys we all know the truth the only animals better is FISH because they just are ok so shut up you bighead
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Cats and dogs are cute but cats require much less care and attention.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Cats, because they are much less work, i don't need to take them on walks.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

Cats are solitary creatures. They don't demand love every single day, like dogs do. A lot of dogs are high-maintenance, but a cat will know how to take care of itself. Cats also make REALLY funny memes, fyi.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

no explanation needed. Cats are very very very very very very very very very very very very very very much better than dogs. Done.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

CATS ARE BETTER you don't have to train them you just have to show them the litter box also you can leave them home for 8 hours the also mostly sleep all day but they can be cuddly and cute.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Cats

cats rule. no questions they rule the out stand dogs. they are so cute and furry
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

Dogs are man's best friend. They can be cute, cuddly, big and mean, and lots of fun. They are all you need as a companion. They are always grateful and if you treat them kindly they never take you for granted.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

Cats are evil creatures
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

when they grow up their used as a retirement animal. because they arent as athletic but still a companion (but a dog is a mans bestfriend)
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Meaningful argument

Evil how?Here are some definitions of evil, none of which pertain to felines:- morally bad or wrong- the quality of being morally wrong in principle or practice- having the nature of vice- that which causes harm or destruction or misfortune- malefic: having or exerting a malignant influence- behavior or thought which is hateful, cruel, excessively sexual, or violent, devoid of conscienceAdmittedly a cat can "cause harm or destruction" but no more so than a canine.
Debate: Cats or Dogs?
Side: Dogs

"-behavior or thought which is hateful, cruel, excessively sexual, or violent, devoid of conscience"Cats are not as trusting as dogs. If you are meeting a cat for the first time it will most likely scratch or hiss at you. Dogs, in general that is, will jump up to you and want to play with you. So as for the "behavior. . . which is hateful, cruel. . . " that pretty much fits the description of a cat.