The Instigator
otello
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
Adam2isback
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points

Are Republicans the future of America

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
otello
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/27/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,305 times Debate No: 65907
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (28)
Votes (1)

 

otello

Con

The Republicans stand for small government, low taxation and hyper militarism. Those 3 attributes do not make for good governmenatal policies that will benefit the nation. With the change in demographics changing and 2020 census the Republican Party will become marginalized

The Republicans stand for small government, low taxation and hyper militarism. Those 3 attributes do not make for good governmenatal policies that will benefit the nation. With the change in demographics changing and 2020 census the Republican Party will become marginalized
Adam2isback

Pro

Thank you. Yes they are the future. Small government allows for businesses to trade and do their business without someone interferring in them. Low taxations allows for more job growth, because that way the businesses are stripped by the government of their money. The Democrats have done the opposite

http://polination.files.wordpress.com...
You can have a president of a certain party, but what good does it do if the opposite is always stalking your legislation
Debate Round No. 1
otello

Con

Small government only produces deficits in a first world nation and small government cannot provide for societal needs of its many citizens. You can not have a small government in a highly technological, industrialized nation. Low taxation only brings about huge deficits as we have seen since Reagan cut taxes from 71% down to 34 to 36% . You are merely espousing supply side economics which has been discredited by most economists. Reaganomics has been a blight on this country and has caused many of the ills that we now have.
Adam2isback

Pro

A few corrections I would like to make: "Low taxations allows for more job growth, because that way the businesses are stripped by the government of their money." I meant to say "because that way the businesses aren't stripped by the government of their money." So I apologize.

Now rebuttals and additional arguments:

Small government only produces deficits in a first world nation and small government cannot provide for societal needs of its many citizens.

A small federal government is ideal. Each state has their own governments. Why not let the states take care of issues relating to the people?

You can not have a small government in a highly technological, industrialized nation. Low taxation only brings about huge deficits as we have seen since Reagan cut taxes from 71% down to 34 to 36% . You are merely espousing supply side economics which has been discredited by most economists. Reaganomics has been a blight on this country and has caused many of the ills that we now have.
Except in many of those cases, you're talking about the latter half of his administration. Reagan's effects were well into the beginning of the term. It's only when the Democrats took control of the Senate, that problems started to arise. All the good ideas Reagan had were most of the time vetoed by the Democratic Senate, starting in 1986 for about a decade. Same with Bush Sr.

Small governments allow prosperity. Government regulation does no good whatsover.
Debate Round No. 2
otello

Con

A few corrections I would like to make: "Low taxations allows for more job growth, because that way the businesses are stripped by the government of their money." I meant to say "because that way the businesses aren't stripped by the government of their money." So I apologize.

Now rebuttals and additional arguments:

Small government only produces deficits in a first world nation and small government cannot provide for societal needs of its many citizens.


A small federal government is ideal. Each state has their own governments. Why not let the states take care of issues relating to the people?
Con1- Because if we rely on 50 states with 50 set of rules then you do not have a cohesive nation. This is why we have greater poverty and poorer schools in the South because those states do not have the revenues to support the people and they rely on the more prosperous states for financial help. We need a unified nation in order to have a unified people.

You can not have a small government in a highly technological, industrialized nation. Low taxation only brings about huge deficits as we have seen since Reagan cut taxes from 71% down to 34 to 36% . You are merely espousing supply side economics which has been discredited by most economists. Reaganomics has been a blight on this country and has caused many of the ills that we now have.
Except in many of those cases, you're talking about the latter half of his administration. Reagan's effects were well into the beginning of the term. It's only when the Democrats took control of the Senate, that problems started to arise. All the good ideas Reagan had were most of the time vetoed by the Democratic Senate, starting in 1986 for about a decade. Same with Bush Sr.
Con 1-You are not addressing supply side economics and skipping into side issues. Deal with supply side and the huge reduction of taxes under Reagan which even today is promoted by the Republican Party. and please list what good ideas did Reagan have?


Small governments allow prosperity. Government regulation does no good whatsover.
Con 1- You have said that. No need to repeat yourself unless of course you have run out of ideas.
Adam2isback

Pro

Con1- Because if we rely on 50 states with 50 set of rules then you do not have a cohesive nation. This is why we have greater poverty and poorer schools in the South because those states do not have the revenues to support the people and they rely on the more prosperous states for financial help. We need a unified nation in order to have a unified people.
Who cares about a cohesive nation? Why try to force others to adopt the ways of Washington. This sounds eerilie like one of those doctrines wanting everything under control of the state, like amongst the British, and other major empires.
Depends on the finacial help of the more prosperous states?
http://www.areadevelopment.com...
http://blogs.edweek.org...
Citizens of those so-called propserous states are moving south and out west. High taxes cause jobs to go away.

Con 1-You are not addressing supply side economics and skipping into side issues. Deal with supply side and the huge reduction of taxes under Reagan which even today is promoted by the Republican Party. and please list what good ideas did Reagan have?
Reductions of taxes allowes for businesses to have money to provide jobs for workers seeking work. When you tax them it drains from the companies giving jobs. It reduces their power. Taxes are no good.

I've already proven why Republicans are better for the country. Vote pro.
Debate Round No. 3
28 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by otello 2 years ago
otello
Posted by cheyennebodie 4 minutes ago
cheyennebodieOtheloo... Entry level jobs are just that. Anyone can negotiate a wage, with Future increases tied to output. All businesses would take to that.
O- First of all teachers are not entry level jobs. Secondly I am talking about large corporations and large governmental agencies. You are ignoring this.

All unions did was hold people back that would otherwise increase their skill level to make more. And those who didn't have the ambition to do that can stay in the lower paying jobs.
O- Study your labor and economic history. Unions provide the foundation for workers to move into the middle class. they provide the stability that management will not provide.

That is what is called freedom to choose.And it is the unions that protect really bad teachers.
O- Not true. I was a teacher for 38 years. Bad administrations who do not want to work to remove teachers are the real culprits.

The teachers union is the most awful entity that has ever hit America. They are churning out nothing but little liberal brats.You are probably a product of them.
O- LOL I am way too old. And you are just being a little conservative brat regurgitating RW crap.

Unions destroyed GM. I don't know why they did not move out of Detroit before irt got that far? But that is what they should have done. Let the union cry in their beer.
O- and you would see thousands put out of work? Why are you so elitist? Do you have the wealth to be so elitist and anti-worker?
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Otheloo... Entry level jobs are just that. Anyone can negotiate a wage, with Future increases tied to output. All businesses would take to that.

All unions did was hold people back that would otherwise increase their skill level to make more. And those who didn't have the ambition to do that can stay in the lower paying jobs.That is what is called freedom to choose.And it is the unions that protect really bad teachers. The teachers union is the most awful entity that has ever hit America. They are churning out nothing but little liberal brats.You are probably a product of them.

Unions destroyed GM. I don't know why they did not move out of Detroit before irt got that far? But that is what they should have done. Let the union cry in their beer.
Posted by otello 2 years ago
otello
Posted by cheyennebodie 6 hours ago
cheyennebodieOthello. Who would negotiate their contracts? How about the individual when he applied for the job.I am sure U.S. steel would have been glad to pay me more than the others because I made them more. But I was stuck on union wages.That was the last union I was in. And it soured me about unions. Just a bunch of babies crying if their milk was too warm.And it was not long that they drove that company out of Pittsburgh.Instead of being Steel City, we are now the rust belt of Pennsylvania.That and democrats running things.
O- Huh? You have 80 thousand teachers . Some with their first job ever and you want them to negotiate their own salary and work condidtions? Are you serious? What you propse may work with small businesses, but with large companies and large civil jobs it wont work. The unions never have the power to destroy a business. It is the greed of management that kills the company and the inability to bargain in good faith. Unions bring prosperity to the middle class. Under capitalism unions are the most effective in doing that.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Othello. Who would negotiate their contracts? How about the individual when he applied for the job.I am sure U.S. steel would have been glad to pay me more than the others because I made them more. But I was stuck on union wages.That was the last union I was in. And it soured me about unions. Just a bunch of babies crying if their milk was too warm.And it was not long that they drove that company out of Pittsburgh.Instead of being Steel City, we are now the rust belt of Pennsylvania.That and democrats running things.
Posted by otello 2 years ago
otello
Posted by cheyennebodie 1 hour ago
cheyennebodieActually unions make it easy for loafing citizens. I actually heard one union guy say that the company should pay him for just showing up. That guy is in effect a freeloader. And the union protects them.When I started in the late 60's working in a steel mill, my attitude was I appreciated U.S stell giving me a job. And I showed that appreciation by working hard.And I was condemned by the older union guys for making them look bad. I was kind of a smart a## then and I said, YOU make YOU look bad. Don't blame me if you are lazy.

That work ethic has served me well all these decades.Hard work was not a dirty word where I grew up.
O- Please explain how your personal experiences can be applied to the whole concept and benefits of unions?
Posted by otello 2 years ago
otello
Posted by Adam2isback 5 hours ago
Adam2isbackcheyennebodie
Exactly, thank you.
And unions make life hard for hardworking citizens.
O- Learn the value of unions. Without unions who would negotiate the working conditions and the salaries of large organizations of workers? NYC has 80,000 teachers. who would negotiate their contracts?
Posted by otello 2 years ago
otello
And as a side note. Since Obama took office , the freeloader class skyrocketed. 50% of the people are not freeloading off of the other 50%. And as the freeloaders climb into the wagon, it will bring the engine of economics to a halt. It will stall out what the producers want to do.
O- Could you please list who are the free loaders?
Posted by otello 2 years ago
otello
Posted by cheyennebodie 5 hours ago
cheyennebodieothelo..... Reagan has been out of office for 26 years.You mean the wizard of smart democrats have not fixed things yet.Lets look at reality. I know that will be a chore for you. Detroit has been a democrat utopia for 60 years.You can go up there and government will give you a home. So they can start getting taxes from it. Of course there will not be any jobs to pay the taxes.
O-First of all we are still following Reaganomics.And that includes the Dems. secondly, Detroit lost its capital base when whites left and ttaxes stayed low to accomodate the remaining whites.

Why would a corporation want a poor middle class? That is their consumer base.
O- Cheap labor.
Now government would want a dependent on them middle class. That would keep them in power ad nauseum.That is why government , especially democrats, want to tax corporations heavily. So the corporations have less money to give to their employees. Thus the workers have to go to government for subsidies, welfare.
O- Corps do not give to their employees. They give to the share holders and the corps pay little in taxes .

And we see what unions did to GM. Unions hold people back . Not the gutless ones that want a collective raise without being more skilled and deserving more.O- Unions are the mechanisms that bring people into the middle class. Without a strong union workers can not move into the middle class

And easy credit was pushed on banks by government. Then when it blew up in peoples faces, they blamed the banks. Not one person who took out a loan did it with a gun to their head. I am not in debt and will never be in debt.
OEasy credit was created by banks and the credit industry.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Actually unions make it easy for loafing citizens. I actually heard one union guy say that the company should pay him for just showing up. That guy is in effect a freeloader. And the union protects them.When I started in the late 60's working in a steel mill, my attitude was I appreciated U.S stell giving me a job. And I showed that appreciation by working hard.And I was condemned by the older union guys for making them look bad. I was kind of a smart a## then and I said, YOU make YOU look bad. Don't blame me if you are lazy.

That work ethic has served me well all these decades.Hard work was not a dirty word where I grew up.
Posted by Adam2isback 2 years ago
Adam2isback
cheyennebodie
Exactly, thank you.
And unions make life hard for hardworking citizens.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by AbandonedSpring 2 years ago
AbandonedSpring
otelloAdam2isbackTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:42 
Reasons for voting decision: Fairly tied debate. Pro obviously used sources, so that was guaranteed. I said con had more convincing arguments because he didn't mix up his argument in round 2.