The Instigator
Pro (for)
19 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Economic Prosperity is more important than Environmental Protection

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 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/9/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,035 times Debate No: 60249
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (19)
Votes (3)




Hey people. I look forward to debate anyone. I will not be giving background as I do with most of my debates, for I want this to be free of influence.


Economic Prosperity: ( prosperity. a successful, flourishing, or thriving condition, especially in financial respects; good fortune.

More important: of higher value

Environmental Protection: Policies and procedures aimed at conserving the natural resources, preserving the current state of natural environment and, where possible, reversing its degradation.

By choosing con, you believe environmental protection is more important than economic prosperity. So you'll have to defend for environmental protection!


So you're telling me that the thing that gives us all oxygen just so we can take it for granted by destroyed "parts of nature" for businesses, is at all remotely acceptable? You must be the lowest form of living matter on this planet to accept this position...

So let me tune you in on some actual logic - the entire idea of business is making profits off of ignorant people, not intelligent people. This is to say that the entire productivity of business is encouraging the stupidity which causes many, many, many people pain and misery because these stupid people continue to envy within this stupidity. So the business profits off of others, in turn causing it to grow - what people don't understand is that there are basically 99% stupid people in this world and 1% intelligent people. This is to say that businesses thrive off of ignorant and stupidity, while the planet, and its entire design, thrives off of an intelligence beyond even my own. You are destroying this planet for what? Your pocket?

Yeah, you're such a big guy for making profits off of what isn't your own size or above your own size, thus why you're a spoiled kid that would rather learn how to cheat his fellow men, than to lead them into a better future.
Debate Round No. 1


Thanks to my opponent for accepting.

Well that's a nice way to start out by attacking me as being the "lowest form of living matter on this planet to accept this position." I didn't know that my opinion subject me to being the "lowest form of living matter on this planet." It would have been in the best interest of my opponent to listen to my side before making quick judgement.

Anyways my opponent fails to recognize many things. For one, he fails to recognize that America is the richest nation on earth. He fails to recognize that when I say economic prosperity I'm not simply referring to business people, it could also be he/her and I economic standing, and the nation as a whole. He fails to recognize that some of the poorest nations on earth fails to tap into their environment for economic prosperity. He fails to recognize that economic prosperity is the reason why our workers are some of the most pay individuals in the world. A doctor alone makes $187,200 a year. That's more than what half of the third world individuals can make combine in a single year. Most third world people lives on less than $1.25 as according to the World Bank. ( Now I don't know what you want to be, or what you are, but if you are getting $187,200 a year, you shouldn't take it, because it came with thriving for economic prosperity, which led to some environmental damage. If it wasn't for thriving for economic prosperity as some of our leaders have vision, we'll be living in a pit, instead of a nice suburbia area or urban lifestyle. With no economic prosperity, you wouldn't be able to afford a computer, get a car, get a home, eat out at a restaurant, travel the world, or go out for social fun.

Before I start making my points, I will like to point this out. Here in America, we have money to put food on our table, we grow more food than the whole world, our transportation sector is a vital part of our economy, coals power and provide cheap electricity for our homes. I'm sure my opponents or someone he knows has a car, I'm sure he has a laptop or computer to be debating on here, I'm sure he has a phone or some form of communication, I'm sure he has electricity in his home that keep him in peace, and I'm sure the same business people he's attacking are the one that are providing jobs for him, or the one that are providing taxes to the government so he and I can go to school, go to the hospital, or ride the public transportation. We got all these skyscrapers, subways, and fancy things, which makes us the envy of the world, but with it comes some environmental harm, but should we throw all that away in the name of environmental protection? I guess to my opponent environmental harm should hinder our economy, which than means going to bed hunger at night, and regulation on coal, which means no electricity, and no jobs, means living in despair. When you look thousands of miles across the world, many countries in Africa still have the largest forest in the world, and have not tap into hydro power plants ,geothermal power plant, nuclear power plant, and coal power plant, enough though they hold huge potential which could possibly boost their economy and alleviate their 600m people whom do not have electricity in their homes. With some of those power plants comes environmental harm, not just from building it somewhere, but because the money to build it must have come from some business that had to pay taxes, whom must have taken advantage of the environment in some way. And while Africa environment remains safe compare to first world, their people remains poor.

Now to defend my point on why I say economic prosperity is more important than Environmental protection is because I rather suffer from few air pollution(i could wear mask) and environmental degradation than live suffering with no food and no car to commute. The good about economic prosperity is, let's use the United States for example, is that once you have the money, you have it. The United States had to take advantage of its environments to get to this point where we are today as the richest nation on earth, with trillions of dollar that no country on earth could match to. We today contribute more to NATO than any of our partners, we give more to the United Nations, give trillions of dollar to Israel and egypt, and have given money to alot of nations that any nations have given. And yes this came with a cause, such as the climate change we are facing today that is shaking up some parts of the nation. But you know what though, because we already have the money, we could reverse this trend. Same thing in Japan today, the nuclear meltdown and the tsunami. These are environmental issues, which came with the cause of economic prosperity, but their among the longest living people on earth and have access to many things the third world cannot get their hands on, such as technology and the valuable educations. Look, Japan once stood behind United States as the highest GDP in the world, today China takes that place, and it is estimated that China is to surpass the United States by the year 2020. Enough though there's alot of air pollution in China, they are on the path to being the Economic Power comes 2020. The good thing about the environment is that it's never too late to restore it. China could starts replanting trees, put better environmental policies in place, and restrict some things, but they'll not lose their economic standing as long as they continue to forge forward.

I look forward to my opponent reply.


It's nice to know that you'll now see exactly why I attacked you (I saw everything in you before you said a single word by simply analyzing the title of your debate).

America is not the richest nation - it's in a 2,000,000,000,000 debt because: 1) the money that they spend, is not even theirs; it's the citizens'. 2) they are forced to spend X amount of our money every year, while in office; it's a rule that the government spends all the money they get, then when they spend too much, they "raise the ceiling again". 3) they expect their people to have jobs, when they don't do anything themselves; they ship off our jobs over seas; they allow machines and robots to replace human roles, which destroys the entire economy and its essentials! 4) the people running the government are also on programs for poor people, like food stamps and financial services. 5) the president (the reflection of our people, our country and how everything is), is constantly throwing us into further debt, along with the good-for-nothing congress! 6) The U.S isn't only not rich monetary right - it's not rich intellectually wise. Our rulers are the stupidest psychopaths in the history of mankind!

Therefore you're just another "american dream" patriotic idiot that supports "land of the idiocy; home of the graves"; "for the feeble; by the feeble"! Get your head out of your political chute and wake up - our rulers are psychopaths that are forgetting the practicals, the principles and the people!

When you say "economy" period, in a society that is built on business over family, I'm not even going to toy with semantics. I know jobs and labor in this country through and through. To argue me, is to argue the truth - which is why you're not here; which is why you had to nerve to say this country was the richest, when you couldn't be anymore behind on the actual knowledge.

A doctor? You mean the role which cheats people into taking pills even when they don't necessarily need them? You mean the people that make money off making stuff up for ADHD, ADD, OCD, Depression, Anxiety and so on? You mean the people that only make so much money, because they use people's lives as a way to obtain that money? Oh, don't worry, there's only 1000 things that can happen to you, just so one part can slow down your issue, rather than solve it at once. I never take pills in my entire life - I don't get people sick; I don't get sick. I haven't been sick for over 2 years. My mother takes pills a lot - she is sicker than anybody I've ever seen and seems to just be stacking up on those pills. You call that a job? Then you're again the scum of this planet for not waking up to the monetary deceit of our society!

Your american pride disgusts me.

Where did the trillions of dollars come from you nitwit! That's our money you bloody buffoon! Tax payer money - the money we worked for, so they can spend it on what? Wars? Golden toilet seats? A river dam?! You are so full of it!

Go feed your ego to the third world countries then!

You sound like you have no clue about what goes on in the real world, just what you see inside your head from all that you allowed yourself to see - blind, you're blind. A one-eyed man is king in a world full of blind people.
Debate Round No. 2


I thought this was a place for intellectual discussion. I will choose to remain calm, and discuss in the utmost manner.

Before I dealt into refuting your points and presenting my arguments furthermore, I will like to point these out.

As much as you got the mouth to talk, you haven't yet presented any reason as to why Environmental Protection is more important than Economic Prosperity, but rather slide away from the true argument of this debate.

You have not yet understand the concept of economic prosperity. It's not just about business, its about how you going to feed your family, how you going to commute, where you going to sleep, where you going to go to school, where are going to get your treatment. What's environmental protection, if our people got no food to eat? What's environmental protection, if our people are dying from preventable diseases? What's environmental protection, when coal power plants are providing electricity for our homes so we and our family could live and sleep in peace? God has endow us with natural resources, to use them as a means to better the of our people. Now I know that some businesses take advantage of the environment to the extent that is unbearable, but I rather have them tap into them to provide a better standards of living. The environment depends on us for it survival, as we depend on it for its survival. It's not given to us to just be kept. Go live in a third world country for a while and see if you like it. See if environment protection is any good when people are dying early, kids are very skinny, and many people are not in school.

Before I start, I will like to defend our doctors on the front-line that you have chosen to attack now. 8 years ago, I broke my leg while playing under a tree. For months I suffer in anguish, and I knew that I will never be the same again. I will not be able to pursue my dream of being a soccer player, I will not be able to play outside with my brothers. I will never again be able to walk normal. My right leg, the broken one, was as skinny as a stick. For months, I slept in the hospital and I was given crutches to support me. Today, I can happily say, that I can stand on my own, even though I will no longer pursue my soccer dream, instead a lawyer. My story is not the only. My little brother, when he was a baby, mistakenly picked up a pen and put it in his mouth. Who saved him? You should know. I'm not sure if you have heard the stories of people being saved by doctors from many issues, ranging from bullet wounds, to stabbing, from car accident, to the common cold. With economic prosperity, comes the advancement of health. So Economic is not just money and business people, its the "well-being of a nation and its people." Economic Prosperity takes into account the education, health, transportation, security, defense, etc, of a nation.

Okay. Now you state that "the money the government use is not even theirs, its the citizens." But wait, you have been attacking business, since this debate. Guess who give you that job, in order for you to even get that money you call yours? Business. But wait, who made the business people to choose to invest here? The government. But wait, who give the business individual a loan or grant so they can start their business, contribute to the economy, and help our people rise from the ashes of poverty. The government. So no, its not really your money. It's the money the government made, that they give to the business, so they can provide with jobs, in return provide you with money for the work you done. Look at it this way, it is essentially the government money, their trying to get back.

My opponent has stated that the United States is not the richest nation, because its 2,000,000,000,000 in debt. I will like to argue that the United States is the richest nation on earth, despite the fact he has pointed out the wrongs of our government. The United States alone is worth 15t, the only nation that comes close to that, isn't even really that close, which is China: 8 trillion. Higher GDP means to improvements in health, education, transportation, security, and defense. We have more universities compares to the world. Our transportation sector is among the envy of the world. We build bridges over bridges, our people have cars, our people are able to travel the world because of our aviation industry. We are a nation of pioneers, we went to the moon and created the Peace Corp. Our three main cities shows the economic power of our nation: California, Texas, and New York. California alone is worth more than Russia, and Brazil. And it alone comes close to Japan, UK, Germany, France, and Italy. This speaks volume to economic prosperity. Just for you to know we give more money to the United Nations. We help many nations like no other nations have done, and we have the USAID, MCC, Power Africa Initiative, and many other programs we fund to help the world, still we could build our own nation.

I understand that we're shipping jobs overseas and I do not like that. But its the hard regulation we're putting on business such as environment regulations, that are causing them to do that. Machines and robots replacing human roles, I do not like it. But that's the advancement of technology, it moves and power the world. That's why I believe we should put programs in place to help who loss their jobs due to this. But your argument that it destroys the entire economy is wrong. As we have seen what technology as done, look at our iphones, our medical tech, and the technologies we're using in the classroom. Human limitation prevents us from doing some things machines can do. Considering all you have to see about the government, I will let you believe what you want to believe.

Thank you for the comment: "you're just another "american dream" patriotic idiot that supports "land of idiocy; home of the graves." I'm glad to know that I'm a idiot. Don't judge a book by its cover. That's essentially what you're doing, with my stand on this issue.

I'm not saying I value business over family. This is a totally different debate. You're undermining this debate, and slipping away. "Family" does not have to do with environment. I very much value family to my dear heart, that's why I believe in economic prosperity so they would be able to eat and not go to bed hungry at night, so they would be able to go to school and not be uneducated, so technologies to make their life better. You cannot tell me you value family, but than prevent the path that could lead to a better standard of living for them. Just like you, I know jobs and labor in this country through and through. If you want to have a separate debate about that, start it and invite me. To argue me, is to argue the truth, as well. I speak truth, and I have always preach truth, which gets me in trouble. So I do not run away from the truth. If you want me to talk about the truth about labor in this country I will.

To counter the small things that I'm not going to rebuttal against but say a few things..."a river dam" I guess you do not want electricity. I guess you do not want the business to be power so you could work. You know the machines, or the computer you use to do your jobs, they are depended on electricity. But I guess you do not want to work. I'm not preaching ego, and I do not have an ego, I was simply trying to have an intellectual discussion about economic prosperity and environmental protection. But you fail at that. Wars? I do not support it, but it is sometimes necessary, when innocence lives are being loss, we need to intervene, not that we have to start it ourselves. But again that's a different debate.

I know the real world buddy. I know it. I educate myself on world event. This world is too small to not know what's going on.


You know this world, yet somehow you claim the the U.S is the richest? Please. I'm not going to buy your snake-like ability to elude these powerful points I have certainly struck your nerves with.

Here, let me climb the slope that I supposedly slid off, considering that it wasn't a slope but a flat surface that has absolutely no obstacles in the way to prevent me from seeing the sheer importance of the environment and how the environment shapes us on the inside. Let a child run through a city, and they will treat you like the slums - let a child run through a forest, and they will treat you like the roots. The only thing that prevents you from understanding that nothing you fight for now would exist without what you do not fight for, is you closing your eyes and living in denial of your own psychopathic tirade. This land is so beautiful full of life - destroying it for the economy is exactly why humans have lost hope in humanity, which then leads to psychopathy; the bottom of human potential.

If the environment is shaped by an economy that inevitably produces lies and toxins into our environment, why the hell are you even arguing against something that makes what you argue for even remotely possible? By the way, the third world countries don't even have an "environment" - people are living on "dead land". There's so little life where they live, hence why they have very little to reflect on themselves. They do not experience the enlightenment of nature nearly as often as we do. Therefore, again, the environment is our teacher - it teaches us many things about what we feel.

I respect your experience, but I do not respect your ignorance. I feel for the pain you were forced in - I will not feel for the pain you cause us. I also do think it's great that you shared your personal story, as that shows that you have potential as a human being, which makes me wonder why you chose to be a lawyer, when they are designed to cheat people and abuse loop holes. You know what else? Those that help Mankind are not doctors - they are human beings. What they do as a job is irrelevant to why they do what they do as a job. What they wear has no relevance to what they want in life. Therefore you can stop with the generalization because you had good experiences with them. I may have a great father, but that does not stop me from realizing that I was lucky to have this experience - there are billions of children that are born into terrible parents and terrible events. I learned a lot from admiring the stars, the moon, the trees and everything around me - that gave me education, health and inspired transportation (horses). Security, however, is really stupid - it allows people to work in secret in their security, while impeding on our owns security; it's a double-edged blade.

You need to look at it again: There's the people; the jobs; the government; the government running off of the people's money they make from jobs. Tell me how exactly your logic works, when the government makes you work through business, while they don't have to work as they live off of the money you make? You are so blind to even miss this invaluable truth. It's out tax payer money - period. To say otherwise is you're own undoing.

That 15,000,000,000,000 is our tax payer money - money that's printed and no longer truly of value. Therefore you're wrong - our money isn't real money. It's called conflation; stop being so naive and falling for big ol' intimidating numbers. The U.S is nothing but a bluffing bully.

These phones and other "technology" has taken us away from our brains and the sheer purpose of living! How can you sit here clicking and clacking away at your computer as to ignore the sole notion that people are lazy because of technology! Are you that far behind in understanding the cruel truth behind this society - any society!?

You do not speak anything except through the ruse that deceived you since the beginning. You're so gullible and misinformed, it painfully disturbs me.
Debate Round No. 3


I'm glad you keep pointing out the United States is not the richest. Yet you have not pointed what nations is the richest. Check out this link:

Every nation uses paper money. It is the means of currency these days. And there's nothing wrong with it, unless inflation cause it to be worthless. It is not real money, I understand that, but every nation is using it to trade and exchange. It's not like all the nations of the world has gold. Have you not use that money to buy something that has been "printed? that you're saying is "no longer truly of value." If it wasn't, how were you able to get whatever you're using right now to debate? Because something of no value has no purpose. So how were you able to get your material? How am I wrong when I didn't say anything about our money being real? Haha.

There's not the job, if a business person wasn't able to provide it. The government is not running off the people money, their using it to make life a little better, even though I understand governments become corrupt. But they have build more schools, hospitals, and roads so you could live a better life. Do you oppose these because they come with environmental consequences, and the money they are using is fake? I know that our government don't have to work as hard as the everyday citizen, rather they just make the laws. But you ought to give them credit, where credit is due. They are the one working tirelessly to ensure your security isn't at risk. They are the one working tirelessly to the ticking of the clock, to connect the roads that move you. I'm not going to go into this any deeper, as I'm sure you know what the government do."It's our tax paper money -period" But how were you able to get that money? Period.

Do not blame technologies as the cause of people being lazy. It's people own state of mind that made them lazy. I got a phone, a laptop, a computer, and a television, but that has not made me lazy. I still play with my little brothers, go to the park, and spend some time out. Maybe it has made you or others lazy, but not me. You're claiming I'm sitting here clicking and clacking away at my computer even though its a laptop, but you're also doing the same. So why question me? No I have not been far behind, honestly, technology has done more good than harm. If you want a separate debate on technology and how it has made people lazy, I'm open to it.

One, I'm not ignorant, I'm only trying to present my opinion, two, by improving your life through economic prosperity, we're in no way causing 'us' pain, three, lawyers are not designed to cheat people and abuse loop holes. You essentially see everyone for their bad side, while turning a blind side to the good they do. I will defend myself right now and the best interest of the people. Part of being in Political Science class is understanding economy, environment, and people behavior and right now, this is what I'm trying to get. I can tell you right now, we're not "causing 'us' pain", we're alleviating or trying to alleviate it despite the fact people like you will try to stand in the way of it. Not all lawyers are the same, I do not intent to cheat people or abuse the loop holes. My life goal is to become an criminal prosecutor, and fight for truth and justice. I'm doing it in the interest of people, not for my sake, though some lawyers do that.

You oppose doctors, lawyers, governments, and business people. Who than do you support?
You have not struck down my points or struck my nerves. You have certainly failed at that.

Now I'm not saying that everyone in this country is enjoying the economic prosperity totally, as I'm not, but it has trigger down to those who have reached for it, because it has been provided to them, and they just have to reach for it. Not everyone did, but Most did. Do you know the water treatment plants we build to prevent waterborne diseases was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the bridges and highways we build to connect our states was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the fact that we have eradicated malaria, which is still in other countries was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the fact that we grow a lot of food was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the fact that you have a home, instead of a shack was the result of economic prosperity? Do you know the fact that maybe because you have a car, instead of a bicycle is was the result of economic prosperity. I guess you do not care about that. Hey lets destroy the water treatment plant, and let you go drink untreated water. Hey, lets stop medical research, and let people die of diseases. Hey, lets stop investing a lot in agriculture, than no food to eat. Better yet, lets stop building transportation so we won't be able to visit our families in other states, because its those highway that comes with environment destruction, that made it possible to travel to a different state. We'll all simply be stuck in one state. Hey let's dedicate our efforts towards protecting the environment and forget about human well being.

Look, I'm not saying because there's economic prosperity, means our government is perfect. No government in the world is perfect. I understand that there are some slums cities. But due to economic prosperity, we have the money to build those cities. It's our government that has failed at that. We could build those cities within a year with the trillions of dollar with give Israel if we want. But you would be the same one opposing the bringing of development to the cities that are affected by slums. By slums, I'm guessing you're talking about run-down buildings, unpaved streets, and poor people. But in order to build better houses or apartments, we need to cut down trees and extract some natural resources such as coal to power them. But you're against that. To paved the streets, we need tars and to produce them, it has environmental consequences. To give those poor people jobs, we need companies to invest in those areas, but all this time you have been attacking them. So they wouldn't see a reason to. And to give those cities a face light, there are environmental consequences. You making a two-sided debate here. You cannot attack business and than talk about slums, you cannot oppose environmental consequences, and still talk about slums. Understand this, just because we're destroying a few environmental areas, does not mean that we are about to put an end to life. We need to give up a few things to get the other. It's call opportunity cost in microeconomics. Again what's "beautiful life" if we're living a despair life? You rather have beautiful scenic view than be able to afford food? Huh? Okay. The environment has no emotions. We as humans do. The environment will not cry when there's no food, the environment will not be uneducated if it cannot get an education, the environment will not go to the hospital; as compare to us.

Again, with economic prosperity we could reverse the trend, as we are trying to do today with climate change. But if we have allow environment protection from the beginning block our economic progress such as building railroad tracks, cutting down trees to build houses, and clearing lands to open up airports and build highways, than we'll never have the money we have today that we're using to invest in education, health, transportation, security, and defense. We would than be a vulnerable country to ruthless leaders. I have given you example of country that is or is now doing good economically, enough though they have environment problems. But that does not mean that's the end of them. With all the air pollution is China, there is still a China. Japan tsunami, there's still a Japan. Still rich.


I'm glad that you keep resorting to that logical fallacy, hence I already explained why you're delusional about it and that printed money is not real value, which causes economical erosion; so it's nice to know that you support economy, while supporting its disease all the while dismissing the importance of an environment.

It's like you can't comprehend this simple notion: America started printing money - America started the artificial value. Therefore other places doing what America does, isn't to say that America is richer - it's to say that America is the puppet master and that nobody knows the actual value of these countries - period.

That's not true about what they built - schools are the lowest priority in terms of governmental agendas. Do not fool yourself, for you live in a world consisted of conformists and ignoramuses.

Technology is the cause of people being lazy, because it's how the brain works. The technology is causing the part of the brain which reacts to convenience to go off, which means the brain is already rationalizing the destruction of the human brain - nice to know the human brain is self-destructive! Just because you still are active, does not eliminatethe fact that technology has slowed down the human brain's evolution to a crawl.

Your inability to obtain genuine information concerns me that you will lead your fellow men astray, as you keep saying things that are not true and are simply a ruse created by psychopaths to keep the American people in an illusion that they have freedom! Until you have the same passion as you have, while seeing every ugly aspect of this world, I do not consider it an incredible feat.

I support humanity - I do not support all these things that rip away our humanity into make-believe system created by hungry psychopaths.

What is the point of having nice materials, when you live in a terrible environment? Please tell me, as I haven't really said much about economic prosperity alone - only in comparison to environmental protection. Until then, you are proving that you'd do a terrible job at playing Jenga.
Debate Round No. 4


As much as I love to continue to debate, it is now coming to conclusion.

If not printed money, than what do you suppose we use as currency? Do you want us to use the gold standard to make live harder for our people and trading? I suppose you don't. Or do you? So now its disease when we're trying to connect our states so our people can commute? It's a diseases, when it gives us the chance to be able to afford food and other life necessities, such as medicine? No its not disease, Sir. It's a blessing.

Oh my God. Stop. Did I just hear you say that "America started printing money. - America started the artificial value." I do not know where you got that from, but you're wrong, considering the United States is still a young country compares to other countries. For your correction, China was the first to start printing money.

Countries do not just make currency has much as they want, doing so causes inflation, which leads to the money being valueless. United States currency exchange rates with most countries is 1: - . Take for example: United States exchange rate with Mexico: 1-13. By looking at this, Mexico currency is valueless as compare to the United States.

America is richer, as much as it is boastful, America is richer. And since all nations of the world uses paper currency, than we'll judge nations by their currency. But I'm not judging United States by its currency, I'm judging the United States by its GDP. That's the real value economists look at in judging nations. But if you want to talk about the "actual value" than lets talk about the United States gold reserve. Period. But I'm not going to go into that.

That is true about what they build, but I agree that it's not high on government agendas. I did not say it anything about what's high on our government agendas. If anything, Defense is the highest spending of our government. If it is not true about what they build, how come we have more universities as compare to the rest of the world?

Technology is not the cause of people being lazy! It's people own state of mind that makes them lazy! It's like blaming your fault on someone or something. I'm still active because I do not get too attach to technology. I do not get attach to my materials. Once in a while, I go out. I set a certain time and limit that I will use my materials. It's human time management that causes them to be lazy, not technology. We could have a separate debate about that if you want.

I grasp information and analyze it on both sides; and its benefit and consequences. When I see it is in the best interest of my fellowmen I follow through on it. I will not lead my fellow men astray as you assume, because my passion is in improving their lives. I've met with my city mayor, and council members, and been part of youth programs to discuss how we can better our city and our state. I take my fellow men concern with respect, and to see how I can help improve their needs. I have started a jean collection that donated jeans to homeless people and given money when asked, as a way in doing my part to help them. My intention isn't in ever leading my fellow men astray, but rather improve their lives. Everything I've said is true and I have provided sources to back up my points. I do not see how "to keep the American people in an illusion that they have freedom" ties into this debate. This was about economy and environment, not economy and freedom or environment and freedom. You're losing your edge buddy. I have my passion and I will stay with it. The world is a ugly place, I understand that, and we can work towards fixing it. I'm guessing some of these ugliness you're talking about is hunger, wars, diseases, and lack of clean water in developing countries. But if those countries are economic prosperous, they wouldn't be like that.

I too support humanity - but unlike you - I favor their well being such as being able to eat, commute, get advance medical treatment, and live a better standard of living.

What's the point of an endowed natural resources if we are not going to make use of it? This isn't simply about having nice material, but also having access to advance medical treatment, be able to afford food, being able to commute, being able to see friends and families, and being able to live longer. Honestly, I think you're doing a terrible job at playing jenga, as I have pointed out so many reasons of economic prosperity, defended it and backed it up with sources.

To conclude, Economic Prosperity is more important than Environmental Protection, because it is through Economic Prosperity are we able to live longer as in Japan, receive advancement medical treatment, funds medical research, grow a lot of food, and building bridges and highways that connects and moves us, especially business wise. With transportation, we're able to import and export. Plus Economic Prosperity is good for the environment, because with the same money we got, we could reverse, or restore the environment, through scientific research. Look at Nations like Japan and China, they have environmental problems, but China is now the second in terms of GDP, and Japan people live longer and have access to some of the best medical treatment and technology in the world.

Thanks for debating me. It was nice to debate with you.


I don't mind the printed money, I was just telling you that don't act like its really valuable to begin with.

You're right, this was my mistake. I stand corrected.

Here's a better question: why are so many geniuses and innovative men shaping this world, all the while not going to school? Maybe it's because school is for average people, not ascended individuals?

I don't think you understand how the world works biologically according to convenience and inconvenience. If I had to go to the bathroom, would I walk up the stairs to get there, or take the elevator? If you think that question is unfair, then let me ask you this - even if we do not fall for the technology, there will always be someone doing it, then another doing it, then another, and before you know it, it creates this amazing effect where suddenly everyone is doing it! It's how the brain works collectively.

You want to improve their lives by taking two important factors and raging a war between the two? Just accept that they are both important like male and female are important - done, it's over, no more reason to argue.

If you cared about the people like I do, you would not be encouraging this country when it's being ruled by tyrants with manners.

The environment is the heart of humanity - the economy is the brain of humanity.
Debate Round No. 5
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
So many people confuse my passion for arrogance, as they confuse lies for truth. It's basic human naivety, I'm used to it, hence why I made a joke out of the term "arrogance", by making it redundant through using a term "aero", for "air", to make it that much more "full of air".
Posted by younglaw 2 years ago
wow con...u seem feisty and u suit ur name too!
Posted by KurtGodel 2 years ago
Just a quick correction. When discussing whether America is the richest country on Earth, you should probably choose either to use wealth or income. As far as I know the US is the wealthiest in both respects, but comparing GDP (income) to debt (part of the wealth equation) makes little sense if you're trying to determine which country is the richest (on the other hand, many economists believe such comparisons due have value in economic analysis). There is data concerning both the US's wealth and income on the BEA's website. If memory serves, the net-worth of the US as a country was someone around $80 trillion, whereas the income the US as a whole (GDP) was roughly $16 trillion.
Posted by YoungLawyer 2 years ago
I'm glad to know that I have potential as a human being. So many other people have potentials, it is only through economic prosperity, could we make those potentials come true, like providing loans to open a business, opening a theater for young actors, and expanding roads and highways to increase travels to explore new opportunities. That is what I want for all.

I understand exactly where you coming from. Words come out during certain rushes. I have done it myself, to be honest. Part about dirty talk works in sex...that's funny. Lol. I will pretend I did not read that.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
Well that's good that you did not take it personally, hence why I said you had potential as a human being. I stand by that statement.

I wan't even applying anything to those words. They're so fun to throw around, I don't know why. It feels good saying it; I feel there might be a linguistic root to why people are attracted to saying certain words during certain rushes. It might be tied to how dirty talk works in sex, actually. Thoughts?
Posted by YoungLawyer 2 years ago
"The last time I checked it was 2,000,000,000,000 so by saying it's now 17,000,000,000,000, just proves my point! America is the the land of the policies and the home of the slaves."

But you claim you know this country and that I'm misinformed. So where have you been all this time. I did not prove your point in anyway, about "land of the policies and the home of the slaves" as it does not apply to the title of the debate. Despite the fact you said I prove your point with this national debt, my point still stands that we're the richest nation on earth and that economic prosperity is more important than environmental protection.
Posted by SenatorZhen 2 years ago
According to this graph ( The last time the U.S. debt was 2 trillion was around 1985 or so, so you must have checked it a LONG time ago.. to the tune of around 30 years ago.

Again, we don't have a problem with your argument (economy is brain, environment is heart), but you should give us some evidence to convince us why your side is more correct than YoungLawyer's side.

Should Harry Reid say "Oh, the Koch brothers are spending $8000000000000000 dollars a year on campaigns, so they're going to be the destructive force advocating for big corporations? My argument is still right even though I'm really wrong about the amount of cash they spend."
Posted by YoungLawyer 2 years ago
There's a time and a place for everything; insulting you on this debate was a place. And even though you wanted me to insult you, that is not the kind of person I am. I do not insult individual especially I'm having an academical debate with them.

I never said I do not want to be insulted. And I'm glad you insulted me. It's okay. I do not take it too personal, weather it was to insult genius or ignorance as you have pointed.

I handle the heat and that's why I never rebuttal in insulting you back. Tolerance is the greatest virtue. And I wanted to apply that.
Posted by Aerogant 2 years ago
That much is true. I don't stay up to date with how much of a disaster monocle-wearing monkeys in power are.

However, I did not lose the debate because I was slightly off on the numbers and origins - I said it perfectly when I said the economy is the brain; the environment is the heart. There's no reason to play favoritism.
Posted by SenatorZhen 2 years ago
Honestly whether or not you insulted people shouldn't be relevant in this debate. Congressmen insult each other all the time. It's the fact that you misrepresent statistics (debt) and then make your claims with no backing that will ultimately lose you this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by ldow2000 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: I believe this was the national debate topic a few months ago! That was only in India though...regardless, Pro had better conduct and stronger points.
Vote Placed by mubaracus 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate was absolutely hilarious. Hahahahaha But anyways, lets get serious. Without a doubt, Con had very poor conduct throughout this entire debate. One key element in this debate that I felt was overlooked were the long term and irreversible potential consequences that occur when the environment is not protected. I think pro created a convincing argument as to why we should favor economic prosperity over environmental protection. However I think in, 50 or 100 years this argument may have a more self-explanatory and non-debatable answer. Con's goal in this argument was to essentially criticize the entire US government rather than simply argue why the environment was better which is why I believe pro won this debate.
Vote Placed by saboosa 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con side was very rude and pro had more convincing arguments.