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

Globalist Bankers

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/10/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 317 times Debate No: 76428
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




See ever one of us as a potential commodity, for their own benefit, they play the game. That is the truth. I dare you to dispute this, fool.


Thanks for calling me a fool, For I am one.
I would like to debate with you on the fact it is for their own benefit.

Now then, I would have to disagree with you on that. We are all selfish creatures, so what makes us different than them? We just play the game of the pyramid scheme all the time. All we want is to co-populate in life and produce children.

My Argument goes as follows; The global bankers are doing their best to provide for their families with the luxury of wealth.

Debate Round No. 1


I would never disagree with you supposition, as it is true, in my pea brain. All votes to the not convicted. Who does convictions by the way? The righteous? INSTITUTION? Cheers, bloke!


Since I do not understand your position, I will use a common piece of rhetoric used by republicans to assert my next argument; Trickle down economics.

Trickle down economics is the idea that economic benefits provided to businesses and upper income levels will indirectly benefit poorer members of society when the resources inevitably "trickle down" to them. Though this is theory as of now, there is an argument to support this:

  1. If high income earners see an increase in disposable income, they will increase their spending and this creates additional demand in the economy. This higher level of aggregate demand creates jobs and higher wages for all workers.

  2. Alternatively, increased profits for firms may be reinvested into expanding output. This again leads to higher growth, wages and incomes for all.

  3. Lower income taxes increase the incentive to for people to work leading to higher productivity and economic growth.

A fair amount of people who will support this. So let's call this a fairly valid argument?

Debate Round No. 2


Max.Wallace forfeited this round.


Pity, I wanted to hear more from this guy. He could have won too.

I extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 3


Max.Wallace forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4


I was on my one week out of 52 vacation, sorry to have started this. Poor planning on my part, my apologies.


No problem, Anyway, Vote for whoever you like!
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con ff several times