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

Income should be put ahead of doing what you like for a career

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/14/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 381 times Debate No: 99911
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




I don't really believe this, but thought I'd play devil's advocate. I imagine most people are of the opposite opinion so I figured I'd more easily get an opponent by taking the pro position.
1) No ad hominem, insults, personal attacks
2) Since we each only have one round for debate, my opponent should only use their round to either rebut my arguments or offer their own arguments, not both. This is to make it more fair for me since I am unable to do both.

If either of the rules are violated, the voters should vote for the one who didn't violate them in terms of "conduct"

Main Argument
The amount you make should be put ahead of what you like to do for a career, because if you make a lot of money, you will more likely be able to do leisure activities when you're not working that you enjoy doing. Sure, if you have a career you like doing, you would be doing something you enjoy for 8 hours or so a day, 5 days a week, but what about the free time you have? What if what you enjoy doing doesn't pay well enough for you to do leisure activities that you enjoy doing on the side as well? I contend that a 8 hour a day job that pays more(but may not be your ideal job) which allows you to do more hours of leisure activity you enjoy to do, is better than a job which is your ideal job but you can't afford to do other things you enjoy.

While it is possible to have both a job you enjoy and one that pays well, it's not always possible. If it is the case you get both, that's great, but I am limiting my opponent to not being allowed to take that position, they must take the position that it's better to do what you enjoy, and not necessarily that it pays well.

I turn this over to my opponent


I do agree with my opponent that if you have a job that pays a good salary you will be able to do more leisure activities, but if you are doing a job you don't like you will get more stress overall even with leisure activity. For example, the article "Junior lawyers open up about stress" at states "A 2012 survey by LawCare " which is staffed by volunteers, themselves lawyers " found that 50% of the 1,000 lawyers questioned felt stressed." Keep in mind that lawyers make a median salary of $115,820 a year. (Source at The article "How Many Hours A Week Does A Lawyer Work?" at states "According to the results, there was an average of 2200 hours of work billed each year. That comes out to about 42 hours a week." This means that lawyers do have time for leisure activities. Overall leisure activities probably won't be enough to help with the stress of the job. So, in summary, I argue that making a good salary in a stressful job is not as good as making a bad salary in a job you love.
Debate Round No. 1
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.