Life is better then it was 50 years ago
Debate Rounds (5)
Rules: Round 1: acceptance
Round 2: debating
Round 5: rebuttals (no new facts)
There are some other things that make life better now then 50 years ago. Back then there was a lot of segregation. Blacks were thought of as scums back 50 years ago. I bet you if you asked any minority, they wouldn't want to go back 50 years ago.
I would also point out that 'better' is defined as being more desirable.
I would like to talk about technology first.
To start with, wind farms were invented in 1888, solar generation in 1839, tractors in 1892, the list goes on. My point is that technology has not, in the last 50 years, made such great leaps as you are proposing.
50 years ago, less things had actually been invented, for example, in 1964, acrylic paint was invented. 50 years ago there were a lot more things that were still waiting to be invented, therefore, for inventors, 50 years ago is a much more desirable and, therefore, 'better' place to live.
Your hypothesis that if I was to ask any minority at all whether they would rather live in the present or in 1964 falls down when I ask the 40,000 Yezidis who are now marooned on a mountaintop in order to escape a slaughter that would not have even threatened them say, 50 years ago. This is similar to the fates currently suffered by many other minorities in Iraq recently, all of whom would happily see a return to the way things were 50 years ago, when they still had homes. You would probably argue that this is an example of minorities from one country who think life was better 50 years ago, so I shall give you another example. Arabs who live within the current boundaries of Israel often state that they wish for a return to the pre-1967 Israel borders. So that is all, or at least most, of the Arabs within the Golan Heights, Gaza strip and the West Bank.
I admit that black men and women whom live in America would probably say that they live in a more desirable time now than they did fifty years ago, but that is 'one' ethnic minority, not all of them as you have, rather ignorantly, claimed.
Indeed, the world was a lot simpler fifty years ago, very few countries had access to nuclear weapons, whereas now most countries have access to them. We live in a world which has become more dangerous as we have created new ways to kill each other in mass numbers, We have a lot more to worry about now than we did fifty years ago, an example is global warming, pollution of that scale was not a problem fifty years ago as it is today. Fifty years ago the world was less stressful than it is today which makes life fifty years ago more desirable and therefore, 'better'.
CookieMonster9 forfeited this round.
Still on the technology subject, they have also made electric cars, so people using electric cars don't make pollution. Also on the basis of electric, they have also made hybrids, so it is half gas half electric.
Nowadays cars are faster now then 50 years ago. 50 years ago cars had seatbelts, but nobody used them, the law wasn't as inforced 50 years ago as it is now.
About what you said on minority's it has not gotten much better then it was 50 years ago. 50 years ago minorities in other countries were still in that hardship that they are now. Also unless you are living or know someone in Africa or Europe I would stick to America, where we know what is going on.
As you can see life is better then it was 50 years ago. This is a good debate and can't wait to see what is in store jay Conor.
JayConar forfeited this round.
THE SPACE RACE
I would like to address two of your concerns, kill them both with one stone so to speak. First of all, the 1960's was a time of exciting space exploration for America and the satellites that were being launched were powered by solar energy. So yes, that kind of thing was popular in 1964. The excitement of the space age for most people who were only really starting to become aware of the merits of science proves that America was a much more desirable place to live in 50 years ago than now. Technologically, not much has changed in fifty years, but there is a lot more stress in society now.
Thank you for agreeing with me that minorities in Europe are not all better off now than they were 50 years ago. For reasons that I explained in my last post, there are minorities that were better off 50 years ago than they are now.
50 years ago cars were allowed to go up to 70 MPH on some roads, They are still only allowed to go up to 70 MPH on some roads, nothing has changed. There were less cars however, which resulted in less deaths by dangerous driving, surely proving that life fifty years ago is more desirable today where we have too many cars resulting in lots of traffic jams and crashes. Seat belts weren't as needed because there were less cars around so it was safer, again proving that life was more desirable fifty years ago, therefore 'better.'
When was the electric car invented? I'll tell you, 1884, that's 130 years ago, so it makes no difference to how much 'better' life was or wasn't fifty years ago.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: This debate went off the rails due to the forfeits. Fundamentally, this is based purely on the BoP, which Pro had to show that life was definitely better now than 50 years ago. I don't think he presented enough justification to fulfill his burden. Con's counter argument, that life was better 50 years ago than today, doesn't have to stand for him to win this debate--all that has to stand is that Pro fail to show that it's better NOW. So, narrowly, I'm awarding to Con. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.