The Instigator
CookieMonster9
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JayConar
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Life is better then it was 50 years ago

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
JayConar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/9/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,543 times Debate No: 60224
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)

 

CookieMonster9

Pro

I want to challenge someone to this debate. I wish the best of luck to whoever accepts it.

Rules: Round 1: acceptance
Round 2: debating
Round 3:debating/rebuttals
Round 4:debating/rebuttals
Round 5: rebuttals (no new facts)
JayConar

Con

I accept your debate. I argue that life is not, in fact, 'better' than it was 50 years ago.
Debate Round No. 1
CookieMonster9

Pro

First off I would like to talk about how technology has helped us. Technology has made it so we can stop pollution by getting energy out of things like the wind, the sun, and even things like wood and trash!

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.
JayConar

Con

Life was better 50 years ago than it is today. For the sake of clarity, 50 years ago takes us back to the year 1964, so I shall be arguing that 1964 is a year which, for the majority of people in the world, was better than 2014.

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.

However.

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'.

Your turn.
Debate Round No. 2
CookieMonster9

Pro

CookieMonster9 forfeited this round.
JayConar

Con

We'll pretend this round didn't happen, shall we?
Debate Round No. 3
CookieMonster9

Pro

I see what you are saying and I want to start with what you said about technology. I suppose that you are right about that, but people are more into it now then 50 years ago. They may have invented those things, but were those things popular in 1964? Did companies trust this new way of getting energy? Nowadays by your research it has been 126 years since this was discovered. More and more people now know about it then 50 years ago. Same thing about all of the other new ways of energy, solar generation was made 175 years ago, and tractors were made 122 years ago. Not only was this stuff new, it was probably expensive for a little while. Like for example in this day they have made hovercrafts, but they are so expensive that nobody has them.

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

Con

JayConar forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
CookieMonster9

Pro

Can't say much else. This was a shorter debate then I thought it would be with my forfeit and yours, and I think that if you have some more rebuttals that we should have a second debate.
JayConar

Con

I would first like to state that I live in England and I'm a History student so I know what was going on 50 years ago in Europe and America because I've studied them. But if you would really like me to stick to America...

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.

Nice debate.
Debate Round No. 5
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by JayConar 2 years ago
JayConar
Ah ok you're quite young, might have been a little harsh of me to go all A-level History on you xD Sorry about that.
Posted by JayConar 2 years ago
JayConar
Ah ok you're quite young, might have been a little harsh of me to go all A-level History on you xD Sorry about that.
Posted by CookieMonster9 2 years ago
CookieMonster9
idc. I get what you are saying though with stuff. Im in eighth grade and school has been busy.
Posted by JayConar 2 years ago
JayConar
Whoops, yes I likewise got distracted by life, I thought I had more time, to be honest, whoops. I'll just form an argument anyway and we'll count my forfeit with the same regard as we counted yours.

You ok with that?
Posted by JayConar 2 years ago
JayConar
There are two rounds left, if you use those rounds to debate then we can just ignore the forfeited round.

Round 4: Debating/rebuttals
Round 5: Rebuttals (no new facts).

We'll keep it that way.

If you don't use those two rounds for debate then yes this should count as a loss for you. Or else, what stops people from just forfeiting and asking not to lose because they forfeited every time they think they might lose? Even if that's not the case in your case, it sets a bad precedent. Good luck!
Posted by CookieMonster9 2 years ago
CookieMonster9
I don't want to be docked for my forefeit.
Posted by JayConar 2 years ago
JayConar
Eh?
Posted by CookieMonster9 2 years ago
CookieMonster9
I was working on a debate and it would have been ready but plans happened and my debate was deleted. I would like to have a "pass" on my current debate.
Posted by CookieMonster9 2 years ago
CookieMonster9
we know what we are doing.
Posted by JayConar 2 years ago
JayConar
There are cons to the pro side, don't worry :P
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
CookieMonster9JayConarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
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.