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

Money can solve anything.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The Voting Period Ends In
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/12/2016 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 1 week ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 177 times Debate No: 96083
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)




Money can solve anything.

CON must prove at least one example of a disaster (or misfortune) that can occur in human life that cannot be prevented or overturned -in theory- by a person with an unlimited supply of money. CON is free to make arguments in round #1 and round #2 but must not make any new arguments in the final round (only rebuttals).

It is to CON's benefit to list as many different examples as possible.


Money Can't Solve Everything

Hi, I'll accept your debate. I will be arguing that unlimited money can't solve every disaster/misfortune.
Before we start off I would like to define each term.

Disaster: a sudden event, such as an accident or a natural catastrophe, that causes great damage or loss of life.
Misfortune: an unfortunate condition or event.

First Scenario: Instant Spontaneous Earth Explosion
So, let us theoretically say that earth instantly and spontaneously explodes without warning, because you had no warning there is absolutely no way you could have prevented that with money.

Second Scenario: Black Hole
So, let us theoretically state that this time a black hole enters or forms inside of our solar system. Black holes have a gravitational field so intense that nothing can escape it, because of this, it is impossible for us to prevent earth from being sucked into the black hole with money or otherwise.

Third Scenario: Death
So, Let us say you decide to take your wife and kids on a vacation to the Bahamas with you for 3 weeks. When you return you realize your grandmother died the day after you left. Other family members tried to contact you but couldn't. So tell me how can you bring your theoretical grandmother back to life after almost 3 weeks of death? You can't.

Forth Scenario: Hidden Asteroid
Once again let us theoretically state something. Lets say a massive asteroid enters our solar system undetected, and is headed straight for earth. It will hit earth in 1 Hour. While you do have unlimited money, you do not have unlimited time. You can't make or build something that quickly to stop it, despite all your money.

Fifth Scenario: No Currency
This time let us say earth has denounced all forms of money. It becomes useless and no one accepts it. You can't buy food, water or shelter. You quickly die. Your money in no way, shape, or form can stop this.

I think it is worth saying that while Pro has unlimited money, he doesn't have unlimited time or resources. This is why money can't solve everything.

That is the end of my argument for this round. I look forward to Pro explaining how all of these issues can be solved with money.
Debate Round No. 1


"Instant Spontaneous Earth Explosion"

Is not scientifically possible, and therefore invalid. R#1 rules clearly state that CON must list a disaster or misfortune that "can occur in human life."

According to "Contrary to science fiction, planets are stable and causing one to explode would require some chemical or nuclear process which can provide an explosive punch of energy. For example, to detonate the Earth, a ball of uranium with a diameter of some three miles at the core would be required" Source:

In the event then that Earth was in actual danger of exploding, there would be time to react and reverse the detonation process.

"Black Hole"

Any black hole that forms inside the solar system would be too weak to actually affect earth (). Meanwhile, the sun does not have enough mass to ever become a blackhole in its lifetime.

In the event then that a blackhole were to travel across the galaxy to the solar system (nearest one is 6,000 lightyears away), a person with an unlimited supply of cash would have ample time to invest in technologies and methods that could potentially move the earth; which NASA has said is technically possible:


Death of your grandma in this case, is theoretically reversed by cryonic freezing and then investing literally unlimited funds into new death-reviving technologies. Science says this ice-thawing method of reversing death may one day be possible:

"Hidden Asteroid"

Stopped by investing in obvious technological methods of dodging/destroying an asteroid. Nuclear weapons and ICBMs being one method of choice.

"No Currency"

Prevented by using infinite funds to buy up and establish monopolies on all forms of goods and services now. I would also argue that this example, (while technically possible) is not theoretically possible, especially when 99% of countries on earth practice capitalism.

Even so, what's to stop our unlimited gazillionaire from lobbying or bribing heads of state and buying off entire governments and militaries in the first place?

CON is free to defend these examples or attempt new ones. CON must still prove one example.



1. Instant Spontaneous Earth Explosion
You say the earth cannot explode. My sources say otherwise, as according to the earth can explode from overheating the planetary interior
"The real danger for our entire civilization comes not from slow climate changes, but from overheating the planetary interior."
"In a systematically under-cooled spherical core reactor the cumulative cause-effect relationship is hyperbolic and leads to explosion. It seems that there will be no second chance..."
Source for both quotes:

Also enlighten me how exactly would you reverse the detonation process? It seems you could do very little with money to reverse it.

2. Black Hole
In the link you posted on the black hole scenario, Dr. Gregory Laughlin Claims to have found a reasonable way to move earth, using comets or asteroids. However in an interview with him, he says it was "written in the context of a billion years in the future". He also states it was highly theoretical, and that it was more of a joke.
Article with part of the interview here:

Even if that was credible, you can't speed up billions of years of scientific study in a couple of days, despite unlimited money. Also black holes are extremely hard to spot, as you can only see them when they are sucking in light, therefore they may be closer then you think.

3. Death
You claim you can freeze and revive your grandmother. Your grandmother was dead for nearly 3 weeks before you found out, also your family members didn't have your unlimited money to freeze her then. Here is a description of a dead person after 3 weeks.
"After 3 weeks:
24} The skin, hair, and nails are so loose they can be easily pulled off the corpse
25} The skin cracks and bursts open in many places because of the pressure of Internal gases and the breakdown of the skin itself "

If your grandmothers skin was falling off and bursting open in some places, as well as starting to decompose, I don't think you could bring her back to life after freezing her.

4. Hidden Asteroid
I said in my scenario that a massive asteroid was heading towards earth, and you responded to use nuclear weapons or ICBMs..Here is what would happen.
"a nuclear bomb could obliterate a smaller asteroid, but it's not these smaller entities that pose a threat to Earth's safety. The asteroids that would be really worrisome -- those larger than 1,312 feet (400 meters) -- wouldn't be easily wiped out by such a bomb. Sure, great hunks of one might break off, but not enough to neutralize the danger."

So this says you may break up the asteroid but the pieces are still heading towards earth, not to mention probably radioactive. Radioactive dust floating in space because of this may also settle on earth in due time.

5. No Currency
I stated that the world denounces money in this scenario, and you stated to establish a monopoly on everything. Here is a quote disproving that.
"The Roaring Twenties were an era dominated by Republican presidents: Warren Harding (1920-1923), Calvin Coolidge (1923-1929) and Herbert Hoover (1929-1933). Under their conservative economic philosophy of laissez-faire ("leave it alone"), markets were allowed to operate without government interference. Taxes and regulation were slashed dramatically, monopolies were allowed to form, and inequality of wealth and income reached record levels. The country was on the conservative's preferred gold standard, and the Federal Reserve was not allowed to significantly change the money supply.

The fact that the Great Depression began in 1929, then, on the Republicans' watch, is a great embarrassment to conservative economists.

This shows that the monopolies were a large influencing factor on the great depression. Therefore one can concur that if you form even larger ones, another, and much bigger depression will happen. If there is only one giant monopoly and it falls, money will become worthless, and people will resort back to trade, and people will denounce money, putting you back to square one.

Rebuttal Ending:
I feel every one of my original scenarios still stand, and that money can't solve them.

New Scenarios:
I came up with some new, fresh scenarios

Scenario 6: World Peace
It is unfortunate that we don't currently have world peace. While it is possible to fund different governments with your money, this will not stop fighting, and it may even increase it, because money can't buy world peace.

Scenario 7: Luck
Luck is important and without it misfortune tends to happen. Luck is defined as "success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions". So tell me how do you buy that? You can't.

Scenario 8: Time Travel Paradox
So let us say that someone needs to go back 300 years in time to prevent a chain of bad things from happening, because of this, you create a time machine to do so. However this is impossible because of this.
"In all time travel theories allowed by real science, there is no way a traveler can go back in time to before the time machine was built."

Scenario 9: Omnipotence
Let us say you decide to get omnipotence to save the world, and help it as well. You can't because you can't get omnipotence.

Scenario 10: Omnipotence 2
Lets say an omnipotent being, such as a god, decided to wreak havoc on earth. It is impossible to stop him because of his omnipotence, so how can money help you?

Scenario 10: Earths Collapse
Earths species start dying out at an extremely rapid pace. How can you fix this with money?
Article In case you don't believe me:

That is the end of my argument for round two. I once again look forward to Pro explaining how all of these issues can be solved with money.
Debate Round No. 2


Lol I concede. Using unlimited cash to fund the world's first manhatten project for a time travel device was the trump card I was saving.

Well played I suppose.


Ok, Thanks for the good debate, Ill add a conclusion sentence for the sake of finishing up.

Unlimited money can't solve every disaster and misfortune, and most of my scenarios can't be fixed by unlimited money.

Once again thanks for the great debate, and well played.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by fire_wings 1 week 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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession
Vote Placed by FurryDragon 1 week ago
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: Con won, cause Pro conceded.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 week ago
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: Concession.