The Instigator
Willoweed
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
Diagoras
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Obama is the best president (read details).

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...
Willoweed
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/18/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 844 times Debate No: 19362
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

Willoweed

Pro

This debate will be about which president since Carter has enacted the best job creation, and economic polices.
Job creation generally means number of jobs created (Example: Policy A resulted in the creation of 5 jobs).
We will define economic generally as how much money is saved (Example: Policy B resulted in $5 not being spent wastefully).
Polices the government enacted from 1997-1981 would be considered Carters policies.
Policies the government enacted from 1981-1989 would be Reagan's
1989-1993 Bush 1.
1993-2000 Clinton
2000-2008 Bush
and for Obama we will only included years were Democrats controlled the house and Senate 2009-2011.
The burden of proof will rest on both debaters. I must provide support for Obama, while my opponent must provide support for another president. My opponent can use examples of Obama polices that hurt the economy, while I can use policies his predecessors enacted.
My opponent can either make the first argument or allow me to make the first argument.
Diagoras

Con

if we're only including policies enacted by Obama when democrats held both houses, then we should be fair and treat all candidates the same way. So I'll go with Bush Jr, just to show that Obama is worse than the worst republican of the group. In congress, Republicans did not control both houses until November 25th 2002, when Jim Talent (R) took Jean Camahan's (D) seat and they held both houses until the 110th congress which was sworn in on January 3rd, 2007. So I will look at policies and numbers from December 2002 until December 2006.

I'll let my opponent go first.
Debate Round No. 1
Willoweed

Pro

1)Bush policies that wasted money
A)The Iraq war.
I'd say it's pretty reasonable to say that bombing Iraq was a waste of money (ill only include money spent up till 2007). Around 350billion waste http://zfacts.com...
B)Medicare advantage.
Medicare advantage is a Bush era policy that gave insurance companies free money for no added benefits. This free corporate subsidies wasted 100 billion dollars from 2003-2006. http://www.cbo.gov...
C)Medicare part D.
The part of Medicare Part D that wastes money is its inability to negotiate prices; meaning its essentially giving drug companies free subsides, because of this costs are 58% higher than they should be meaning from 2006-2009 this wasted 116 billion dollars. http://azstarnet.com...
https://www.cms.gov...
Total dollar amount of money wasted due to Bush policies is around 565 billion dollars
2)Obama policy effects on jobs.
A)Cash for clunkers created 60,000 jobs by increase auto sales and increasing energy efficiency http://www.prnewswire.com...
B)Green energy loan guarantees so far have created 60,000 jobs. By expanding more efficient energy technologies.
http://thinkprogress.org...
C)He increased cars/trucks MPG standards which will create 700,000 jobs up to 2030 by increasing energy efficiency.
http://thinkprogress.org...
D)New EPA regulations under Obama will result in the creation of around 1.5 million jobs over the next 5 years, in order to modernize power plants.
http://thinkprogress.org...
E)The PACA will create at least 250,000 new jobs. by expanding health access and reducing wasteful expenditures. http://www.americanprogress.org...
F)Increased head start funding which is education funding for young children will result in the creation of 90,000 jobs. http://news.prnewswire.com...=
G)Obamas 50 billion investment into rail and other public transportation will create 1.3 million jobs. http://www.apta.com...
H)The stimulus act is reported to have created 2.9 million jobs. http://www.reuters.com...
I)Small business lending support, and increased SB lending estimated to create 500,000 jobs. http://money.cnn.com...
Total jobs created 7.36 million.
3)Obama polices that reduced wasteful spending.
A)Requiring energy companies to use more clean energy sources will save 15 billion dollars by reducing pollution. http://www.ucsusa.org...
B)Weatherization assistant program, which helps make homes more energy efficient will save 13 billion dollars in a ten year period. http://www1.eere.energy.gov...
C)Obama increased cars/truck mpg standards which will save consumers 150billion by 2030 by lowering gas costs. http://thinkprogress.org...
D)Cash for clunkers (sourced above) will save consumers 7 billion dollars in ten years by lowering gas costs.
E)New EPA regulations that reduce pollution (sourced above) will save 140 billion dollars by lowering health costs.
F)The PACCA reduces wasteful spending by reducing Medicare advantage spending, switching to a more bundled payment system, investing into comparative effectiveness research, reducing drug patents, decreased medical loss ratios and some other things. This is estimated to save 500 billion dollars (the CBO estimated 500 in savings but private research says more money than that will be saved however I'll stick with the CBO's numbers) http://www.americanprogress.org...
http://thinkprogress.org...
http://voices.washingtonpost.com...
G)Increases in OSHA safety standards will result in 90 billion in savesing in ten years by reducing workplace injuries. http://www.corporatewellness.com...
H)Obama eliminated the white house's helicopter fleet saving 11 billion dollars. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...
I)Expanded head start funding which creates 9 dollars in benefit for every dollar spent (sourced above) saves the country 40 billion dollars.
J)Obama reformed federal student loans removing banks from the process saving 60 billion dollars. http://www.uspirg.org...
K)His 50billion investments into high speed rail and other public transportation measures create $2 in benefits for every dollar spent by reducing congestion, pollution, and commute times (sourced above)
L)Expanded AmeriCorps funding by 4 billion which will create 8 billion in economic benefits. http://www.dlc.org...
M)Stimulus investments. The stimulus act has a long list of investments that save the economy lots of money over time. The investments include, computerized records (1trillion), Community health centers(30 billion), pre-school funding(100 billion), the MEP(70 billion), WIC(8 billion), NASA(10 billion), science/other research, updating the electricity grid (2 trillion), and alternative/clean energy (50 billion).
http://www.rand.org...
http://www.americanprogress.org...
http://americanmanufacturing.org...
http://thinkprogress.org...
http://useconomy.about.com...
http://www.reuters.com...
Obama policies will save 4.3 trillion dollars.
Diagoras

Con

I'll take one of my opponent's examples and look at it individually, but the rest can be compared to reality to show that they are fake.

1) Cash 4 Clunkers.

This program did not create "60,000 jobs" it created "40,200" jobs, and nearly all of these were TEMPORARY. That's because this created only a temporary boost in demand. When C4C ended, the demand left with it, and all the jobs that were needed for that temporary demand also left. That is why, during the 4 months of C4C, the US still lost 988,000 jobs. Voters should also see from the report that C4C resulted in the purshace of 394,000 cars, 210,000 of them were not made in the USA. So this "wonderful" project did more for foriegn workers than our own.

http://www.cargroup.org...
http://data.bls.gov...

2) all the rest.

My opponent says that Obama the Great has created 7.36 million jobs and has saved $4.3 trillion dollars. Rather than digging through this political wet dream, lets just look at the facts. From January 2009 until January 2011, 3,225,000 jobs were LOST, not created. And from Jan 2009 to Jan 2011, he increased the national debt by $3.5 trillion.

Simple comparison.

Bush from Dec 2002 until Dec 2006, we say 6,708,000 CREATED jobs, and only $2.27 trillion added to the national debt. So when it comes to the economy, Bush created jobs, Obama the Great destroyed jobs. When it comes to national debt, Obama the Great increased the debt 50% more in half the time.

http://data.bls.gov...
http://www.treasurydirect.gov...

Now, if we want to go into the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama the Great took us into a war in Libya and is continuing the war in Afghanistan, so you can't complain about one without complaining about the other.

Sure, my opponent can point to a number of blogs that make junk up, but the numbers are crystal freaking clear. Obama the Great has done NOTHING good with the country and has been the WORST president since FDR.
Debate Round No. 2
Willoweed

Pro

1)A) My opponent is making an odd argument. He claims that the ending of Cash for Clunkers result in the loss of every job that the economy lost the month after CFC ended. This means my opponent is saying that if C4C didn't end it would have resulted in the creation of 988,000 more jobs.
B) However my opponent is using a logical fallacy, you can't contribute C4C to all the jobs lost or created in the economy.
C) Even my opponent says that C4C saves money and created jobs, I'll accept his numbers instead of mine.

2)A) My opponent is making a huge logical fallacy. He is claiming that every job created under the Bush presidency was created due to Bush polices, meaning that according to him if we had maintained the polices that were under Clinton 0 job's would have been created from 2002-2006. This is despite the fact that under Clinton more jobs were created then under Bush
B) I'd also like to point out that my opponent doesn't even list a single policy that Bush enacted that resulted in any job creation or any money saved.
C) I'd also like to point out that increases and decreases in the deficit does not mean increases or decreases in money saved. In order for a policy to save money it must show that the money spent results in more economic benefits then the money spent. For example money spent decreasing pollution results in lower health costs meaning money saved.

3)A) The Libyan cost to the America government was less than 1 billion dollars. http://abcnews.go.com...
B) Also I'd like to note that if we include Afghanistan war spending as waste we can only include the increase in costs under Obama and Bush. So that results is total Bush military spending in Afghanistan was 105 billion dollars, while total Obama spending is around 70 billion dollars. http://costofwar.com...

When we include the Iraq war we find that when adding all the wars together Bush wasted 384billion more than Obama on the wars.

My opponent so far has not given us any polices that Bush enacted that created any jobs or saved any money. Meaning at the moment we have 0 jobs created due to Bush polices, and we have 384 billion dollars wasted due to Bush polices. For Obama we have slightly over 7 million jobs created, and 4.3 trillion saved due to Obama policies
Diagoras

Con

1) C4C

My opponent is missing basic logic. I didn't claim that C4C resulted in 988,000 lost jobs, but that all the temporary jobs left along with hundreds of thousands of other jobs. Voters should also realize that my opponent has not denied that all these jobs were TEMPORARY, like seasonal workers around winter solstice. Since they are not perminate, they don't mean crap.

2) Job creation

While not every job is a result of Bush's individual policies, the whole picture can be shown as his responsibility and as such, his success. The best thing that any president can do, is simply get out of the way. While Bush was no libertarian, and didn't suscribe to laissez faire. He was a lot closer to it than Obama the Great is, and that is why we saw a much better economy under him than we do with Obama the Great. His tax cuts and derugulations are the key reasons for the success. And of course, as soon as the democrats took congress, they fuckked it all up.

3) Money saved

Yes, it does involve the deficit. The very fact that the deficit is growing means that more money is being spent than saved. All the "predictions" that my opponent's blogs suggest mean jack shiit when the real numbers show that Obama the Great is spending more than he is saving.

4) Wars

The money spent on the wars is far from wasted. Apart from creating tens of thousands of jobs, it is helping remove dictators from around the world. The entire Arab spring can be traced to the collapse of Saddam. Once the people of various nations found that dictators can fall and the people can survive without them, they rose up. Unless my opponent wants to argue that dictators are good, which wouldn't surprise me given his love for Obama the Great, then he really has nothing to stand on in this regard.
Debate Round No. 3
Willoweed

Pro

1)
A) I find it odd that my opponent thinks that temporary jobs are useless, given that every job is temporary. If you build a house eventually that house will be built and the job is done with, if you harvest a crop when you are done that job is done with. Also CFC will result in millions in saving due to increased fuel economy.

B) The facts still remain that C4C created over 40,000 jobs in America, increased GDP and will result in Consumers saving .7million a year because of increased fuel economy. How my opponent thinks those things are bad is beyond me.
2)
A) First off some of the jobs created by Obama will be creased after 2011. For example increasing MPG standards will create 700,000 jobs up to 2030.

B) Second my opponent is making the same logical fallacy that he made when he claimed that Bush was the cause of every job created in 2002-2007. You can't logical/honestly claim that ALL the jobs losses from 2009-2011 was Obama's fault, especially given the fact that for the first quarter of 2009 Obama's polices weren't even implemented yet.

C) The Job loses that occurred from Jan 2009-Mar2010 occurred because of the popping of the housing bubble and the banking crisis. Now it is impossible for those two things to be Obama's fault considering they occurred while Bush was president.

D) It is irrelevant how many jobs were lost from 2009-2011, because this debate isn't on how many jobs were lost/created during the presidency of Bush and Obama. The debate is on how many jobs were created due to policies implemented by both presidents

3) Also like I said in my last post that increases and decreases in the deficit does not mean increases or decreases in money saved. In order for a policy to save money it must show that the money spent results in more economic benefits then the money spent. For example money spent decreasing pollution results in lower health costs meaning money saved.

4) So to recap so far we have that Bush policies wasted 384billion, and created 0 jobs, and that Obama policies have/will save4.3 trillion dollars and create over 7 million jobs
Diagoras

Con

Diagoras forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Willoweed

Pro

My opponent forfeited.
Diagoras

Con

There's nothing more that can be said. The numbers of reality speak for themselves.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by lolcannons 2 years ago
lolcannons
Here's a better one actually

http://topics.nytimes.com...
Posted by lolcannons 2 years ago
lolcannons
For the record, Cash for Clunkers has been rated as one of the WORST political policies of ALL TIME!

Here take a look: http://money.cnn.com...

There's more where this came from...
Posted by Ore_Ele 2 years ago
Ore_Ele
I expect to see a Reagan v Obama or a Clinton v Obama, pending on the political affiliation of the member that accepts this.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Buckethead31594 2 years ago
Buckethead31594
WilloweedDiagorasTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: In my opinion, Pro had better arguments, many of which were not refuted by Con. Also, Pro had better usage of sources. Along with a forfeit, Con conceded the debate in the final round.