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

Poverty reduction is the only way to ensure economic solvency

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
Twindebaters has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/19/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 327 times Debate No: 93907
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




Well, what is the economic solvency? It means where there is nothing to worry about your economy. But when you are in such a condition of poverty, that means you have a lot of things to worry about. You will face shelter problem, food problem, blah blah blah..., won't you? So simply it can be asserted that to get rid of the above problems poverty-reduction is the only way,isn't it? So whoever you be, I expect anything more and more easier than poverty reduction from you. Please fill my expectation.


This is a Socialist idea, and it's a complete false assessment.

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
-Winston Churchill

"The spirit of envy can destroy; it can never build."
-Margaret Thatcher


This concept is demonstrated in the following example:

If a class in school handed out grades by a Socialist ruling, a student could make a 100% in the class, but wind up with a 63% percent per Socialism. Thus, the next time, the student who got the 100% doesn't try as hard, and gets say, a 59% on the test, but because those getting lesser grades the first time decided to work a little harder, he gets a 65% in the class. He did better by doing less.

Now, he does about the same and the ones who worked harder the second time think, "hey, I got about the same grade as the first time when I did nothing. So now, both do very little and all students get a 45%. So now, nobody has a good grade. It's the equal sharing of misery by default of hard work not being rewarded.


Pro offers us a model that uses magical thinking to assume you can wave a wand and eradicate poverty. It's not reality. Here is reality 101.

You go to a poverty stricken area and give each person $500. Many use the $500 to buy drugs, go to the movies, go out to eat at a nicer restaurant, take a trip, etc. Since they have little, drugs enduced reality vs poverty reality wins many times. Many splurge the money just to feel like they have something that resembles a life. And...their economic situation has not improved. The money simply goes back to the rich. Would some save it? Yes. Enough to affect the economy? No. And if they all did save it by a miracle, the prices would now simply go up because everyone now has more. Now we are back where we started.


What it would take is a legaly bound service. And I don't mean simply giving them a foodstamp card. Many people in poverty trade food stamp items for drugs and drugs for foodstamp items. This is defeating as far as the economy goes.

There would be a community building where people could go with the card. You would go in with your card and be able to purchase one meals' worth of food, and no food could be taken out of the facility. In other words you must eat it there. Security measures would be in place to check you. If you violated the rule and were caught 3 times, your card would be revoked.

The same with bills. If you had a bill, you would go in, they would apply the allotted amount to your bill, and no money or goods would trade hands, only a transaction. Those wishing to donate to help you could look on a board of people needing help and apply however much to the person needing helps' bill.

The system would be set up so that people needing help could advertise their issue in a way available for all unpoverished people to see to help. It would show a copy of the bill and needs, and they could deligate however much they want to individuals and families. The person and family could choose to be anonymous or open. The donater could do the same.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.