The Instigator
Krueger515
Pro (for)
The Contender
zmblizz
Con (against)

Republican policies are more economically sound than Democratic policies

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
zmblizz has forfeited round #1.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/19/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 269 times Debate No: 103603
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (0)

 

Krueger515

Pro

Please use the first round to acknowledge and accept the scope of argument and challenge respectively. The arguments will begin in round 2.

What this debate should focus on:

"Policies" in this context is primarily referring to stimulus policies (such as Pres. Barack Obama's stimulus package), taxes (the act of either lowering or raising, tax bracket levels, and the effect that said actions might have in the different tax categories [such as corporate, income etc.]), entitlement programs (such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc.), budgetary allocation of funds (such as infrastructure and all of the aforementioned topics), and trade.

"Policies" also refers to the act of either privatizing or the acquisition by the government of responsibilities affecting the lives of citizens, and how either of these actions may affect the economic efficiency and quality of said responsibilities.

What this debate should steer clear of:

Talking points based on uncertainties and conjecture
Strictly emotional arguments
Claims of factuality not backed up with credible sources (please no Wikipedia!)

Pro will argue that Republican policies are more economically sound than Democratic policies.

Con will argue the opposite stance.



I am new to this forum but am excited to get arguing. Thanks and good luck!
This round has not been posted yet.
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
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by levi_smiles 11 months ago
levi_smiles
That said, kudos to Kreuger for bringing a genuinely important policy debate to the table- a rare enough thing on DDO.
Posted by levi_smiles 11 months ago
levi_smiles
Also- the influence of politics on the economy is itself uncertain & subject to conjecture (I.e. the importance of regulation or taxes vs. cyclical market forces). If economics weren't mostly speculation, there would be little value to economic debate.
Posted by levi_smiles 11 months ago
levi_smiles
I suspect that Kreuger is really looking to pit fiscal conservatism against liberal modernism since US political parties aren't particularly representative of either economic ideology & whatever the rhetoric & editorial are more alike than different. For example, traditional fiscal conservatism would have thrown its support to the Trans-Pacific Partnership - prioritizing more open markets & more free trade above social or near-term labor considerations. Traditional liberal economists would be more skeptical. In practice, Republicans trashed the deal for a few points of populist credibility & the Dems quickly followed suit, both parties understanding that they were sacrificing 1-2% GDP a decade down the road. The pillars of Obamacare came out of the Republican reaction to Hillarycare in '94 & might well have been promoted by a McCain administration. Republicans & Democrats like to project certain oppositional economic philosophies but in practice both tend towards a popular middle-ground blend.
Posted by Krueger515 11 months ago
Krueger515
Sorry, auto-correct is being temperamental today.
Posted by Krueger515 11 months ago
Krueger515
Sorry about my apparent bias agaibst Wikipedia, but if you can't use it as a source in school you probably shouldnt use it in debate. And I would like to keep my own personal beliefs out of debate. This should be about making the strongest arguments possible for hour side. Whether you agree or dissagree with your arguments should make no difference as long as the points you make are factually correct.
Posted by Wylted 11 months ago
Wylted
Pretty much every study you find agrees. So stupid to be biased against Wikipedia http://www.zmescience.com...

Pro is probably a cuckservative and not an actual conservative, because he does not understand spontaneous order is just as good if not better than a government body who controls everything.
Posted by Wylted 11 months ago
Wylted
Wikipedia is a credible source, genius. Studies have shown it to be as accurate as the Encyclopedia Brittanica.
This debate has 6 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.