The Instigator
Lmotoole95
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
TheSkeptic
Pro (for)
Winning
48 Points

Welfare

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 8 votes the winner is...
TheSkeptic
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/13/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,547 times Debate No: 5970
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (8)

 

Lmotoole95

Con

I am against Welfare because they need to get off there but and work and we pay them through our taxes.
TheSkeptic

Pro

I thank my opponent for challenging me to a debate/issue I have never come across. I'll admit, I know nothing about welfare. However, in the spirit of debate I'll pick up this challenge and see how it goes. Hope we have a good debate :)

[Definition - Welfare]
http://dictionary.reference.com...

a. Receiving financial aid from the government or from a private organization because of hardship and need.

Since I have no argument to rebuttal, I will propose one of my own.

~Arguments~

What my opponent states about welfare is wrong. It's not for lazy people, but it's for unfortunate people. Those with disabilities or family problems need financial aid, and it can come in many ways. Many students in college are familiar with grants and scholarships. The purpose of these is to reward students who work hard, but even with a job they can not meet the financial barriers of college.

The American Dream is supposed to be that everyone can work hard and succeed. To even make this a reality, welfare helps those who truly work hard, but are burdened by the misfortunes of life. It isn't for the lazy and the slouchers.

~Conclusion~

I presented one argument, which basically outlines the purpose of welfare. It refutes my opponent's only line, that "because they need to get off there but and work and we pay them through our taxes". I have shown how welfare IS for people who work hard. Until he presents new arguments, this is all for now.
Debate Round No. 1
Lmotoole95

Con

Well, I know that we need Scholarships and Disability, but I am talking about welfare people where they get money from the government. They need to work! What is wrong with them in not working. Government giving them money for nothing. Except there kids. I am ok with disabilitly checks but I meant come on. There should not be welfare checks for the people that don't want to work.
TheSkeptic

Pro

So it seems that my opponent has conceded with my point about welfare being there for the disabled, and for students struggling financially in college.

~Counterarguments~

His argument against welfare is "Government giving them money for nothing". Without specifying WHO is getting welfare from the government for nothing, I really have nothing to debate.

Some scenarios I can think of people getting welfare for "nothing" is people like working mothers. However, they aren't receiving financial aid for trivial reasons. They are obviously burdened harshly with a job and taking care of kids. Assistance can come in tax relief for them. [1]

~Conclusion~

With a vague resolution and opening argument, I brought up the reason that welfare is for those who are disabled or for students. My opponent has conceded this point. His new point in Round 2 is demonstrably vague. Really, I have nothing to debate, but brought up a possible example of what my opponent means by "Government giving them money for nothing." However, I showed why working mothers receiving financial aid is justified, and it is my opponent's job to prove me wrong.

---References---
1. http://en.wikipedia.org...(financial_aid)
Debate Round No. 2
Lmotoole95

Con

Okay, what about this ladies and gentlemen What about lets say the drug test. I think that the people that are on welfare should get a drug test to get money from the government. We need to STOP giving money to drug attics!
TheSkeptic

Pro

So it seems my opponent returns to a new argument in his final round. He has failed to meet his burden and has failed to refute all of my arguments and rebuttals.

~Counterarguments~

"...What about lets say the drug test. I think that the people that are on welfare should get a drug test to get money from the government. We need to STOP giving money to drug attics!"

--> Yes, let's give them a drug test! So even if I agree with this point, how is this an argument against welfare? Is this not more of a proposal to refine aspects of the (I assume) US welfare system? Either you win or lose this point does not matter; you have failed to meet your burden.

~Conclusion~

My opponent has failed to refute both my argument and my rebuttals. His last point should be discarded, since even if he wins on that single point, it does nothing for his side. Vote PRO if you had the decency to read this debate :)
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by ournamestoolong 8 years ago
ournamestoolong
How is this remotley colse, this should be a landslide.
Posted by ournamestoolong 8 years ago
ournamestoolong
"I voted CON because welfare is unjust and immoral despite what theskeptic said."
-->wait. Helping people is unjust and immoral? in what world does that make sense.
Posted by Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
Before/After debate: Pro
Welfare is necessary for the improvement of quality of life for those with less opportunity. Unless it is argued that everyone in America begins life with the same opportunities, I don't see how a lack of welfare is beneficial. Also, some people on welfare once paid taxes- especially in today's economy where some might get both unemployment AND welfare.

Conduct: Pro
Con didn't even bother arguing his points, and I know there are points to be argued, like better alternatives to the current welfare systems. He presented none, and simply assumed his argument was superior because he thought so. In my opinion this is very bad conduct, as it is passive-aggressive condescension.

Spelling/Grammar: Pro
Con not only didn't formulate his arguments, he didn't properly formulate his statements. He didn't bother for punctuations like commas, periods, etc. He didn't even bother to review his "arguments" and check the spelling of easily spelled words.

Convincing Arguments: Pro
Again, Con did not present any arguments. Pro could have done better, but only if presented with the challenge to do so which he was not.

Sources: Pro
Con presented no sources whatsoever.

All points to Pro.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Brad, the question is who made a better argument, not who is accidentally correct rofl.
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
"I voted CON because welfare is unjust and immoral despite what theskeptic said."

--> Then obviously you shouldn't be allowed to vote.
Posted by funnybrad333 8 years ago
funnybrad333
I voted CON because welfare is unjust and immoral despite what theskeptic said.
Posted by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
All of my vote goes pro. Con did not even bother framing an argument, offering only opinions.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by Poop2stick 8 years ago
Poop2stick
Lmotoole95TheSkepticTied
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 
Vote Placed by pawletoe 8 years ago
pawletoe
Lmotoole95TheSkepticTied
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 
Vote Placed by theitalianstallion 8 years ago
theitalianstallion
Lmotoole95TheSkepticTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by kels1123 8 years ago
kels1123
Lmotoole95TheSkepticTied
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 
Vote Placed by ournamestoolong 8 years ago
ournamestoolong
Lmotoole95TheSkepticTied
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 
Vote Placed by Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
Lmotoole95TheSkepticTied
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 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
Lmotoole95TheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:06 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
Lmotoole95TheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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