The Instigator
audrina1000
Pro (for)
Losing
35 Points
The Contender
Danielle
Con (against)
Winning
53 Points

should there be welfare

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/31/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 6,256 times Debate No: 9890
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (16)

 

audrina1000

Pro

I will let my opponent go 1st
Danielle

Con

Hey - Welcome to DDO! Good luck :)

-- -- --

Ill begin by assuming that this debate is focused around the United States. As such, it's fair to say that we live in a capitalistic society. When we do something that works, we are rewarded with money and subsequently continue doing what works. If we do something that doesn't work, the result is that we lose money, and that's our incentive to drop what doesn't work and try something else. This is how we remain productive and contribute to society, as well as command the supply and demand aspect that rules our economy. With welfare, the incentive works the other way around. The money you receive isn't about your effort - it's about your lack of effort. In that case, the incentive is to do what is rewarded, which is to be dysfunctional (do what doesn't work) or simply not work at all in order to keep being rewarded. The result is a lack of production (work) meaning a lack of contribution to society, and actually a drain on society (the tax payers) who are forced to give money without merit... in other words, legal theft.

The quickest way to ruin a productive society is to create a welfare state. As I said, there is no incentive to work and contribute. For those who wish to work but have lost their jobs, we have the social program of Unemployment. For those who wish to work and can't find work, I submit that the government should utilize the money spent on paying people for nothing and instead create jobs. For those with disabilities or handicaps, we again have various social programs to take care of those individuals, as well as insurance plans, union benefits and other company policies that specifically help in those situations. Now, I could go on regarding social and responsibility, but I'll wait to see how Pro responds before discussing philosophy, politics and other things that we here on DDO like to discuss :)
Debate Round No. 1
audrina1000

Pro

welfare strives to promote the basic well-being of individuals in need. These efforts usually strive to improve the financial situation of people in need but may also strive to improve their employment chances and many other aspects of their lives. welfare helps people who truly need it like single parents who's spouse died or went to prison. people want to band welfare why? because you don't want to pay the extra money in taxes for people who's too poor to barely eat. yes, their are some people who take advantage of it but why punish the people who truly need it? if you band welfare you might as well band Medicaid and chip and other programs that help people, that use tax payers good earned money for that too.
Danielle

Con

Pro responds by telling us what welfare aims to do; however, she fails to mention that welfare doesn't work. If it did, then welfare programs would be decreasing after helping people, instead of increasing by fostering more incentives for non-production and the creation of a welfare state. Sure there are some people who "really need" welfare, but again, what's their incentive to work? I'm waiting for Pro's answer. Taxes are essentially legalized theft. In the case of income tax, the government actually penalizes productivity. Welfare rewards the lack of productivity. This is an essential illogical dichotomy that makes welfare immoral. Also, Pro didn't respond to my points about there being other programs to help people in need, and more importantly, my point about the government working to create jobs instead of providing welfare. Since that's not what happens, we can observe how the government is actually oppressing people in this way, and assume that the politicians do it for their own personal gain. "When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always be assured of Paul's vote." I'll send this discussion back to Pro for now.
Debate Round No. 2
audrina1000

Pro

con says what is their incentive to work? well people who actually cant find a job like convicts or single mothers who has small children and cant go out and work right now. its hard to find a stable good paying job this day in age especially when you have kids and bills you need to take care of. yes their are some people who take advantage of welfare but should we let the people suffer who actually need it? their are some people who is on welfare till they find a job. it does help some people get motivated to get a job but some its a small income to put food on their table and clothes on their children's backs while they go out and look for a job. governments should do a better job of monitoring the people on it and help them find other solutions instead of cutting it out completely for the people who really need it. should we really be that worried about were are taxes are going if its helping someone? forget all about the people who take advantage of the program and focus on the people who actually need welfare those are people that matter, they are the people we help support.
Danielle

Con

Ladies and gentlemen, you'll notice that Pro still hasn't provided one incentive to work when one receives welfare. As such, my point stands. Pro mentions single mothers and convicted criminals who can't find jobs, and harps on an appeal to emotion fallacy explaining that it is society's obligation to help these people. The reality is that people suffer all the time for various reasons, but we can't steal from others to rectify something (especially when the proposed solution doesn't even work). Perhaps the felony offender should have considered the penalty for his crime before committing it, or the single mother should have insisted that her partner wear a condom. If we don't hold people accountable for their actions, we'll wind up with a society where the responsible support and pay for the mistakes of the people who become burdens on society. This will only create a widening disparity between the rich and the poor.

If people know that they're going to be responsible for themselves, they will do their best to make good decisions, work hard and seek success instead of purposefully remaining stagnant to receive help. The problem with welfare once again is that it only helps those who make under a certain amount of money. Therefore once an impoverished individual gets a job, they'll probably be making the same or just above what they were receiving from the government. The difference is that they would have to work which is inconvenient. So, as I said, welfare specifically encourages people to remain stagnant and irresponsible.

Once again, you'll notice that Pro completely ignored my arguments about the government providing jobs instead of hand outs. Additionally, Pro didn't respond to my point about government programs like Unemployment which are also aimed at helping jobless individuals get back on their feet. The government doing "better monitoring" of welfare recipients once again costs tax payers money, so either way the people who do work and are productive are hurt by this system. As such, it's not only unfair but illogical. The reality is that we're not helping anyone - neither the individual or society as a whole - when we provide government welfare. We should continue to seek charitable alternatives and responsible choices.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by carley2010 7 years ago
carley2010
I think that there should be welfare. I agree that some financial help is just unnecessary. I, personally, know someone that had rounds with the welfare. They were put in their care for two years and eight months. It wasn't the best time of their life, but at least it got them out of the place that they were in. I know that some people dont really care what happens to other people. But think about what you would do if it happened to you.
Posted by meaningfulsounds 7 years ago
meaningfulsounds
Is it OK to contribute a point to the Pro side in this comments area? I am new here, so my apologies if this is not the right etiquette.

You both seem to be missing the fact that some people are simply not employable, this is sometimes due to physical or mental illness. These people need an income too. And the fact that welfare does create dependency in some people, is not enough argument against welfare. It does help people in an interim situation where they can't make ends meet but need to put food on the table until they find paying work. Welfare should be combined with evaluation and other assistance to better help people get back on their feet. To do a proper job of evaluating individuals' needs and tailoring welfare to them, requires more resources, not less.
Posted by MasterDebaterMK 7 years ago
MasterDebaterMK
Robin Hood (stealing from the rich and giving to the poor) was a horrible childrens book, and should of never been taught to children or the government. Now look at the mess it created.
Posted by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
B/A & Convincing arguments: CON
"Pro still hasn't provided one incentive to work when one receives welfare"
Seems to be the best argument against welfare and PRO totally drops it.

Sources: Tied

Conduct: CON
Dropped arguments, new argumentation, etc.

Spelling/ Grammar: CON
Capitalize the 1st word in your sentences.
There was also this among other things:
"if you band welfare you might as well band Medicaid"
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by philosphical 6 years ago
philosphical
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by LaSalle 7 years ago
LaSalle
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 1gambittheman1 7 years ago
1gambittheman1
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by Lucky120 7 years ago
Lucky120
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 MasterDebaterMK 7 years ago
MasterDebaterMK
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Renzzy 7 years ago
Renzzy
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 Vi_Veri 7 years ago
Vi_Veri
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 1-2-3 7 years ago
1-2-3
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 Guy_In_Mi 7 years ago
Guy_In_Mi
audrina1000DanielleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03