The Instigator
actorgurl
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Darth_Grievous_42
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Society is Getting Worse

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  
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: 4/1/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,539 times Debate No: 3479
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (4)

 

actorgurl

Pro

In this debate, I will give a "road map" so to speak of what I will be talking about and I would like the con to address each of these topics in detail of how they think that subject is not getting worse.

1) The rudeness in our society is getting substantially worse.

2) The stupidity of people in general is getting worse.

3) The government is getting more lazy and careless about Americans

4) Gas prices are rising, causing Americans to lose jobs and homes.

5) Living in general is getting worse for Americans.

Now I will address each one individually.

1) Rudeness is getting substantially worse.

It is a common well-known fact that rudeness in America is getting increasingly worse. People are answering their phones AND talking on them in the middle of a movie in the theater, people you don't even know are yelling at you on the streets or in cars, and the list goes on and on. According to CNN, a phone survey done in January of 2002 revealed that "79% of the 2,013 adults surveyed....said a lack of respect and courtesy in American society is a serious problem....61% believe things have gotten worse in recent years." And that was 5 years ago in 2002.

http://archives.cnn.com...

Another survey done says that "79 percent of Americans say lack of respect and courtesy should be regarded as a serious national problem; only 19 percent say it should not be viewed as serious given other issues facing society; 73 percent believe Americans did treat one another with greater respect in the past; just 21 percent attributed those feelings to a false nostalgia for a past that never existed; 62 percent say that witnessing rude and disrespectful behavior bothers them a lot and 52 percent said the residue from such episodes lingers with them for some time afterwards; Six in 10 believe the problem is getting worse."

http://www.homemakingcottage.com...

So as you can see, it is inevitable that the rudeness in our society is increasingly getting worse.

2) The stupidity of people in general is getting worse.

When you think about it, how many "no-brainer" instructions, labels, and warnings do you see out there now days? On most chap stick tubes, it gives people instructions on how to use the chap stick. That is kind of a NO DUH label. You open the lid, spin the dial, apply it to your lips, spin the dial again, and put the lid on again. How hard is that, or do we need to sell people along with the chap stick to show the people how to actually put it on? Here is one of the greatest ones of all, I'm sure you probably remember it. A while back, a woman had just purchased a nice hot cup of coffee from McDonald's. As she put it in her lap and drove away, surprise surprise, the coffee spills on her. What does she do? SHe turns around, sues McDonald's, and WINS. probably 10-15 years that would not have been the case. People need warning labels and instructions on practically EVERYTHING now days and why? Because people are stupid enough that if the warning label is not on that item and the consumer gets hurt by their own stupidity, the company gets sued.

3) The government is getting more lazy and careless about Americans

Let's face it. This is undeniable and you cannot get away from it. The government could give a crap less about us Americans. Look at the recent China scare out there. People are so worried because the Chinese are over there putting lead in our children's toys and poisoning pet food, and what is the government doing to stop them? NOTHING. you could say, "Oh well they can't really go over there and tell the Chinese to stop." You're right, they can't do that. But they sure and heck can stop trading with a country that is killing off our society. How many hundreds upon hundreds of toys have been recalled because there is lead poisoning that is causing serious damage to the kids in this country? How many brands and how many thousands upon millions of pet food has been recalled because of poisoning? Bottom line is that the government is getting more lazy about checking to see if things are safe for us.

4) Gas prices are rising, causing Americans to lose jobs and homes.

When you see this headline, you may think "well, how does the gas prices rising make people lose their homes?" Think about it this way. The price of gas is going up, we all can see that and there is no way that can be disproved. Because the price of gas goes is going up, people who drive to work everyday use more gas, depending on how far they have to drive, some may use more in a day than others. But then they have to use at least half their paycheck just to keep gas in the car. That in turn makes paying bills and paying for everything they need to live harder to do. If they can't pay for the gas AND keep paying bills to live in a house, then they have to either give up the car or the house. Most people would choose giving up the car first. But in turn, they usually end up losing their job because they don't have transportation to and from work except for walking. A lot of people are too lazy now days to walk, so they lose their job. Losing their job means they can't pay bills, which means they lose they house and are now homeless. And it all started because the government is greedy and raises the price of gas.

5) Living in general is getting worse for Americans.

That brings me to my final point. Americans in our society are so scared because of the recent poisonings from China they don't lead normal lives. Prices of gas and living in general are making it hard to live so therefore living in general is getting worse for Americans.

So what I am saying amongst all this is that yes, our society is getting substantially worse and if we don't stand up and do something about it, we may not live to see tomorrow. The way things are heading now, we are all in for a rude awakening if nothing is done to try to improve society.
Darth_Grievous_42

Con

As con, the polar opposite of Pro's stance that I shall defend is that "Society is Getting Better" for the 1st Bracket of the First Debate.org Tournament, to be Judged by username Noblethe3rd. In accordance to actorgurls request, I shall answer all her points in the order she has given them in all the detail I deem necessary. Actorgurl seems to have limited her meaning of society to mean only America's, and until she feels the need to attack the subject from a more global standpoint, I too shall limit my arguments to this 1 country.

Society is getting better. An important word in this topic is "getting", aka progressing. Progressing from what you ask? The past. It can most certainly be seen from almost any perspective that society is indeed better than it ever has been. I shall highlight these advances, both technologically, socially, and politically in my provided 'road map'.

1) Rudeness - Really? Rudeness is a crisis? I will not attempt to deny that there is rudeness, especially on modern highways, in America, but I think it hardly a reason why society is worse. In fact, it may very well be a sign of society getting better. Because we are progressing throughout the years there's been many example of extreme rudeness. The best example of which would be slavery. How unimaginably rude for someone to own, beat, and force another human being to do manual labor? And worse yet it was on a countrywide scale! Most rudeness today is simply shouting obscenities and maybe an inappropriate gesture her and there, but I think that hardly anything compared to this
http://www.thechessdrum.net...
Next to that, any amount of rudeness we now have to endure is like a friendly "hello". Surly, the progression from slavery to bad language is a sign that we've progressed considerably.

2) Stupidity - All because of warning labels? It seems that if one criteria for societies worsening, labels are hardly a good judge of intelligence. These labels as well can be viewed as societies progression. The labels are only a method of avoiding legal issues, not really there to educate an entire 'moronic' populace. This coffee woman is just 1 out of hundreds of intelligent citizens. The average person now is actually probably 10 times smarter or better educated than nearly any colonial patron. Today, an average ten-year old is beginning early stages of algebra. Algebra! A ten-year in colonial days had barely started multiplication. So already, we have progressed educationally. We are also smarter. Because we are better educated, we know so much more. A high class colonial would have nowhere near the knowledge I have on physics, chemistry, or calculus. So already, we can see that the people today are much more intelligent than they ever have been, meaning education is getting better. Every age has its morons, but on a society wide scale we are much better off.

3) Government - Au contraire. The government has taken many more steps to ensure the peoples safety. The reason why we found out all those Chinese products were bad AND sent them back was because they cared. They set up a health code and child safety laws, and as soon as the toys did not make the cut there was an instant recall. This shows much better child safety and well being concerns than what there was back in 1938 and earlier, when corporations used child labor. It has now been 70 years since that past, and already look at the progression. From manual labor to toy safety! That is a huge jump! If you want to explore more on safety, just look at cars. When it was first invented they were a death trap, and if not for the protests of individuals like Ralph Nader, they still might be. But action was made, and the government was finally brought to light on it, and now there is not a single car, foreign or domestic, that is not required to have seatbelts and airbags, and they mandate all car companies to do excruciating safety tests on every vehicle model. If that's not society getting better, I hardly see what is.

4) Gas Prices - One cannot lose their home due to gas prices unless they have no fiscal brain at all. If ones job is to far way then take a bus. If filling up your tank costs more than your house you don't deserve a car. But to date, I have never heard of gas prices causing a family to lose their home, and will assume that this is merely a hypothesis until you can provide evidence that it actually has. Yes, it is more expensive, and makes paying bills that much harder, but in no way can it cause one to lose their house or job. Until you show evidence I discredit it as a mere theory, unlike your above three. But supposing it has merit, it also has made society better. It has finally made people think about the environment, and gas efficiency. New hybrid cars, energy efficient trains, solar power, hydropower, and more are starting to come more into play now more than ever. These advances are not only good for the world, but to the people of society as well. The prices have encouraged better energy use because people no loner want to rely solely on such an expensive necessity. So while it might hurt the wallet now and then, raised gas prices have started to better society by motivating it to come up with better, cleaner, and less expensive methods of power and fuel.

5) Living Conditions - Also not true. Today's standard of living is infinitely better and more comfortable than that of America's past. Even a horrible modern apartment provides more shelter, warmth, and livability than the colonial log cabin. Since America's birth our standard of living has greatly improved, and is now one of the worlds highest SOL countries. These fears we have now are temporary, and will pass given time. But until that time they can safely and comfortably rest in their temperature controlled houses, while in the past, our forefathers get to sleep in the cramped, chilly, creaky cabins. Overall, I would have to say the American's living conditions are far superior now than they have been. So again, progression.

So what I am saying amongst all is that no, our society is not getting substantially worse and if we just reap the benefits and take pride in all our achievements, we will live to see a beautiful tomorrow. The way things are heading now, in comparison to the past, a few nasty words, warning labels, aqua dots, fictional gas-induced homelessness, and the heepy jeepies are hardly reasons to think that society is showing signs of collapse. Rather, these small nuisances should be a clear message that today's society is far surpassing that of the past, and thus, is only getting better.
Debate Round No. 1
actorgurl

Pro

The reason I limited my argument to only American society is because how often do we hear about all the sickness from things being poisoned and gas pricing issues and people losing their homes in other countries like we do in our own country? Not near as often.

1) Rudeness

Actually I never said anything in my opening argument about rudeness putting our society in "crisis." I merely said it was getting substantially worse. As stated from dictionary.com, crisis means "a condition of instability or danger." I never said that our society is in "a condition of instability or danger." I said that it was getting "substantially" worse, meaning it is increasingly getting worse. No our society is not in a state of instability...yet. If we do not get things under control, however, then yes, we will be in crisis. But just to clear things up, I never said we were in a state of crisis about anything. The whole slavery topic, I have to agree it was wrong. BUT, you have to look at the fact that that was how people lived. That is how this country functioned. Look at ancient Egypt. The empires were built on the backs of slaves. It does not mean it was right, but America was not the only country to ever have slaves. Another thing I would like to point out is that the con practically just threw out my ENTIRE argument about rudeness. He did NOT attack my arguments about the phone surveys, in which I presented actual EVIDENCE to prove my case. I provided had evidence and included the links to the exact place I got it from about rudeness and he never even attempted to attack ANY of the topics I brought up. He simply threw in slavery as an example of rudeness, when in reality it was not rude, it was inhumane and wrong. Then he said and I quote, "Surly, the progression from slavery to bad language is a sign that we've progressed considerably." So seeing as he never even brought up ANY attack arguments against any of my evidence about rudeness, he is basically saying that he agrees with what I said. If he did not agree with me he would have at least attempted to argue back. He did not do that so therefore jude, you and I can only come to the decision that he agrees and therefore it is a dead subject and I win on the subject of rudeness.

2)Stupidity

Actually warning labels are "a good judge of intelligence," because you know what? There would be no reason for companies to be afraid of lawsuits because of not putting a warning label on something if people would use their brains. How stupid do you have to be before the fact of the whole McDonald's coffee thing does not make sense? In other words, you would have to be pretty stupid to have a thought like, "Oh well, even though I am in a car and a car has cup holders, there will be no danger in me putting a steaming hot cup of coffee in my lap while driving." Seriously, what is wrong with this picture? Steaming hot coffee + it sitting in your lap + you driving in a car while having to move your legs to push the gas and break peddle. If you cannot see the stupidity and how something like this could go terribly wrong, then I feel sorry for you. About the whole labels factor. Did you know that there is actually a label on a vacuum cleaner telling the consumer "this hose is not to be used on testicles?" And why do you think they put that? Yea, so they did not get sued, but it is because some IDIOT tried putting his testicles in the hose of a vacuum cleaner. The companies do not just come up with things off the top of their heads and put the labels on there just because. There had to be an incident happen because of someone's stupidity that made them put the label on there. Judge, please tell me honestly. Do you really think that this is a smart country if warning labels like the one described above have to be placed on items? I surly don't and I see nothing but a pro ballot on this argument as well.

3) Government

Yes, they were recalled. But wouldn't you think that if the government really cared, after the first 2-3 recalls they would start checking the toys for the lead poisoning BEFORE distributing millions of them throughout the country? That would be that smart thing to do. Just as more of an example to further my argument, here is a link posting EVERY toy recalled up until October 9, 2007.

http://www.usrecallnews.com...

This is to give you an idea of just how many toys have been recalled from China. if the government truly cared, then they would have learned to NOT buy from China. They knew full well the issues behind it but did they stop buying from China? No. I would also like to point out that Darth_Grevious also never even attacked my argument about pet food. He instead brought up cars. Again I say that if he did not agree with the whole pet food argument of mine that he would have brought it up and tried to argue against that instead of bringing up cars which I did not bring up at all. Therefore, once again, the pet foods subject is a dead subject and should not be brought up again seeing as he obviously agrees with my point of view. So all I can see on this subject as well is a pro ballot.

4) Gas Prices

Um actually that is happening all over the country. Do you not watch the news? Everyday people are losing their homes and everything they own because things are getting worse. Again, here is the scenario in a nutshell. Gas prices go up but hourly wages at work do not. The money people use up mostly goes to gas now days. Because people need to pay bills to live in a house they need a job and money. If money goes mostly towards gas, they either have to give up the car to pay the bills at home, or give up the job and stop running around everyday in it. Either ways you spin it, no car means no job which means no house, or no job means no money which means no car or house. So yes it is very possible, and in fact, happens all the time. How do you think people are losing their homes and becoming poor and homeless? If this is not evidence enough then I do not know what is. All I see here judge is a pro ballot because the evidence is in our everyday lives and if can cannot see that then that is not my fault.

5) Living Conditions

Even though I will openly admit that the log cabin theory may be true, today's living standards are not improving. If everything I have said in this argument and my opening argument has not proven that point already then I really do not know what will.

So just a few thing I want to point out to you judge is that

1) Darth_Grievous has dropped many of my arguments which practically means he either agrees with me or just cannot debate against them.

2) He has brought up some subjects I never even brought up. That in itself is ok for examples against me, but he brought them up and dropped some of my arguments in the process.

3) I have given much more hard evidence than he has and in turn can prove myself true that I am not lying or making things up. All he has is 1 picture of a slave, whereas I have multiple sighted sights with the links in my debates.

Given all of this judge, I see nothing but a pro ballot.
Darth_Grievous_42

Con

I've taken the liberty of looking through actorgurl's rebuttal, subtracting of course, the unnecessary and constant pleads to the Judge in an attempt to make my argument look bad because I skipped over a few minor details she barely examined herself and not giving specific information links that any 6th grade history textbook would provide (in it's entirety all this constituted nearly 60% of her argument). She has also made the claim that because I have skipped over them that I must 'logically' completely agree with her entire point. This may scare other's, but I have looked over her debate very carefully and noticed a similar trend, being that she has done close to nothing, besides a very small rebuttal on the topic of slavery, to argue specifically against any of MY points. I would suggest to the reader to re-examine her round 2 arguments, and you will see it. So by her own logic, this would mean that she completely agrees with all of my positions. However, she will most likely object to this, thus meaning that she doesn't think her own rules apply to her, and therefore, not to me. If she concedes to this fact, then I will drop the minor subjects of pet food, a rudeness statistic, and the links I will provide to my sources, although I had taken for granted that they were common knowledge by now. Now then, if my defense of that borderline ad hominid attack is finished, I will continue.

Since my opponent seems obsessed with sources, here they are:
For slavery: http://www.historyworld.net...
On early schooling: http://www.pbs.org...
On new energy sources, which does mention oil dependency as a cause for its research: http://ec.europa.eu...
And early houses: http://www.pilgrimhall.org...
As for a list of items that have passed the tests after importation, just go to your local shopping center and look for any of the thousands of items that say "Made In China". As long as your list is, I'm fairly certain mine greatly outweighs yours.

1) Rudeness - As I mentioned in round 1, my position is that society is getting better, so it had to improve from something. I have not over looked her rudeness statistic, but think it irrelevant. People can think things all they want, there are thousands of statistics to prove this. The simple fact remains that while people can worry all the want about bumping shoulders or bad language, but the point is that today's rudeness is drastically better than the past. My specific example, slavery, is the BEST example of this. My opponent claims that slavery was not rude. That is news to me. Oxford defines rudeness as: 1 offensively impolite or ill mannered. 2 referring to sex in a way considered improper and offensive. 3 very abrupt: a rude awakening. 4 chiefly Brit. vigorous or hearty: rude health. 5 dated roughly made or done; lacking sophistication. 6 archaic ignorant and uneducated. Can my opponent really claim that in no way did the American slave system not exemplify ANY of these traits? For more info specifically on this subject, here is Wikipedias take on it: http://en.wikipedia.org.... I defy you to again say slavery was not rude. Because it seems you will not acknowledge any of my rebuttals without an unnecessary and excruciating amount of clarity: crisis - it was just a descriptive word, relax, there was no need no waste 109 characters fighting it. Egypt - so the slavery of entire generations of Jews to a life of literal backbreaking servitude is not rude at all? Everything else - see first paragraph.

2) Stupidity - Again, you over dramatize the actions of a few dimwits to mean a whole society is a pack of morons. Legal proceedings have progressed (which also helps our society from a time when there was little to no justice at all) and so people have more freedom to sue others for whatever the cause. Because a minority of people don't know how to properly use things, companies are forced to put on warning labels. Before 1 persons dumbfounding deed was done, there were no labels because the peoples intelligence was taken for granted, meaning everyone knew everyone else was smart enough to handle it. The only reasons that a testicle label on vacuums (which if I was arguing from your standards, would call you out on not providing a specific reference) and on McDonalds coffee cups are only there because of 1 idiot person, not an entire society. Like I said, every age has stupid, ignorant people. Such as Vlad the Impaler, Hitler, followers of the Spanish Inquisition, and for America, those like John Wilkes Booth and Charles Mason are a few examples. Spilling coffee on your lap and warning labels are hardly anything next to the things these individuals have done to others. So Peoples stupidity, while still around, has greatly improved. So to answer your final question, although in reference to the judge: Yes, I do think this is an overall smart country, testicle warnings are the least of our worries. And again, I have given evidence that our people in general are smarter than those in the past, though actorgurl did nothing to contest this.

3) Government - On Pet Food - another greatly exaggerated worry. At least it was caught in the end. Also by your own standards, I'll need you to provide a link of recalled pet foods. I looked through the link you gave, and there is no such list there. Until you do, this argument is dropped in my favor. On Toys - Like I said above, for all those we catch, and as your own evidence shows, we've caught many, there are at least 10 more brands that pass having met all safety requirements. Most Chinese companies do realize this potential problem as well. One owner actually hung himself after discovering the news that lead had been fund in his toys. They know the risks, and have passed new laws on lead use (http://kdka.com...). So we, and they, continue to care about toys. My example of cars was to show that the government does care about the peoples safety as far as products from both outside and inside of it go. You didn't argue against it so until you admit your faults, I'll assume you concede this point as well, but still allow you to present your case.

4) Gas - I do watch the news, and just for you watched CNN all day. Not once did they mention gas prices causing even one person to lose their home. They did talk about the economy hurting and downsizing (like all civilizations have and still do), but nothing about gas prices causing homelessness, which one would think might be a major story. So until you provide hard evidence (all you've given so far is speculation), this is also dropped in my favor. And you still haven't challenged the other methods of fuel and energy that I discussed, so, you know he drill. How are people losing their homes? - the drop in retail, personal financial debts, etc. But not gas prices.

5) Living Conditions - Since everything you've said is wrong or, at least, over dramatized, your theory is not correct. Peoples homes now are far better than a colonial home. If you've ever stayed in a real cabin (and I have) you will know this to be true, even on summer nights.

So actorgurl, you have 1 last round in this tournament debate to actually, well, debate. I suggest you not waste it, as you did in round 2, on finger pointing to the judge. Remember, if you concede that you have not specifically addressed any of my arguments (as you haven't), thus by your own rules, meaning you completely agree with them and my position that Society has gotten and is getting better, also leading to the conclusion that you admit utter defeat, then I will drop my worried-about-rudeness statistic, pet food rebuttals and some of the links. Otherwise, I think I'll keep them, and still point out that you have not contested my points at all. Don't open Pandora's box unless you are prepared to face the consequences.
Debate Round No. 2
actorgurl

Pro

First thing I would like to point out is that my "unnecessary and constant pleads to the judge" were only 5 times and that was at the end of each of my points to show the judge why he should be voting for me. As for the whole "6th grade history textbook" argument, I would like to ask you since when did 6th graders start learning about statistics in American rudeness in history? Also, when did they start learning in history textbooks things that have come out in the media within the past 5 years? I would really love to see a logical explanation for this. And you did not just simply "skip over a few of my arguments." You dropped almost my ENTIRE opening argument on rudeness and brought up slavery with only a little argument against bad language. But I will get into all that later on in my closing argument. As for the first 4 links you brought up, I would love to see an explanation as to how the early schooling and early houses is linked to anything in this entire debate? This is the first time it was ever brought up and, frankly, I do not think it is very fair for me to have to worry about proving my point on those two subjects in my last argument when there is so much more that I have to argue. So in my opinion, the links for early schooling and early housing is irrelevant and untopical. Not to mention all you did was provide the links, not telling how it relates to this debate or what you want to be read or anything. As for the slavery link, I will have to say I am almost completely clueless as to how that is relevant. I do like the very first sentence which states, "Slavery enters human history with civilization." That is basically saying that slavery was a part of life. The rest of the article was talking about the entire history, which I really see no relevance in how it proves that slavery was "rude." As for the energy saver link, with this country currently being being $53 trillion in debt and rising http://mwhodges.home.att.net.... So please explain how we could fund this. What list are you talking about? From what I gathered, you were talking about the whole China issue and if so, how? You were unclear on all this and I really think the links and the list of items argument should be thrown out simply because you fail to express how they are relevant, what specifics you wanted emphasized, all you did was provide links, half of which, are irrelevant.

1) Rudeness

Please explain to me how you think my rudeness statistic is irrelevant. I did provide a link and it is hard evidence as to what the majority of America thinks. You did not provide any hard evidence as to how rudeness in America is not an issue, how it is not as bad as most think, or anything. You just simply said "there are thousands of statistics to prove this" but you provide none. You are going on, in your own words, "speculation." With the link you provided from Wikipedia, I would like to point out that if you click on the lock icon at the top it goes to a page that says that "Semi-protection prevents edits from anonymous users (IP addresses), or from accounts which are not autoconfirmed. Administrators may apply indefinite semi-protection to pages which are:......." and then goes on to say what they are. Basically saying that people can go in and edit the information on that site if they have an account. Therefore, this link can be deemed irrelevant. If you want to know what it fully says, then click on it yourself. Another point is, why is it relevant to this topic to count how many characters I spend describing something? Please explain to me how in the world that is relevant at all and will help you win your case. For everything I said on slavery I stick to it, see above paragraph.

2) Stupidity

I would like to point out that it had to be more than just "a few dimwits" messing up to cause the companies to put warning labels on everything. Companies are having to worry too much about lawsuits because of the idiots it is not even funny. Another thing is, how could legal proceedings have progressed if people, like you said, "have more freedom to sue others" and now, you could practically win on almost any case. The examples you gave about people in history really are not that topical simply because they were not stupid, they were down right DANGEROUS. There is a difference. According to dictionary.com, stupid means "lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind." Dangerous means "full of danger or risk; causing danger; perilous; risky; hazardous; unsafe." So yea, I would say these people were dangerous, not stupid. It is not just simply the testicle warnings. It is everything that I have mentioned. We start off with the small, stupid warnings that are no brainers to some of us, and then it just gets down right idiocy.

3) Government

About the pet food, tell the many, many, many people in this country that have lost pets because of this issue that it is "another greatly exaggerated worry." They would not agree with you and neither do I. Here is a link for recalled pet food. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov... There are 91 cat food recalls, about 110 dog food recalls, 2 for ferrets, 1 for fish, 1 for rats, and 1 for birds. Like I said about the toys, we have caught them, but only after they were distributed across the country. Plus, like I originally said, if the government cared, they would stop the trading with China after seeing a trend developing. You said that "most Chinese companies do realize this potential problem as well." If that is true, then why is it so unheard of? I have asked around and NO one out of the approx. 50 people I asked who watch the news have heard of them committing suicide or that they realize the problems. The article does state that, "Chinese companies often have long supply chains, making it difficult to trace the exact origin of components, chemicals and food additives." Which puts in our minds that knowing this fact, they probably are poisoning us on purpose because they know it is hard to trace exactly where it came from. It also states that, "The toy recalls were among the largest in recent months involving Chinese products, which have come under fire for containing potentially dangerous high levels of chemicals and toxins." Which only proves my point more that the American government needs to stop trading with China, and if they truly cared they would.

4) Gas

By the way, CNN is one of about 40 local news channels across the nation. The gas prices are all over the news as well as the internet.

http://money.cnn.com...
http://www.tcpalm.com...
http://www.gas-mileage-tips.com...

Read everything in the above 3 links and you will see what I am talking about when I am talking about the gas prices. I still go with my original argument about gas prices affecting us to the point of homelessness. Refer to my opening argument if need be. You did admit they did talk about the economy getting worse, which is what I have been saying.

5)Living conditions

The only thing I have to say, is say that it is over dramatized to the many who have lost their homes already. Everything I have already said holds true and I am not dropping anything I have said.

Well, I have provided many links, and if that does not prove anything, then I don't know what will. Judge, I ask you to carefully review my closing argument and take to mind everything I have said and all the links I have provided versus all the links he has provided and everything he has said as well. Honestly I see nothing BUT a pro ballot because everything I have provided massively outweighs what my opponent has provided as in hard evidence and proves that today's society is getting substantially worse. If we do nothing about it, we will be extremely sorry in the long run that we did nothing about it
Darth_Grievous_42

Con

I will answer her individual questions in a very general way, because most times, and this is only me, I like to actually debate the topic at hand (In this case I am defending why Society is getting Better) rather than waste my time pointing out and exaggerating format. This method of mine is known to some as "Staying on Topic". But now to her questions (these are the ones where she usually starts off by saying "I would really like to know..." or "please explain")
Every, and I mean every argument I have given has been to prove my case. Society is getting better, and had to get better from something. The points I brought up, from slavery to colonial houses, were all to exemplify this. You'll notice that every time I somehow included all the larger concepts of your information into my arguments (even if some minor ones are not specifically pointed out for space), where as you have completely disregarded mine in every case (except that small slavery excerpt in round 2). What you've given me are all minor cases of bad occurrences in modern history, all of which I have given examples to show that they are not signs of societies crumbling, but in comparison to events in our past, are signs we've drastically improved, and thus, are getting better. Your examples are indeed, low points of today, but you haven't, as of yet, given one reason why it shows we are worse. Worse to what? Now we are buying toys made in China, all of which we've quickly recalled, rather than the lead based paint that our own society made and released? We have to recall a small fraction of the pet food that is given out, compared to the times when raw meat was given to dogs, without any kind of safety inspection? Rather than whipping the backs of slaves, we are just concerned about rudeness? I'll address them all specifically in a minute, but up to now, you have given NO evidence on how this society is GETTING worse, only that we are having troubles, like every single other society that has EVER been in existence. All of my links are direct evidence to further exemplify my points. You implied that contrary to you, I've given no evidence of my historical facts, and there they are (my 5 links). I don't need to draw a road map to how to how it relates, as I explain everything in my rebuttals. The links are there so you can compare the accuracy of what I am saying to sites that do specifically address those topics in detail. This is what I meant by the textbook. All my information should be general knowledge; your 'contemporary info isn't in textbooks' speech is merely skewing my words. The quantity of my links is irrelevant in comparison to the quality. I gave information, all of which is sufficient to not only back up what I am saying, but to disprove yours as well. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, but there is a strict background check on all new information. It is credible. Now then, if I am finished wasting 3000 unnecessary characters defending MYSELF, I will defend my POSITION.

1) Rudeness - Again, actorgurl is only attacking the relevance of my information, which as I've just shown is valid. Your rudeness statistic is invalid for the same reason that I explained in round 2, because peoples opinions are subjective, where as my information is objective. They can think today's rudeness is a problem, but slavery actually was. Slavery was rude in every respect, and far worse than what rude is considered to be today. Therefore, rudeness has gotten better. Society is better on that insignificant front. My link provides hard evidence that slavery existed, and what they had to go through. It may have been a part of life, but that does not mean it was right. It was a terrible thing, as you yourself admitted, and is far worse than anything you or a few people on the street may consider to rudeness today.

2) The men I gave example to did stupid things. You don't think the conscious slaughter of hundreds might mean that maybe these people are lacking a little "keenness of mind"? Anything they did was far more harmful to society than a woman spilling coffee in her car. As for legal proceedings, as I already stated, we now have more freedom and access to the law than ever before. We can find justice, even if you don't personally agree with it, in practically any sense. At least with coffee lady, and testicle man, hundreds of people didn't die; the worse thing that happened was now there are safety labels on things that previously didn't. So, we've gone from mass human slaughter to 'warning: hot liquid inside'. I'll let the audience decide which society was worse.

3)http://www.msnbc.msn.com...
There's your story on the Chinese manger that killed himself. Now you can educate your friends. This shows they realize the repercussions. They know that if something is found to be dangerous that there are consequences. What logic would they have to WANT this? If there is a toy recall it is just as much news to us as the concerned mother and pet owner at home, except while all we have to do is make a return, they have fines, lawsuits, and invoices. Nobody wants that. And again I must point out that at least we catch them, and like I said above, our own country let these kind of things go on under our noses. But now, everything is much safer. If they really didn't care do you think they'd release a recall list at all? The fact that they do, and make public announcements about it is a clear sign they care. Also, your personal feelings about our trade with China are irrelevant t the topic at hand. In this argument, along with the above two, you did not further try to advance our position, only pointed out ways my evidence might lack merit, to which I've given enough reason and logic to show that it doesn't. Therefore, you've dropped your own case, and mine about cars. So were he had our own country letting us use lead based paints, drive seat belt-less cars, and eat un-inspected food, whether pet or human, to a day where we have strenuous medical and safety tests, and public recalls of any item that MIGHT be a threat. On this issue, our society is definitely getting far better.

4) The evidence you gave only says 'gas prices are raising'. I could deduce that when I go to fill up my car. But nowhere does it say it causes homelessness. This entire issue of yours has been made null by your own lack of hard evidence (sound familiar?). You wanted me to say how we can afford other methods of fuel? I ask how can we not? These higher gas prices encourage the study of cleaner, safer, less expensive alternate fuels. Where once we could buy cheap, smog inducing, green house gas causing oil, now we are trying to find a better method than even that. Those are undeniable signs that our society is getting better.

5) My link on colonial houses and education were given to show that what I say is not mere subjective banter but fact. They both, in fact all of them, show that when in comparison to today's world, we are much better off than what they had. Living conditions have improved greatly. Education now dwarfs that of the past. Housing is much better than the past, thus society has gotten better here as well.

Now judge and jury, look up. Re-read her last few arguments. Then mine. I have addressed all her points and added to my argument. She's only complained, for lack of a better word. I hate needing to do this, frankly it disgusts me, but I feel it necessary so you are not misguided. She's not given any reasoning to really contest my points, only tried to debunk their validity. She's dropped both her and my arguments just so she can make me, not my premise, look bad. The numbers of links don't matter. The evidence behind them does. My links, facts, evidence, and examples all maintain their validity, and thus my argument that I've more than proven, being that society is, in all 5 respects and more, getting better. Darth_Grievous_42 out.
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Logical-Master 6 years ago
Logical-Master
Had I been PRO, I would have gone with arguments that concern constant neglect for the environment.
Posted by Logical-Master 6 years ago
Logical-Master
No, I'm completely fine with it. And it's not specifically LD which I was referring to (that was just a guess on which debate your opponent may have taken up). What you're referring to as "pleading" is a custom for most forms of formal debate.

There's also the matter of "conceding." Points which are not responded to (without there being a valid reason) are considered conceded points in formal debate competitions. Still, you were correct to question this logic. Last I recall, there is no rulebook which debate.org is required to uphold. Furthermore, this is an informal debate (for the most part), hence being further reasons as to why those rules wouldn't necessarily apply.
Posted by Darth_Grievous_42 6 years ago
Darth_Grievous_42
I'd very much like to know what your exact interpretation of LD debating is Logical Master, perhaps I'll agree. But by the tone of your writing (that I cannot accurately distinguish) it seems that does not sit well with you?
Posted by Logical-Master 6 years ago
Logical-Master
Interesting debate. Especially the criticism of debate team customs (LD perhaps) made at the beginning Grievous' round 2.
Posted by Darth_Grievous_42 6 years ago
Darth_Grievous_42
Technically Yraelz, the picture is Aaron McGruder's. Nevertheless, it was made with the thought of theLwerd. I figure it may be good karma, and help me attain a winning streak as she currently has. Anything helps.
Posted by Yraelz 6 years ago
Yraelz
Hmmm, why did you adopt part of theLwerd's picture? =)
Posted by Darth_Grievous_42 6 years ago
Darth_Grievous_42
I look forward to it, and the possible future debate we may well have.
Posted by Yraelz 6 years ago
Yraelz
Enjoy judging my round Darth_Grievous, sorry that it will probably be very long. =)
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Noblethe3rd 6 years ago
Noblethe3rd
actorgurlDarth_Grievous_42Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Darth_Grievous_42 6 years ago
Darth_Grievous_42
actorgurlDarth_Grievous_42Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by HadenQuinlan 6 years ago
HadenQuinlan
actorgurlDarth_Grievous_42Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 6 years ago
Logical-Master
actorgurlDarth_Grievous_42Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03