Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Topics I would like to Debate

bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
This is more of a list to archive, rather than a forum post in need of discussing. If you'd like, you may post some clarification questions or anything that feels worthy of posting.

There Is little Economic Freedom when there is no Political Freedom (Pro)
Minimum Wage Should Not be Raised (Pro)
Taxes Should be Lowered on the Principle of Property (Pro)
Governments with more dominance over the public tend to have more corruption and abuse (Pro)
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)
Individuals should have the right to discriminate based upon gender, race, or religion on their private property (Pro)
Redistribution (Con)
Economic Theory of Marxism (Con)
Government Ownership Leads to Less Growth and More Poverty (Pro)

I will refine this list later. This is all that comes up right now.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 4:14:25 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.

I'm a libertarian and would prefer a free market solution to healthcare. Unfortunately a time may come when I have to accept that we'll always have 3 or 4 companies that run the system based on over regulation as well as other unfair policies that give these businesses an advantage. I may have to accept that in this political environment, no pathway to a free market system in that regard exists, so the second best option that would benefit consumers, is a more socialist system.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 4:26:37 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 4:14:25 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.

I'm a libertarian and would prefer a free market solution to healthcare. Unfortunately a time may come when I have to accept that we'll always have 3 or 4 companies that run the system based on over regulation as well as other unfair policies that give these businesses an advantage. I may have to accept that in this political environment, no pathway to a free market system in that regard exists, so the second best option that would benefit consumers, is a more socialist system.

You just made the biggest misconception of the free market. Don't worry though, it's common.

The reason why the free market works is because everything is dependent on profit and consumers.

The reason why healthcare costs rise is because of government. It is in the ABSENSE of government that the free market will correct itself. In Canada, it takes about 10 months to get an appointment. If the only way in which a company can survive is by making money, not by being helped by the government, then the prices will fall.

Read up on some Ron Paul. He will tell you how a free market solution will lower prices without sacrificing quality.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 4:29:14 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 4:26:37 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:14:25 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.

I'm a libertarian and would prefer a free market solution to healthcare. Unfortunately a time may come when I have to accept that we'll always have 3 or 4 companies that run the system based on over regulation as well as other unfair policies that give these businesses an advantage. I may have to accept that in this political environment, no pathway to a free market system in that regard exists, so the second best option that would benefit consumers, is a more socialist system.

You just made the biggest misconception of the free market. Don't worry though, it's common.

The reason why the free market works is because everything is dependent on profit and consumers.

The reason why healthcare costs rise is because of government. It is in the ABSENSE of government that the free market will correct itself. In Canada, it takes about 10 months to get an appointment. If the only way in which a company can survive is by making money, not by being helped by the government, then the prices will fall.

Read up on some Ron Paul. He will tell you how a free market solution will lower prices without sacrificing quality.

Actually that's precisely what I said. I was just stating that the political realities of the situation may force a more practical course though not better course to correct some of the current system's weaknesses. Thanks for repeating what I said right back to me, though.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 4:32:53 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 4:29:14 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:26:37 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:14:25 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.

I'm a libertarian and would prefer a free market solution to healthcare. Unfortunately a time may come when I have to accept that we'll always have 3 or 4 companies that run the system based on over regulation as well as other unfair policies that give these businesses an advantage. I may have to accept that in this political environment, no pathway to a free market system in that regard exists, so the second best option that would benefit consumers, is a more socialist system.

You just made the biggest misconception of the free market. Don't worry though, it's common.

The reason why the free market works is because everything is dependent on profit and consumers.

The reason why healthcare costs rise is because of government. It is in the ABSENSE of government that the free market will correct itself. In Canada, it takes about 10 months to get an appointment. If the only way in which a company can survive is by making money, not by being helped by the government, then the prices will fall.

Read up on some Ron Paul. He will tell you how a free market solution will lower prices without sacrificing quality.

Actually that's precisely what I said. I was just stating that the political realities of the situation may force a more practical course though not better course to correct some of the current system's weaknesses. Thanks for repeating what I said right back to me, though.

The healthcare system is weak as a result of government. That's what I'm arguing here. If government is the problem, then get rid of it. If there is no protectionism and corruption, the healthcare prices will fluctuate based on supply and demand. I understand what you are saying, but the practicality is that government is the problem, and nationalizing anything is not the solution.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 5:47:24 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 4:32:53 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:29:14 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:26:37 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:14:25 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.

I'm a libertarian and would prefer a free market solution to healthcare. Unfortunately a time may come when I have to accept that we'll always have 3 or 4 companies that run the system based on over regulation as well as other unfair policies that give these businesses an advantage. I may have to accept that in this political environment, no pathway to a free market system in that regard exists, so the second best option that would benefit consumers, is a more socialist system.

You just made the biggest misconception of the free market. Don't worry though, it's common.

The reason why the free market works is because everything is dependent on profit and consumers.

The reason why healthcare costs rise is because of government. It is in the ABSENSE of government that the free market will correct itself. In Canada, it takes about 10 months to get an appointment. If the only way in which a company can survive is by making money, not by being helped by the government, then the prices will fall.

Read up on some Ron Paul. He will tell you how a free market solution will lower prices without sacrificing quality.

Actually that's precisely what I said. I was just stating that the political realities of the situation may force a more practical course though not better course to correct some of the current system's weaknesses. Thanks for repeating what I said right back to me, though.

The healthcare system is weak as a result of government. That's what I'm arguing here.

Yeah and I'm telling you it's pretty dumb to argue that point against somebody who agrees with you.

If government is the problem, then get rid of it. If there is no protectionism and corruption, the healthcare prices will fluctuate based on supply and demand. I understand what you are saying, but the practicality is that government is the problem, and nationalizing anything is not the solution.

What if the only options are nationalizing it or keeping it, at it's current state?
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 6:27:42 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 5:47:24 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:32:53 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:29:14 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:26:37 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:14:25 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.

I'm a libertarian and would prefer a free market solution to healthcare. Unfortunately a time may come when I have to accept that we'll always have 3 or 4 companies that run the system based on over regulation as well as other unfair policies that give these businesses an advantage. I may have to accept that in this political environment, no pathway to a free market system in that regard exists, so the second best option that would benefit consumers, is a more socialist system.

You just made the biggest misconception of the free market. Don't worry though, it's common.

The reason why the free market works is because everything is dependent on profit and consumers.

The reason why healthcare costs rise is because of government. It is in the ABSENSE of government that the free market will correct itself. In Canada, it takes about 10 months to get an appointment. If the only way in which a company can survive is by making money, not by being helped by the government, then the prices will fall.

Read up on some Ron Paul. He will tell you how a free market solution will lower prices without sacrificing quality.

Actually that's precisely what I said. I was just stating that the political realities of the situation may force a more practical course though not better course to correct some of the current system's weaknesses. Thanks for repeating what I said right back to me, though.

The healthcare system is weak as a result of government. That's what I'm arguing here.

Yeah and I'm telling you it's pretty dumb to argue that point against somebody who agrees with you.

If government is the problem, then get rid of it. If there is no protectionism and corruption, the healthcare prices will fluctuate based on supply and demand. I understand what you are saying, but the practicality is that government is the problem, and nationalizing anything is not the solution.

What if the only options are nationalizing it or keeping it, at it's current state?

Hypothetical questions are impratical. In a real scenario, the options always will be 3 things: nationalize it, keep it, or deregulate and allow the free market to handle it.

Nationalizing costs a great amount of money and will kill our economy, since 18% of our economy is relative to medical services.

Keeping it won't be too good either.

That's why allowing the free market to handle it will be best. Don't get it conflated with protectionism though.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 7:10:17 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.

I'm not necessarily supportive of nationalized healthcare. For the most part I agree with your position on all of the listed topics. In the case of those two topics, I was slightly interested but after hearing your reasoning we're just too similar.

I do see that we disagree on some big issues, so if you're ever bored or something feel free to shoot me a PM and we can get something going.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 7:11:26 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
Hypothetical questions are impratical. In a real scenario, the options always will be 3 things: nationalize it, keep it, or deregulate and allow the free market to handle it.

The question isn't really hypothetical. The current political climate will not allow it to be deregulated to the likings of Libertarians. Maybe a few deregulation a here and there, but with the Overton window where it is, we're stuck with insurance companies being highly regulated. This means if you're a congressman, the only two realistic options is tinker with the status quo or push for single payer healthcare.

Nationalizing costs a great amount of money and will kill our economy, since 18% of our economy is relative to medical services.

No it wouldn't. I assume private medical practices and hospitals would still exist. I believe we're just talking about nationalizing healthcare. A lot of the cost of medical care, might be spent on other things as well. Maybe instead of spending every dime somebody has on heart surgery, they could get a timeshare in Conneticut and have more fulfilling vacations

Keeping it won't be too good either.

That's why allowing the free market to handle it will be best. Don't get it conflated with protectionism though.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 7:31:55 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 7:10:17 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.

I'm not necessarily supportive of nationalized healthcare. For the most part I agree with your position on all of the listed topics. In the case of those two topics, I was slightly interested but after hearing your reasoning we're just too similar.

I do see that we disagree on some big issues, so if you're ever bored or something feel free to shoot me a PM and we can get something going.

Sure thing.

Also, I have some debates In voting stage. Do you mind voting for them?
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 7:35:04 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 7:31:55 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 7:10:17 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 4:09:06 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 12/16/2015 6:15:03 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 12/16/2015 1:35:59 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Healthcare is a right (Con)
Free Healthcare is inefficient (Pro)

May I ask what your reasoning is behind your position on these two?

I don't see healthcare as a right for an American citizen. It's not outlined in the constitution explicitly and it's quite easy to destroy any arguments about the implicit meaning of "the right to life".

On the other hand, healthcare being a government entity rather than being provided by private enterprise is completely inefficient. It's not cost effective, quality recedes, and it goes against every American principle.

I wouldn't expect a libertarian like you to want nationalized healthcare.

I'm not necessarily supportive of nationalized healthcare. For the most part I agree with your position on all of the listed topics. In the case of those two topics, I was slightly interested but after hearing your reasoning we're just too similar.

I do see that we disagree on some big issues, so if you're ever bored or something feel free to shoot me a PM and we can get something going.

Sure thing.

Also, I have some debates In voting stage. Do you mind voting for them?

No prob, I'll check them out now.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...