The Instigator
Pro (for)
Anonymous
Losing
0 Points
Abundant foods should be free.
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Club
| Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
| Started: | 7/12/2019 | Category: | Society | ||
| Updated: | 2 years ago | Status: | Post Voting Period | ||
| Viewed: | 445 times | Debate No: | 122420 | ||
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (27)
Votes (1)
|
Pro Farmers should be paid directly, With tax money, This is a cheaper solution for everyone.  Con RESOLVED: Abundant food should be free To win, Pro must state the benefits of free abundant food, If failure to, CON wins. If pro states the benefits, And con matches them with the impracticalness of it, CON wins. 1. If abundant foods are free they wouldn't be abundant anymore. Let's say berries are abundant, So you see them at the market and they're free. Your first instinct is too take them. This process goes on for a few years, And it's not abundant anymore. 2. The companies that produce abundant foods will be bankrupt. They will lose billions of dollars in produce, And the economy will be greatly impacted in a bad way. These are my starting arguments, And I wish to have a good debate. |
 |
|
Pro People making money on food should be hanged if you ask me Con REFUTES: Scare food should cost money, My statement is automatically balanced. Response: What about the MASS PRODUCING BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRIES that are at risk? People making money on food should be hanged if you ask me Response: No one cares what you think if you're not a certified professional. |
 |
|
Pro Truth speaks for itself. Con |
 |
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by drewsaphor 2 years ago
| Anonymous | Club | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - |  | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 7 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was completely childish
You have to win, Lol, That is the problem it creates ;)
We live in a world where, It pays of to put unhealthy stuff in foods to make more money, And people need money, In order to eat. Figure out the rest, Think about a dentist wanting to make more money, Drilling holes in your teeth to make more money, Or how about doctors, How about companies that produce various chemicals that go into nature, What are their motivations?
The motivation prices on abundant food creates is entirely opposite of what it should be, It means love friendship truth existence can't exist outside money, The necessarily blinding goal necessarily leading us to the extinction of our species, This change has to be made or we are already dead.
You are being a selfish idiot. You have to pay for it, Or else the people who produce it don't have money. Therefore no one will want that job limiting production, And making it not abundant. Who wants to work in fields for hours and not get pay? You guys are not seeing the other side, Just seeing your dumb lazy first world problems.
If you make abundant foods free you will launch a string of problems, And this is what I'm arguing for. Vote for Con because Pro had lack of arguments, Refutes, And sources. All he stated was 2 sentences in his arguments, Because of his lack of effort, VOTE FOR CON.