• Filter by:
  • Pro
  • Draw
  • Con
  • 2 years ago
  • 2 years ago

    @benmouse42 Congrats for advancing to the next round!
    @chriscowherd Great job and too bad to get out so soon! Hope to see you in November's tournament (last chance to get a free entry to Dec' $5,000 Championship):

  • 2 years ago

    +1,500 points for the QO mug

    • 2 years ago

      Yer @chriscowherd that was great haha, I'll guess we'll see what people think

      • 2 years ago

        @benmouse42 excellent debate my friend! When I establish a society without taxation I'll be sure to have you over for dinner ;)

        • 2 years ago

          Excellent debate. Both debaters are doing a great job on style and focus. Con has somewhat better analysis in slicing up propositions than vice versa. Most of each sides arguments were countered in some fashion. Thus, a close debate.

          Pro wins a small victory in terms of simplicity. One bracket vs 4-6 brackets.

          Fairness is a tie, with Pro having a nice baseline, but Con calling it into doubt in many ways. It's frankly hard to judge.

          Con wins a more unopposed point on impacts to the poor. Which to me, seems more a burden than marginal tax complexity.

          So I vote Con who I think also had better founded argumentation on a few points, and who pointed that out rather carefully.

          Notes - in case anyone is interested...
          Hurting poor by having government services? A strange argument. Flat tax is a higher burden. / Cant codify this / Don't need it
          Loopholes are non-unique to the resolution, thus the complexity of tax code exists, but is not especially large. Postcard vs Table.
          Government infrastructure does indeed count as a significant benefit to business.
          True that many businesses are Corporation, this weakness con point somewhat, the counter is decent, corporate money is still part of wealthy income.
          Con's analysis of "where should we get the money?" is good.
          Fairness argument still has some strength despite wealthy benefits more argument.
          Flat tax generates more income (I wonder why, no loopholes?), con says this doesn't matter / instead where should we take it? / raising more money is superior / amount is based on tax level, which is non-topical
          Poor don't have equal court access (turning on Pros words)

          Simplicity Pro has very small edge
          Fairness (egalitarian) -even
          Impact on poor - Con - largely unopposed
          Business impact - to late to count - counters wage difference

          • 2 years ago

            @benmouse42 good debate friend. Best of luck with the rest of the tournament