text stringlengths 0 9.69k |
|---|
Mary will deal with the remainder of that. I don't actually think it's responsive cool. Why is the European Union better one? It gives you a bigger initial offer for opting in, meaning that it also means that at the point where you would be leaving, you would be trading off a significantly larger immediate, short term ... |
</mo> |
<gw> |
let's imagine for a second this was not about Consul, but this was a motion about the different set of countries. Do you think CEO would have even considered running. These are stupid people that will just keep themselves on the head with the rock, and they will not be able to get along, regardless of what happens. Hon... |
<poi> |
Even if both unions are equally integrated, Eastern countries are still denied a greater amount of EU subsidies for public health and bailouts during crises. This is the most important impact, because more people live in Poland than Macedonia and in 2004 these countries were not necessarily registered. |
</poi> |
Look two things. The first is, this is not true, because you still have incentive to bail the amount of crisis because you have trade relations amongst each other. Then if one country gets crisis, you are also fucked. You are also like EU gives money to non EU countries all the time, by the way, in this sort of way. Al... |
</gw> |
<ow> |
Then I will start in 321, I will first take out CG in this debate, and I will deal with OG. And then if I have time left, I'll with OO. But I think which I beat governments that should already also beat OO. So Alec, here's the thing, just because I don't break UGC rules and put in my background, which country I come fr... |
<poi> |
So again, this presumes little to no trade with the EU. What we argue is not only will they still do this, but that the ability for you to negotiate that is much greater as a block that is an individual |
</poi> |
Look, Here's the problem with that. One countries that are not in the EU can already trade with the EU to the extent that you think they have they would have higher leverage. You need to explain why this new union would actually be stable, actually desirable for you to stay over the EU and actually something that can g... |
</ow> |
<pm> |
The rise of hustle culture and the annoying social media that is LinkedIn has led to more sadness than happiness in the world and that's what, opening government is going to prove today. What we want is very simple. We do not, we oppose the pressure to focus on promoting one's career at the expense of forming a family.... |
<poi> |
We're defending the status quo, and yet in the status quo, the vast majority of people still get married eventually. Why do you believe that familiar relationships are so impossible on your side of the house to opt into? |
</poi> |
No, no, no, no, no, no, obviously, most people get married, that's not the problem and we agree to that, that's not the problem. The problem is, where do you derive your fulfillment from? Do you derive your fulfillment from the fact that, "Oh, I go back to my house and then I see the face of my partner and then get hap... |
Materialistic fulfillment versus interpersonal. We think in terms of framing, in a world where you prioritize careers on top of family is where you, by default, prioritize materialistic stuff. Because what does a career give you? It gives you money, it gives you access to a lot of privileges and benefits that are attac... |
</pm> |
<lo> |
Before I get into instructive and explain why this narrative is better for the individual in society, I want to point out a framing that I think marginalizes most of the opening government case. I don't think this debate is about opting out on the mouse from relationships or even opting out to a great degree. I think o... |
Firstly, I just contested as hard to get fulfillment from a career. Firstly, just empirically, there are a broad array of options for work and they are diversifying every year as remote work becomes far more available, as provisions become more diversified, and as there are more and more jobs that exist in society as w... |
<poi> |
The pressure to be able to provide for your family always exists. People who ignore this pressure on your side of the debate would probably not be swayed by this pressure either. |
</poi> |
I don't think they ignore that pressure, right. I think what this does is on the margins, make you more likely to prioritize your career in junctures when it is critical in your life when you could be seduced easily by the siren song of your narrative on your side, and I want to make the comparative very, very clear on... |
Firstly, you're able to find more fulfillment. Interpersonal fulfillment is highly subjective. It's incredibly unclear whether or not you can derive pleasure from it. Many people don't enjoy relationships. Family can be incredibly stressful. The comparative is that the diversity of Greece is giving a lot of different o... |
</lo> |
<dpm> |
All are very quickly going to go out of this debate. The first thing they base their case on is this narrative being prevalent at early points in time. This is because for some reason you care about your family later on and you don't do this naturally, early on. The first response is, presumably, if they can feel that ... |
<poi> |
Yeah, look. In the developing world and in minority communities, which often tend to have this narrative far stronger due to the fact of being more conservative, they're often more religious. Things like the patriarchy exist. These narratives are far more salient, which means that women lose their defense mechanisms sa... |
</poi> |
Why does this get her better for women? Their inherent incentives to include women in the workforce regardless. First, you want to maximize output as an economy. All politicians don't want 50% of their labor force to be completely unused at home. This is the exact reason why the most conservative societies like Banglad... |
</dpm> |
<dlo> |
This is the third time I've gone up against Sajid and Soradev at this competition, and I think it's safe to say that the phrase "an old dog can learn new tricks" is fundamentally false. Let's get into dismantling their case and explain to you why I win from the LO. Firstly, a bit of weight. If there's a pressure on eit... |
<poi> |
Yeah, Ahmed, could you please explain to me what's more important to a kid? Having their father give them more attention or having $10,000 more dollars when they inherit? |
</poi> |
This is beautiful because this part right now, I'm going to explain to you why the father is more suited to be able to play catch with his kid. Look, on opp, even if you don't buy that, why is a better financial and career position or dedicating more time to your career means you're more likely to get a better family? ... |
</dlo> |
<mg> |
Panel, I think there is a great reason behind why kids that are coming from extremely rich, privileged, and career-oriented parents are often the most depressed cohort there are. And I do believe that this narrative pushes parents to behave in awful ways, in the end, harming the kids the most. I think so far, the top h... |
</mg> |
<mo> |
I’m going to first offer two responses to closing government, then go into our constructive. One, the idea that people will massively overwork themselves and never see their kids. Uh, I would posit that the first response to this is a reality check. Most people don't work in management consulting and corporate law. The... |
<poi> |
How does your work-life balance get better? Once women have to balance both home duties and work duties. |
</poi> |
I'll get on to that, but also broadly, I think there's just lots of reasons why this is a universal pressure. I'm genuinely unclear why this pressure, unless it was actually analyzed in either team, doesn't apply to women. Cool. Let's go into why you improve work-life balance. OO for impact here is incredibly individua... |
</mg> |
<gw> |
Panel, first summer building, then weighing to top half. And then rebuttal of a closing, then weighing us against top half. Let's, let's first start with revolt, because the rebuttal we hear is basically that the idea that people massively overwork themselves needs to be reality checked because people have upper limits... |
However, I'm incredibly happy that kat found fulfillment in mathematics. Really I am. She's a good friend and her happiness is my happiness. That being said it is not clear to me why she wouldn't have found happiness and mathematics on either side regardless of the pressure to work or not. That, while anecdotally very ... |
<poi> |
We are logically prior to every claim your case makes. The time and resource trade off you put in towards attempting to form a family on your side makes it far harder at the point with your family exemption stability by virtue of you working longer on our side and having more time to figure out what trade offs you want... |
</poi> |
No you're not logically prior. Using a fancy words does not make a true math. Let's be very clear. POI to you that highlights that presumably people aren't idiots. People want to, people |
who really care about having families. Presumably want to have you know, the necessary financial means to actually give to their children, you know, food, shelter, clothing, presumably these kinds of mechanisms exist either way. People who actually go through with having children at 18 before they have any financial pr... |
<poi> |
So, Kat explains to you why having people who who think families are important, be at the top of the ladder, makes it easier for everyone to have both. With past extension. |
</poi> |
Yeah, that's because people who think that families are important are probably not the most likely to be at the top of the chain. You don't actually prove that to us in your extension. You won't have your side of the debate that the women who makes the top of the of the career ladder are the ones who prioritize familie... |
</gw> |
<ow> |
Panel, I will start with an old and radical claim. If a motion does not specifically probably refers to society, then it doesn't only affect 50% of it or 49 or however many men are, but it probably also applies to women. So I actually find it quite offensive. Both government teams for some reason think it's a good rebu... |
No side of the debate has fiat or even attempts to provide to you any analysis on why women would be better off if family is something that was put on them. What we do have, is a lot of empirical evidence of many, many centuries and also a couple of decades of liberalism and progress where that did occur, and we're sti... |
<poi> |
You're yet to prove why your side has the most accessible form of fulfillment. Why women succeed in this? And why money is fulfilling? |
</poi> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.