Watch This Debate
Report This Debate
Forward This Debate
Debate Comments
Bookmark This Page
Category: Politics

Paying into the current social security system should be mandatory

This debate began on Friday, May 16, 2008, 8:41:01 AM Pacific Time.
Who Won This Debate?
 
Vote For zdog234
11 Votes
 
Vote For LedLegend
0 Votes
 
 
Con"Against"
The Instigator: zdog234
zdog234
Versus
Pro"In Favor"
The Contender: LedLegend
LedLegend
 
 
Con ~ Round 1

My opening argument is very simple.

1) Social security is not even. People do not get the same amount of money as someone did 30 years ago. Soon all of the baby boomers will reach retirement age and the social security funds will dry up. Most of these social security funds will come from younger Americans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...(United_States)#Claim_that_it_is_a_pyramid_scheme

2) Social security discriminates against the poor, as they pay an extra social security tax.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...(United_States)#Claim_that_it_discriminates_against_the_poor_and_middle-class

3) It gives a very low amount of money back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...(United_States)#Claim_that_it_gives_a_low_rate_of_return

4) I recommend that the social security system sets up private savings accounts. These savings will not be used for government purposes and they will not be moved to other accounts unless decided so by the owner of the account.
 
Pro ~ Round 1

i think that the elderly do deserve more money right now, and besides as long as we keep our savings we should have enough to last us
 
Con ~ Round 2

First of all, I am sorry I forgot a few things

Social security:
1. (usually initial capital letters) a program of old-age, unemployment, health, disability, and survivors insurance maintained by the U.S. federal government through compulsory payments by specific employer and employee groups.
2. the theory or practice of providing economic security and social welfare for the individual through government programs maintained by moneys from public taxation.

For our purposes, I'll use definition 1.

But now I wish to mention a few things.

1) My opponent has not addressed any of my arguments, which means I win every single one of them.

"i think that the elderly do deserve more money right now,"
2) My opponent has not used a fact, shred of evidence, source, or even statement, so this argument is void. The other problem with this argument is that he does not consider that our generation will be old eventually too, except we will be getting much less than what the seniors now are getting. (see con 1 source 1)

"and besides as long as we keep our savings we should have enough to last us"

3) I don't understand what "last us" means, but I'll have to assume my opponent means "keep us from poverty"
Again, when we are old there will be no social security left for us. And the use of should further disqualifies his argument.

4) My opponent has not addressed any of my issues, nor has he presented any viable positive effects of keeping social security.

5) Vote based on who had a better logical argument, not who you agree with.
 
Pro ~ Round 2

listen you dont make sense, why would you not pay social security i mean its a program that gives you money when you get old.
 
 

Member Comments (7)

Only members can post comments.

 
perfectionist48 i am juan
1 Month Ago
Report It
 
pro's only wrote two sentences in the entire debate, and they wernt even that effective. CON wins, basically by default.
1 Month Ago
Report It
 
well... before i tell you who are you then?
1 Month Ago
Report It
 
This comment has nothing to do with the debate. =)

LedLegend, you obviously go to the same school I do because you know Zane and Emmet, I just don't know who you are. So, um, who are you?

And I am now arguing this same subject with Zane, so you can look at that if you want.
1 Month Ago
Report It
 
well i loose then

but zane (zdog234) you need to know i dont often debate i only tried it because you and emmet (weaponE1) told me to try it and were always talking about it
1 Month Ago
Report It
 
The point of a debate is to address your opponent's points and uphold your own.
1 Month Ago
Report It
 
why should i adress your arguments when you want to go against something that gives you money.
1 Month Ago
Report It