Originally Posted by
jamesbanks
Again, I am going to respond to your points in the same order that I did before - in order.
First Point: Report conducted by the UN concludes that the United States is the most productive country in the world.
Counterargument:
'Many ******s lie. I live in Australia and a ****** done last year said Australians were the most productive and hardest working people in the world. This came as a big surprise to most of us
Downunda. Most who were aware of this result
most definitely did not believe it. You’re right Matt,
what about the Japanese, Koreans , Taiwanese ,
Chinese and Singaporeans. I think they’re a bit more productive than Westerners, esp. the Chinese.' - Patrick Seery, comment on that article.
I know that this may not necessarily be true, but it is the only evidence that I can think of as a counterargument. I can not exactly state any facts on this point, all of them are observations that I made in real life here and in other countries, but I am 100% sure that America is not the most productive.
Argument 2: Infrastructure gives a productivity boost to the Services sector which helps the economy greatly.
Counterargument:
'Services may involve the transport, distribution and sale of goods from producer to a consumer.' This means that the Services sector takes goods that have already been made, and selling it, or distributing them for customers. The Services sector does not involve manufacturing the goods, which is one of the major influences on the economy. That's why lots of people wanted to bail out Detroit automakers because there were so many jobs involved in the big three and people were afraid what would happen if they went down. This sector also does not involve construction workers, farmers, Hollywood, Lawyers, Businesspeople, Factory workers and teachers. The services sector only includes pilots, drivers, merchants, and some business owners. While the Services sector does contribute greatly to the economy, it does not contribute as much as other sectors.
Argument 3: After conception, the Embryo has DNA, which makes it alive.
Counterargument: Everything that is alive had DNA! The Embryo had DNA when the mother comes out of the womb. It always had DNA.
Argument 4: A Gitmo detaine said that if he was not captured, he would have destroyed the Pentagon, you would use torture if it meant better national security.
Counterargument: Uh...state your source please so I can cross check it. Thanks. And most of the terrorists over in Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan fought for the Taliban and AlQueda because they knew what torment their soldiers were going through over in Cuba. Some of the innocent detains have been released and fought for AlQueda because of the torture that they went through at the Gitmo facilities. If we shut down Gitmo altogether, there would be a downfall in terrorists. We should give them all military trials based on accurate evidence. If they were proven innocent, we let them go. If they were guilty, we put them into American prisons so they will be in the same environment as mass-murderers.
I would also adopt Inhumane ideas, to prevent any person in the world, from being brutally murdered by some people and their Radical Ideology.
We do not know if these people actually wanted to hurt us, for every one guilty person we tortured, we probably tortured three innocent people. Would you join the military if you knew that foreign countries were capturing some of our citizens, most innocent, and torturing them and holding them without trial? Do you think that they would just let it go? This is an unwinnable war. If we storm their country and kill tons of civilians chasing shadows, do you think that that country will be happy at us? No. There will always be people who want to harm other people. I wish it was not like that, it is just the human nature.
37
Argument 5: Economy sucked during Regan because we loaned money out to destroyed countries after WWII, so there was no money left. Was that your point?
Counterargument: Regan took office 37 years after WWII, so it has nothing to do with that. Regan diverted all of the government money to military stuff, which made our economy suck, and what did he do to try to fix it? The failed policy of trickle-down-economics! TRICKE-DOWN-ECENOMICS HAS NEVER WORKED AND IT WILL NEVER WORK IN THIS DAY IN AGE SO PEOPLE STOP TRYING IT BECAUSE IT JUST MAKES OUR ECONOMY SUCK MORE!!! And yes, I know that Clinton signed that thing that made it easier from subprime lenders to get loans, which the banks used to their advantage by jacking up their interest rates a couple years down the road which is causing all of the foreclosures now, so the banks have no more money, but look what Bush did to solve it. Tricke-down-ecenomics, and it didn't work...again! Why does anyone want to try this again? Someone please explain it to me.
And FYI Bush had the worst environmental policies ever, he made mountaintop removal legal, gutted the Clean Water Act, and pretty much said fuck you to Mother Nature.
P.S.: I was kind of grumpy last night, so I may have sounded like a bitch. Sorry about that. Hey join my group, intellectual politicians. We can chat some time.