CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Flameaway

Reward Points:27
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
96%
Arguments:52
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
1 point

You can't win if you don't play super jolio.

;}

So that's an easy proof.

But if you play and have an unlimited amount of money to buy tickets and as many people to buy those tickets as necessary. You will win the lottery.

And when it comes to life...

Here on Earth it won the lottery.

1 point

Why does he have to offer you anything of value at all? Why do you even think he cares about you, or what you think of his music.

Let's say he's a rapper with a great big ass drum that you can hear from anywhere on the island... And he raps through this conch shell that along with all the tidal caves does a terrific job of amplifying his voice.

:D

Cool so Einstein leaves you behind but would have taken you along back to civilization if you would have just shared a bit of your coconut cream pie...

I'd say you came up short in that deal.

If you'd have decided to cooperate you'd be taking a nice warm bath rather than living through another fifty years of sand in your shorts wondering how that guy with the weird hairdo managed to make a outboard engine out of coconut shells and lizard intestines.

1 point

I've been studying women since I was five.

I've almost got my associate's degree...

Just twenty more years.

1 point

LOL

Well joe, maybe I'll come to oneness with the words of Ron Burgundy over time.

:)

Nice to meetcha, oh by the way.

1 point

Again, I made absolutely no assumption regarding which economic system you advocate. Of course your original statement was advocating that capitalism is the best system t date for creating wealth. But as for socialism or whatever, I assumed nothing, you brought that up out of thin air.

I notice that you skipped the idea that slave economies might be better at producing wealth...

Concerning Plains Indians: They were not wiped out by disease at least not during the time of the main US conflict with those tribes. They were wiped out by buffalo hunters. A strategy developed by General Sherman of loot and burn fame. To the Plains Indian the buffalo was wealth. That is why I brought it up. And Sherman's strategy amounted to an attack on their economy. There is a fairly compelling argument that the Plains Indians cultivated and managed the not only the herds but their entire environment. So if you are talking about systems of creating wealth, then you'd have to consider the system the Plains Indians used.

Please read "1491" by Charles Mann.

(As an aside, I'd point out that settlers used biological warfare by giving Indians small pox infested blankets. Not only that the 95% dead by disease in a hundred years, is controversial. Such figures would not match mortality rates for the diseases in question. Even in previously unexposed populations)

Concerning wealth versus distribution of wealth, aren't both macro level concepts? And again you completely ignored Slave economies...

:)

Concerning Stalin-ism being a better source of tyranny. I will disagree with this especially concerning economic tyranny. It is widely understood that the USA won the cold war with economic power. In fact your very argument here is that capitalism is the best at developing economic power so you would seem to have scored an "own goal" with this statement.

Concerning your dodge on adding up the total costs of capitalism. I was referring specifically to your comment on the "best system" for creating wealth, not whether capitalism has any benefit.

However, if you'd like I can adjust my original argument very easily to score on your dodge. If we consider that capitalism may in fact cause cascading climate change with the accompanying deaths of most of humanity, then in the widest possible context capitalism has not been beneficial but inimical. After all some poisons work slowly through accumulation. Just because someone might enjoy donuts that have been sprinkled with small doses of arsenic, does not then mean that eating arsenic dosed donuts is a beneficial practice. This because over the long haul them donuts are gonna kill your ass.

Concerning your objection that Stalin also industrialized without using capitalism. We are not talking about what other economic systems can accomplish we are talking what capitalism accomplished. First and best if we follow your reasoning. Perhaps we could have pursued some different strategy, but we didn't. So this objection is rather spurious.

Concerning your objection that in discussion of economic systems wealth has a particular meaning: Ehh... I guess I can see your point here. We could go back and forth a bit about tulip bulbs, real estate, fiat currency and buffalo. But mostly wealth is stuff or the means to produce stuff. I agree that it is generally considered a good thing for nations. But I'd disagree that it is a necessarily good a thing for humanity (you've assumed nations here) as a whole if acquisition and distribution get out of control. Which is the point I'm making in that section.

Concerning your statement that my inferences are "fairly" unfounded. I will consider that I've made progress from your first rebuke which said simply that I was "making many inferences" with no qualifier.

Interesting discussion.

1 point

www.worldwatch.org/node/810

"The United States, with less than 5 % of the global population, uses about a quarter of the world's fossil fuel resources—burning up nearly 25 % of the coal, 26 % of the oil, and 27 % of the world's natural gas."

http://www.cnn.com/US/9910/12/population.cosumption/

"As scientists note the arrival of the six billionth human being on the planet, they also are warning that 16 percent of the world's population is consuming some 80 percent of its natural resources.

That's the estimated toll the wealthiest populations on the globe -- the United States, Europe and Japan -- are taking from the earth's natural bounty to sustain their way of life."

Watch this Chomsky video for a good answer to all three of your objections

https://youtu.be/8C5Nd0loODI

There are four videos in the series.

2 points

Of course I don't know who you am. It's my first day here.

If you are trying to rile me up it's not working.

:)

I like to deconstruct what people say. It doesn't really matter to me if they believe what they say or not. It about arguing a side for me.

Sorry if this disrupts your agitation plans.

On the plus side I'm having fun.

LOL

1 point

You think that music or literature, philosophy or theology don't require critical thinking skills?

A degree in Literature for example requires writing any number of comparison and contrast papers. That activity is the essence of critical thinking.

1 point

The society you propose is a horror and counter to the very impulses that provoke social cooperation.

I don't think that you've thought this through very well.

1 point

I never said that Einstein was going to take your stuff.

But let me ask you this if Einstein figured out a way off the Island and decided that you didn't get to go because you didn't do any of the work to figure out the solution and you didn't share your food with him while he figure it out, you be okay with that right?

LOL

Flameaway has not yet created any debates.

About Me


Biographical Information
Name: Patrick Briggs
Gender: Male
Age: 62
Marital Status: Married
Political Party: Other
Country: United States
Postal Code: 92367
Religion: Atheist
Education: Some College

Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here