- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Hi my name is Nia and I am supporting the opposition side of this argument.
1. Assertion:The Federal Government provided money for the repair of public roads and services.
Reasoning: The Gulf Coast could at anytime have another an the roadways the Federal Government have repaired are a vital evacuation route. Many buildings have been replaced with the money from the Federal Government.
Evidence:Many bridges, houses, and roadways destroyed were rebuilt or replaced after Hurricane Katrina.
2. Assertion:The Federal Government payed for the repair of houses.
Reasoning: After Hurricane Katrina many houses were completely destroyed and needed to be rebuilt. The Federal Government gave those people money to rebuild the houses are move somewhere else.
Evidence: 79% of homeowners were able to rebuild with the help of the Federal Government.
Hello my name is Nia and I am supporting the proposition side of this debate.
1. Assertion:The Gulf Coast has high insurance costs
Reasoning: Before Katrina, people who lived on the Mississippi Coast paid on average $952 a year on a $100,000 insurance policy. After Hurricane Katrina, for people living between Interstate 10 and the beach, the cost is twice that, $1,869 a year.
Evidence: After Hurricane Katrina, in some areas the insurance shot up 30% or more.
2. Assertion:There has been a huge loss in business development after the hurricane.
Reasoning: In 2005 after Hurricane Katrina many people's houses were destroyed and they moved out of the gulf coast area. Stores need costumers and without customers they will shut down. If the Federal Government had done a good job, more people would have moved back.
Evidence: The population of New Orleans fell from 484,674 before Katrina (April 2000) to an estimated 384,320(July 2014).
1. Assertion: Refugees cause riots
Reasoning: There are so many refugees coming from Africa and the Middle East if they get angry they could really damage European countries. Refugees can break through police force because police are outnumbered.
Evidence: Refugees have already caused riots because they did not like the food European countries had given them. If refugees will riot over a small problem like this imagine what they will do if they get really upset.
2. Assertion: Refugees bring disease to European countries
Reasoning: Refugees from other countries with disease problems can have disease with them. These diseases will now be Europe’s problem. All that letting refugees in will do is spread disease to more countries.
Evidence: Refugees carry many different disease that they can give to people by accidently bumping into people or touching items that other Europeans have touched
3.Assertion: Refugees will overpopulate Europe
Reasoning: More than 107,500 people have moved to the EU in the last month. This number keeps growing and if Europe lets a few of them in they all will come in. The refugee will take resources that were used for locals and cause an overall disturbance in Europe.’
Evidence: Germany agreed they would take 5,000 refugees, but ended up having 59,605. This shows that Europe cannot just take in a few people, they have to take in all the people.
1. Assertion: Refugees do not have anywhere else to go
Reasoning: Refugees have escaped from countries with war, poverty, and no religious freedom. Once refugees have left their countries they have nowhere else to go. If Europeans do not accept them they will die of hunger or freeze to death.
Evidence: Refugees travel from Africa to the Middle East on unsafe boats. After they land in Europe from the long ride we cannot tell them to turn around and go back.
2. Assertion: Countries that are doing well should help countries that are not.
Reasoning: Currently, Africa and the Middle East are having problems. One day, the tables could turn and Europe will be having problems. Africa and the Middle East will remember how Europe had sent their people away and do the same.
Evidence: When a country is not doing well it may take a while for the country to recover. While the country is having a hard time other countries should help it recover.
1. Assertion: Prices will be rounded up
Reasoning: If the penny is gone prices that are a dollar and 99 cents will be rounded up. There are many stores that do this, especially dollar stores. If every store in America does this, people
Evidence: Stores will need to change prices, so consumer can pay them. Prices will either go up one cent or down 99 cents. Business owners will bring prices up one cent so they can make more money
2. Assertion: One penny may not be worth anything, however 100 pennies are worth something that costs a dollar
Reasoning: When people keep paying a price that has 99 cents at the end of money. This money can be used to buy items.
Evidence: If an item costs $0.99 you pay 1.00 for it. Your change would be one cent. If you bought 100 of those items you would have 1:00. If everyone in America gets that one dollar we have a lot of money.
Hello my name is Nia and I am supporting the idea that the penny should be abolished.
1. Assertion: A penny cost more money to make than its monetary value.
Reasoning: If it is costing the mint more money to make the penny that a penny’s value we lose about $90 million from the national economy each year.
Evidence: A penny is worth 1 cent but making it cost 1.7 cents. This means in seven years the national economy will have lost $630,000,000. The United States has to save as much as possible the making of the penny is harming the drastically. This is why the penny should be abolished.
2. Assertion: Nothing costs a penny.
Reasoning: In the 1900s you could buy some candies, but now even candy cost more than a penny. If we cannot buy anything with a penny it is useless. We are wasting money on something we don’t even use.
Evidence: The penny was originally created because it was almost like having a nickel. Today, you can barely use a nickel or a penny. Things that use to cost a penny, now cost twenty-five cents.
3. Assertion: Tax-payers pay for the penny
Reasoning: The penny cause the population of tax-payers to lose $ 90 million a year. The $90 million that tax-payers are wasting on the penny could be used for parks, houses, education, hospitals, and road repairs. The making of a penny takes away money from public services and gives it to a lost cause.
Evidence: 122 million people who live in the United States pay taxes. Each year the U.S collects $2.2 trillion from those tax payers. So much of that money is wasted for something we do not use.