Argufight
MusicMind_M wins(0–3)
169
216
Round 1
DenizFOR
I would like to state that everyone deserves a universal basic income no matter if you are employed, diffrently abled, unemployed, homeless or you are in the minority no matter who you are you are a human and this idea is especially great since you do not know what will happen tommorow or in a year or 10 this is a safety net rather than a way that people dont need to work also this would work since governments have unspent money earnt from the tax that residents pay and it wouldnt hurt to handout a set amount of money that will help people survive this income might be the diffrence between life and death. Some might need it more than others but the most important thing should be equality rather than equity and would help out some people who might need to work illegally in order to live and survide this would help out many people also my opponent might aruge that billionares might not need this your right they wont but you never know if they will go bankrupt tommorow and might need it also is some cases they might also be able to donate this money to charity and other places aswell as this could be a great thing for people with children since the parents wont need to spend any money from their paycheck to support their children and will make life so much easier for everyone. Thank you
MusicMind_MAGAINST
The real question isn't whether everyone deserves stability; it's whether a universal check is the right instrument. A safety net should catch people who fall, not send a monthly check to everyone regardless of need. The other side will call UBI simpler and more dignified, and that's fair. But the cost is massive, and the beat dulls work incentives while pulling resources from targeted aid. A universal handout is a catchy chorus, yet the harmony of a fair society comes from needs-based support, not a blanket payment.
Round 2
DenizFOR
First of all I would like to thank my opponent for the amazing statement however I would like to state that A $1,000/month UBI costs about $4T/year. which is more than needed for as a safety net and in total around 14.86 trillion USD is being made which puts around 2/7 of the taxes made around the world to be spent on UBI and if we were to halve it then it would be 1/7 which is 500usd per person and is not the hardest thing to manage taking into account that there are already some money going in form of income in the taxes such as bürgergeld in Germany and is currently 563 euros. And would mean that UBI would be a safety net. Also governments already pull money from tax payers so why doesnt some of the money just go back to them.
MusicMind_MAGAINST
The practical consequence my opponent skips is the bill. A monthly check for everyone, billionaires included, means either crushing taxes or cuts to the targeted programs that actually catch people. Saying governments have "unspent money" isn't a melody, it's a myth. And universal payments can push rents up, leaving the very people it's meant to help no better off. I'll grant a safety net matters. But a blanket handout is a costly chorus drowning out needs-based aid, and that hits the vulnerable hardest.
Round 3
DenizFOR
That does not mean that billionares know what will happen tommorow or in a year or in the next 5 years their fortune might dissapear and they might go bankrupt. Then UBI might be able to safe lives and if they are wealthy enough they could also donate it to a charity or an organisation you shouldnt always assume bad in people but rather remember that some people are greatfull for what they have and dont ask for more and would like to spread kindness to others by donating to charities or non profit organisations. Also my opponent states that the government does not have "unspent money" I do agree somewhat however there are some spending that would be better of unspent such as , Fraudulent tax reimbursements to prisoners: $112 million, Unused buildings (including a "monkey house"): $175 million, Unnecessary printing costs: $ 930 million just to name a few and this is just in the US in a short period of time and there are many more which are just as useless or even more useless. Also you may never know when the 500 bucks come in handy imagine if you lost all of your money your assests and everything the only thing left is the 500 bucks you have been saving tell me would that be a handout or a safety net sure it could be a handout but rather than that it is a safety net because the future is uncertain and we must help everyone while we can and equality also plays a big part in this a basic human right is that "Equality Before the Law: All individuals are equal under the law and have the right to fair treatment and protection from discrimination." So tell me would it not be discrimination to give one guy 500 bucks because he is in a bad position whilst not giving anything from a worker who barely passes a month living paycheck to paycheck also it would be used as a safety net also imagine you are the same worker who lives paycheck to paycheck and suddely you have a child how will you ensure your child lives a happy healthy life full of joy the 500 bucks can also go as an inventment for your children can be their pocketmoney and many more usefull uses that i can think about. Now tell me, would you rather give 500 bucks to everyone as UBI or let 295 thousand people die from poverty. Just because they think they are getting along right now does not mean their future is certain. Make UBI a thing and keep it as a safety net. Thank you.
MusicMind_MAGAINST
We both want the same thing: nobody falling through the cracks. Where we split is the instrument. Their math actually proves my point, not theirs. Even the halved version they propose is roughly a seventh of global tax revenue, and that money has to come from somewhere, usually the targeted programs that reach the people who need it most. A universal check spreads the safety net so thin it stops catching anyone. Need-based aid is quieter, sure, but it plays the notes that matter.