PiT/Happy Warrior Debate

[The Mikado]

They agreed to it yesterday, and I had hoped to get the thread up then.  Things came up.

Anyway, I will moderate this, and am doing this in hopes of raising the standards of discourse on this board again.  Both participants are very intelligent and passionate about their beliefs.

Opening statements please.

[HappyWarrior]

I first of all would like to thank The Mikado for moderating this event and PiT for being my distinguished opponent.  I havve alot of respect for him despite our significant policy differences.  Now that that is out of the way....

Everyone I am simply put a man with a populist outlook on our political system.  I feel that all that we do in politics must be to put the least of our people into the front of our minds, rather than the most.  I think we need to give the son of a simple janitor just as much of a chance as to succeed as the son of a Big 100 CEO.  I don't feel that our birth should guide how we are to live.  The time has come for America to care for all it's people rather than simply letting corruption run rampant.  I believe in the free market, but I also believe in freeing America from the shackles of corporate greed.  I believe in a foreign policy that is humble, but at the same time has a kick to it if we are truly threatened.  I think Americans need to stand up for their beliefs, but not to tear down others.  We must respect eachother and ourselves.

[The Mikado]

Thank you.  PiT, your response?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I would like to thank both the Mikado & HappyWarrior for being willing to participate here. I'm not a great debator, but getting experience is always good.

     Anyway, I feel that the government's role here should be one of minimal involvement. I'm not an anarchist by any means; I support regulations on abusive business practices as well as anti-trust laws. However, I generally oppose the idea that the government should have a vested interest in trying to redistribute wealth to the common person.

     While that may seem controversial, the poorest among us are far, far wealthier than the poor in the third world. The current system does a surprisingly good job of maintaining liveable conditions for the impoverished. While we might want the impoverished to be able to live like kings, the fact is that somebody needs to be at the bottom. As I said earlier, the bottom here isn't that bad at all.

     However, we don't recognize how good we have it here because our society is infected with the idea that we should try to get everything as soon as possible. I live in one of the most expensive cities in the country, & barely making a five-digit sum each year, have found it possible to live with the occasional frivolous expense. However, I will admit the fact that my mother owns our own house does help with that.

     My point is that we don't need to increase wages or stave off foreign trade to allow everyone to be successful; we just need to teach people to spend more wisely.

[The Mikado]

Thank you, gentlemen.  There will be five questions.  This first question will allow us to feel out quite a bit.

Many commentators believe that America is in decline.  Do you feel that the economic, military, diplomatic, and social indicators bear this out?  If you do feel that America is in decline, what do you propose to do about it?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I feel that our foreign policy has been run into the ground over the last several years, to which I feel that there is a simple solution. That is, we should quit treating Israel as if it takes priority over our other alliances. In other words, we should treat Israel no better than we treat the United Kingdom, for example.

     I also feel that we have been in decline economically, though the solution is not as simple here. I would say that bailing out companies is exactly the wrong thing to be doing. The automobile manufacturers should be left to go through bankruptcy & restructure. The banks are tougher to deal with, though they should be barred from making sub-prime loans (probably the first & foremost example of an abusive business practice), as well as engaging in other unsound practices.

[HappyWarrior]

Its funny, on most points I agree with PiT.  However there are two things in his statement which I do not agree with.  First of all we should treat different allies different, simply due to the fact that they support us to different degrees themselves.  Also I believe that we need to do all that we can to rescue the banks, though I agree the large companies do not deserve nor should they receive bailout packages.

I believe that America is in a steady decline and there are two major things I feel we need to do to correct it.  First of all we need to restore our appeal abroad by stopping all the saber rattling and simply talk to other powers, stop treating them as enemies and start treating them as possible partners unless they take truly agressive stances againest us or our allies. 

At the same time we need to preserve America's commercial viability by avoiding various pitfalls and subsidising certain industries such as health care to ensure that they are affordable to all Americans.  With the extra money they no longer need to spend on these products it can go into the economy.  To earn the money to perform these subsidies we simply make the tax policy fairer and tax the rich at the same rate as the poor. 

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Perhaps I was unclear in my comment on alliances, as I do agree with you. Mainly, I feel that some of our other allies' contributions have been undervalued with the single-minded focus on Israel above all others. I merely think that we should give other countries that have supported us vehemently, like the United Kingdom (which has been a steadfast ally from before Israel was even a country), some of the intense support that Israel has gotten.

[HappyWarrior]

Alright, I guess I misunderstood you because I very much agree to that idea.

[The Mikado]

Thank you both.  I see the subject of Israel and the Middle East came up in both of your answers.  With regards to Middle East policy, do you see the Middle East as a single problem needing a single policy (that our problems in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Saudi, Israel/Palestine, etc. all need one massive, intricate peace plan), or do you see each problem as it's own issue, with a deal with Syria over Hezbollah or with Iran over their nuclear plans not necessarily tied to Israeli/Palestinian peace?  Piecemeal deals or comprehensive ones?

Also: what would a peaceful Middle East look like?

[HappyWarrior]

First of all, sadly I don't think it is truly possible for the Middle East to be "peaceful" in my mind America is not "peaceful" either.  Simply put it is in human nature to be brutish and violent.  However I do think by working hard we can bring a semblence of peacefulness, or at least of less violence.  This can be done by a seperate policy for each country, region, and ethnic group.  The after all are very disimilar and have thus very different problems and solutions.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I agree with HappyWarrior really. There is no way to magically end all of the hostility in the Middle East, especially with so much of it driven by religious fundamentalism. I feel that the best we can do here is to try to build a Middle East where all parties at least respect each other & do not seek the annihilation of the other, by taking each conflict for the individual case that it is & applying an individual solution.

[The Mikado]

Follow-up on the same question.  What steps should America take in Iraq?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     We should begin drawing down soon, though I also think that we would do well to take final steps in securing Iraq's central government. By this, I mean that we should not only make sure that Iraq has a well-trained police force, but also make sure that it has a field-tested police force. By this, I mean that we should test them to see how well they respond to different situations. Of course, they wouldn't know that these were tests. As an example, we could plant dummy bombs in various places around Baghdad, & monitor their response.

[HappyWarrior]

I believe that we need to begin pulling out our troops, we have accomplished our goals there and if at this point the Iraqi government cannot remain stable without us there to back them up, there is honestly nothing we can do.  We have provided them a huge amount of aid already and if it's not enough yet nothing will be.

[The Mikado]

Third question:

What role should labor unions have in the new global economy?  Are multinational unions a potential response to multinational corporations?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     In my view, labor unions have become less & less of a positive force as time has gone on, since the government has done more to regulate the treatment of workers by companies. I expect this to continue as in the new global economy competition by companies from different nations will help ensure that those nations whose companies treat their workers better will thrive. We're already seeing this with the Japanese automobile companies growing at the expense of their American counterparts (even though they have started hurting too now, due to the poor state of the economy).

     As for multinational unions, I must say the idea intrigues me. I think they will probably appear, but given the different attitudes towards labor held by Europe, the United States, Japan, etc., I doubt any individual union will thrive outside of a handful of countries. In short, I don't expect them to be a really major force in the global economy.