will12345

TL;DR: Dictatorships are better in times of crisis

A time of crisis is a time for action and not words. During a crisis a liberal democracy would spend too much time discussing action and not enough time taking action. A dictatorship would provide the stable backboard for a swift and appropriate response to a crisis.

Some of the countries with the best response to the Covid-19 pandemic such as [Vietnam and Singapore] (https://www.movehub.com/blog/best-and-worst-covid-responses/) are classed as authoritarian and flawed democracies on the democracy index. Equally some of the worst affected countries are classed as full or flawed democracies such as the UK, USA and India. Russia had fully developed a Covid vaccine as early as March 2020 whereas other democratised states were busy going through health and safety checks. With the dictator at the helm, the Western hemisphere could be further ahead with the vaccine programme and closer to normality.

TL;DR: Chemtrails are contrails left by aeroplanes

• Chemtrails are created by conspiracy theorists who believe that the trails left by planes are in fact governments or higher powers ordering the release of chemicals into the air for various purposes. These range from weather manipulation to mind control.

• Contrails are in fact a type of [cloud called cirrus] (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/noise_emissions/contrails/). They are formed when the water vapour in exhaust fumes condenses and freezes. The thickness and size of the contrail depends on the altitude and temperature. that the plane is flying through.

TL;DR: Total immersion is the fastest way to learn a language**

The fastest way to learn a language is complete emersion. This would force you to use a new language every day in relevant contexts. It is possible to use a language every day and not make considerable progress although the desired outcome of using a new language daily will depend on the learner.

[There is evidence that] (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200609095027.htm) using a language app daily will improve speaking skills, however solely using this method would deprive other areas of language learning like listening and writing.

TL;DR: The ESL would decrease competition

Football is one of the most watched sports in the world because it is a competitive game and you earn titles and accolades from sporting merit. Without the threat of relegation, the ESL would not be any more competitive than current domestic and European league formats.

Creating a closed shop would take away an element of competition and would take away the hopes and dreams of clubs from reaching the summit of footballing greatness.

The participating clubs would likely financially benefit more than those clubs that would not participate. Creating a financial wall within thin the domestic leagues and reducing competition further.

The biggest teams playing against each other does not guarantee entertainment

TL;DR: Scholes only played under the greatest Manchester United manager

Paul Scholes was undoubtedly part of one of the most successful Manchester United teams but that does not mean to say he is or was their best ever player.

He played under one of the best football managers to ever exist is Sir Alex Furguson. Not only this but Scholes played with other players such as Ryan Giggs, Cristiano Ronaldo and Eric Cantona. His success is no doubt related to the quality team that surrounded him.

In a team of less talent such as the England national team, he failed to win any major honours. If he was truly a great player he would have been able to transfer his club success onto the international stage.

TL;DR: IQ tests can give a general feel for a particular type of intelligence

Judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree and it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid. This famous quote points out there are many different ways to be intelligent. While an IQ test is not able to identify all types of intellectual ability they do give a good scope if a persons [intellectual potential and if someone has an intellectual disability] (https://www.harleytherapy.co.uk/counselling/iq-tests-helpful-or-dangerous.htm#:~:text=When%20IQ%20tests%20become%20a%20very%20good%20thing&text=To%20that%20end%2C%20positive%20uses,dyslexia%2C%20dysgraphia%2C%20and%20dyspraxia), which is what they were designed for.

Online testing does have drawbacks such as being able to prepare and handling the stress of a test better. However these do apply to all those that take the test, can be mitigated for and an IQ test would therefore give an accurate gauge of natural intelligence.

TL;DR: Safe sex is important but doesn’t need to be free

[Sex is important] (https://www.healthline.com/health/healthy-sex-health-benefits) in many peoples lives. It can strengthen bonds in a relationship as well as providing many psychological and physical benefits. However the same can also be said of sleep and food. Beds and meals are not given out to anyone who wants them and are arguable more important to peoples physical and mental wellbeing than being sexually active.

While it is important to maintain sexual health and be free of diseases. If a person cannot afford the monetary or social cost to purchase protection then they are not mature enough to handle the responsibility of being sexually active. Participants should be motivated by the opportunity to forgo an unplanned pregnancy or avoid sexually transmitted diseases and therefore be willing to part with money for protection.

TL;DR: Not all catcalling is harassment

A common way to start a relationship, professional or romantic, would be with a compliment. So long as the “catcall” is cordial and not offensive it should not be classed as harassment. It is not predetermined that a catcall is shouting an offensive compliment at women but could simply be a “good morning” or a “how are you today”. If the recipient does not engage then the conversation should end there.

We should not define all catcalling as harassment as doing so would discourage conversations. People would feel that the simple act of starting a conversation could land them in trouble. What is important is establishing boundaries and making sure that people, men, in particular, do not cross them.

There are many examples of cannibalism within the animal kingdom. While some aspects such as sexual cannibalism and infanticide would most definitely be unethical under the correct circumstances cannibalism could be a moral thing to do.

In the animal kingdom, a rabbit cannot go to Tesco for a meal they must survive by being the fittest. If that means eating one another that is what they will do. [there are also examples of humans doing the same] https://adventure.howstuffworks.com/survival/wilderness/10-true-stories-survival-cannibalism.htm) in tragic circumstances. It is not an immoral thing to want to survive.

[With biosynthetic] (https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/meat-in-a-petri-dish/105115/#:~:text=Meat%20that%20comes%20from%20a,cells%20in%20a%20laboratory%20setting.) meat becoming increasingly popular and environmentally friendly human could be grown without a human host. This would remove the connection between a being and the flesh reducing the ethical debate.

TL;DR: atrocities committed by humans prove evil does exist.

There are a number of historical and contemporary events that prove evil does exist.

• The Holocaust resulted in the death of 6 million Jews between 1939 and 1945.
• The slave trade continued over 3 centuries (16th, 17th and 18th). Involved taking people against their will and selling them to people, mainly in America, for economic purposes.
• The Manchester arena bombing. 22 people killed and 250 injured attending an Arianna Grande concert.

These events do not even begin to scratch the surface of the number of massacres, butcheries and genocides that have occurred throughout history. The victims of such crimes can only have thought that evil caused these things to occur. The individual experiences of these people is unthinkable and prove that evil does exist.

TL;DR: Transgender people are the gender that they identify with and should be allowed in that selected sexes bathroom

[Studies have shown] (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180524112351.htm) that transgender adolescent brain activity more resembles that of the desired gender. If they identify as a specific gender and feel like a specific gender then they should be allowed in a bathroom of their choosing. It would be highly distressing for a transgender person to be forced into a bathroom in which they do no feel comfortable. [Transgender women experience depression] (https://www.hindawi.com/journals/drt/2014/394283/) at a higher rate than the general population. Attitudes around which bathroom they should go in are likely to contribute to this. If the transgender person feels comfortable going into the bathroom of the gender they identify with, then they should be allowed to.

TL;DR: People have the right to not listen to other people

People have a right not to engage in conversations that they find offensive. While it is entirely reasonable for someone to want to engage in debate and attempt to change someone’s opinion. it is also suitable to accept that someone has a differing point of view and let them live their life that way. If people can learn to live with each other's differences it would make the world a lot less confrontational and a more agreeable place to live.

TL;DR: Inheritance tax fails to redistribute wealth

The need for an inheritance tax is an indication that the current tax and economic model does not work. The wealth that an individual wants to pass on has already been subject to income, national insurance as well as discretionary charges such as VAT and fuel duty, depending on the spending habits and lifestyle of the individual with the wealth. Therefore any savings that have been accrued have already been subjected to a multitude of taxes. A person should not be further taxed for wishing to pass on money they have worked for and which has already been proportionately taxed.

The school of thought that an inheritance tax will help to resolve the wealth gap is redundant when the multitude of taxes already in place cant solve this problem. The fact that huge masses of wealth can be accumulated whereas others scrape by on a day by day basis shows that the issue of wealth inequality will not be resolved by one individual tax but require a monumental shift in the distribution of resources. Individuals should be able to gift the wealth they have accumulated without it being further taxed.

TL;DR: Meat and fish provide essential nutrients

Humans are omnivores by nature and eating meat and fish is part of a [healthy balanced diet] (https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/324093). Meat provides essential proteins for cell repair and growth. Fish contains important nutrients such as vitamins D, good for bone health and omega oils, essential for brain and eye development. The human body requires the nutrients that meat and fish provide and is perfectly ethical to retrieve them from these sources.

TL;DR: Nations only exist because everyone agrees to their principles

Generally nations are identified through three characteristics:

• Having a defined territory.

• A permanent population.

• Being recognized by other nations.

The modern day nation arose out of the treaty of Westphalia 1648. One of the key principles was to recognize the sovereignty of other nations and their right to decide their own fate. This principle has generally been abided by as people agree with the treaty of Westphalia. Nations only exist because everyone shares the same principles and agrees to the treaty of Westphalia. Without these shared principles the very premise of nations would not exist and nations are therefore constructs.

TL;DR Criminalising drug does not stop people from using them and puts money into the hands of criminals

The primary legislative piece to prevent the use of drugs in the UK is the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. Its aim is to control the use and distribution of these dangerous and harmful drugs, with the aim of preventing drug misuse. [Drug use is currently at an all time high] (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-49766047). It is the Class A drugs which can cause the most harm that are being used the most, even by people younger than 18. Current legislation does not work.

If drugs were legal then they could be produced and taken in controlled environments reducing the risks associated with taking them. They could also be controlled in a way that alcohol is preventing children from buying and taking them. If the government controlled drugs it could be a source of revenue and a withdrawal of money for organised crime. People who were caught using drugs would also not be treated as a criminal. They could receive specialist help to help them stop using drugs if they so wished.

TL;DR: Since nuclear weapons have been used the number of conflicts has decreased and they have not been needed again

Since the USA dropped nuclear bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on the 6th and 9th of August 1945 there have been no major world conflicts. Japan surrendered on August 15th bringing an end to one of histories most destructive and costliest wars.

Without the use of nuclear weapons, the war could have been prolonged for much longer and put the lives and prosperity of millions of people at risk. [Mutually Assured Destruction] (https://www.thoughtco.com/mutually-assured-destruction-1221190) ensures that no side will ever go to all out war with the other. As with nuclear war, there will never be a winner so war is not likely therefore making the world a safer place.

[It is clear to see] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK5OsDWYJmQ) the reduction in the number of conflicts since 1945. More conflicts have arisen in countries that do not possess nuclear weapons. It could be argued then that wider access to nuclear weapons would further the security of the world.

TL;DR Obama did not fulfil enough of his policy pledges

At the time of his presidency, Obama appeared to be the ideal leader of the free world. He was cool, calm and collected when faced with adversity and gave hope that racial tensions in North America were easing as the first black president. While he can not be solely blamed for the racially charged riots and the rise of Trump his poor performance as president most definitely paved the way for a Republican to take his place.

Obama failed to take effective action on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The USA is still involved in Afghanistan to this day. He may have presided the US military over the death of Osama Bin Laden but that was more a victory for the military than anything to do with his policy decisions. Obamacare was heralded as a progressive policy but led to one of Trumps most famous mantras in “repeal and replace” and there is still much debate about its fairness and effectiveness.

The election of Obama was most definitely progressive and inspired many people in America and beyond. He failed to deliver on too many of his pledges and paved the way for Republicans to usurp after his time in office had been served.

TL;DR It is not for us to say how people should spend their money

The most commonly thought image of beg packing is surely some Caucasian man with dreadlocks asking for locals in South East Asia to fund his travelling. However, some of these people do provide services such as entertainment or hand made crafts. If someone is providing a legitimate service that brings some kind of value to the local area then there is no ethical or moral dilemma. Particularly if it is something that local people can enjoy, use or learn from. While it is common for this kind of backpacking to take place in less economically developed countries that does not mean that all citizens of these countries are economically poor. Middle or upper-class or even working class citizens of any country have the right to spend their money how they choose. The trend of begpacking would not continue if they received no money at all and it is not within our rights to tell people how to spend their own money.

TL;DR Showering often makes you more productive and a better person to be around

Cleanliness and hygiene is important on a personal level but also for those that we share living spaces and work environments with. A regular and frequent shower level is therefore important.

On an individual level it can set you up for a busy day ahead, if you are a morning shower person. Or it can set up you for a good nights sleep if you prefer showering in the evening. It is likely then that showering often will make you more productive, healthier, and provide you with a sense of all-around well-being. It is also important to utilize bathroom products such as shampoo as this can prevent the spread of parasites such as nits (head louse). As these parasites can spread from person to person it is therefore important to not only shower for personal reasons but also for the wellbeing of those in your surroundings. It would be grossly unfair if working in close proximity to colleagues if a persons stench were to be bothering other people in a professional environment for 8-10 hours a day.

Prisons should not be abolished but need to give greater focus on rehabilitation

There is no question that those who commit crimes should be punished and sometimes have some of their freedoms and rights removed to limit the damage they can inflict on others. However given there are high levels of reoffending and even radicalization in prisons, the process of imprisonment should be reformulated to give offenders a better chance of integrating into society after they have served their time.

Prisons should be reformed so that offenders receive the dedicated care and attention they need to prevent these people from reoffending again and then to be able to positively contribute to society. For instance, if they were caught stealing they should be entered into a job training program that continues long after the sentence they receive so that they are able to provide an income for themselves negating the need to steal. Heavier crimes such as murder may not result in a release from prison but better psychological care whilst incarcerated may result in them feeling some empathy for those that have been affected by their crimes.

TL;DR Mandatory voting would create a fairer society

It is a privilege to be able to vote. It is a right that people have fought and died for. The very premise of democracy is that all sections of society are represented at a governing level. A lack of participation in the electoral systems will lead to the formation of governments that represent the ideals and principles of only those that are politically active. If everyone is made to vote then policymaking at the very highest level will have a better chance of benefitting wider society instead of those who choose to vote.

TL;DR: Student debt is unreasonably large, will never be paid back and should be written off.

The average UK student will now leave University with over £50,00 worth of debt. The current interest rate for these loans is over 6% and it is not paid back until graduates earn over £27,295. With the current graduate salary in the UK at £24,000 the outstanding money owed could be significantly larger once graduates have started earning a high enough monthly salary. The current interest rate adds unfair amounts to the total owed. At the very least the debt accrued through this poorly thought out interest rate policy should be cancelled.

Starting off a professional career with thousands of pounds of debt also hinders social mobility, individuals career options and mental wellbeing. As we have seen in the Covid-19 pandemic many people have lost jobs. If no one had debt then unemployed people may be more willing to take on more education or re-train into a field that is seeing growth. To ask a child (someone below the age of 18) to choose a career path that they will stick to for the rest of their life is unrealistic and unfair. It is easy to make mistakes at such an age and the desire to change professional fields can strike at any time. The burden of debt that students current accrue may prevent them from realizing their new wishes and living lives they do not find fulfilling.

TL;DR: Jesus was extremely intelligent and talented. He utilized skills and abilities to make people believe he could perform miracles and used these powers with the intention of doing good.

There is no doubt that Jesus existed and had a tremendous following. The reason for his following can be disputed. Were a man alive today who claimed to be able to walk on water, cure disease with his hands or resurrect himself he would surely be regarded as a trickster.

There may well be some truths to the miracles that he performed however what is more likely is that he was a man who was well ahead of his time and was able to deceive people into believing the miracles that he performed. People to this day do not understand how David Blaine performs some of his tricks. He is not regarded as a Son of God. 2000 years ago he may well have been. There will always be those who are well ahead of their time whether that is successful marketers such as Steve Jobs or philosophers such as Socrates. Jesus was likely an anomaly for his time, able to use his intelligence to create a following and a religion out of his skills.

It is admirable that Jesus utilized his superior intelligence and skills for some kind of philanthropic legacy. However, the wars and bloodshed undertaken in the name of Christianity (that is based around kindness and forgiveness), would surely have deterred Jesus from propagating these thoughts.

TL;DR: A global minimum corporation tax will benefit all citizens of any country

This measure would prevent multinational corporations (MNC’s) from basing their headquarters in offshore tax heavens. The money spent on goods and services inside of a country would therefore be taxed and returned to the country of origin, to be used for public goods. At a time where the Covid-19 pandemic has caused government debt and spending to reach historic highs, private companies paying a fair share of their tax will provide a necessary revenue source for governments globally. Without a global approach to this policy, MNC’s will shift their profits to the remaining tax heavens. Enforcing this multi-lateral cooperation and agreeing to a set global tax rate will be major obstacles. In the current highly polarized political economy and the competing ideologies of the USA and China, it will be highly unlikely that the goodwill and sentiment required to enforce such a law exists and therefore such an idea will remain an idea.

TL;DR: Age restrictions on fizzy drinks alone will not have a significant impact on the consumption of high sugar beverages

Sugar is on some level a drug. Although its effects are extremely mild on adults in small doses, its full effect can be seen in young children with little or no foresight for the consequences. Even with adults who do not maintain a balanced diet and healthy lifestyle consisting of frequent exercise the long-term abuse of sugar can have life-altering consequences. It is not only fizzy drinks that contain high sugar content. Ribena for example contains 10 grams of sugar per 100ml compared to coca cola’s 10.6 grams. Even “healthy” drinks like innocent smoothies contain high quantities of natural sugar averaging 11 grams per 100 ml.

Imposing a tax and age restriction on only fizzy drinks will simply drive children to high sugar alternatives to satisfy their cravings. What would be better is clearer labelling on the contents of sugary drinks i.e. this bottle contains x amount of sugar. Not the “this bottle has 3 servings and each serving has 10 grams of sugar”, which only leads to further confusion. Education on the effects of sugar will also prove to be more useful as children will learn the negative effects of sugar abuse such as rotten teeth and diabetes.

Given rising levels of job automation, wealth inequality and the psychological and physical suffering that economic poverty can bring now is the time to consider a Universal Basic Income (UBI) policy seriously and examine the benefits that it will bring to society.

The Covid-19 pandemic has seen extraordinary government intervention in the UK economy. Arguably the most extreme measure has been the job retention furlough scheme. This scheme can be seen as a form of Universal basic income and many of the arguments for furlough overlap with UBI. If the free market is always able to correct itself and find a new equilibrium why has a conservative government felt the need to input such a costly policy? The pandemic has rendered some industries unable to continue, with a huge rise in unemployment would come a massive increase in government benefits such as universal credit, with a lack of consumer spending aggregate demand would collapse along with the rest of the economy, resulting in further job losses.

The future of the UK economy faces many of the problems that Covid has exacerbated. Automation possess the potential to make hundreds of thousands of jobs redundant. Driverless trucks are to be trialled in the UK in 2022 with a wider rollout expected in 2030. There are hundreds of thousands of HGV drivers that will be out of work not taking into account courier services and taxis that will likely go the way of automation too. Amazon has launched at a food store with no checkouts. There will likely be further innovation in this sector and beyond to cut costs. Labour is one of the costliest expenses of most businesses and why should corporations be deterred from creating the most profitable businesses possible? Job automation will require millions of employees to go through unemployment and retraining, costs which will come at the expense of the government. A UBI could provide these people with the safety net they need to retrain themselves in a career that best suits them at a pace that suits their lifestyle too.

There is no question that the furlough scheme has been extremely costly, as would be a UBI. However, the long-term implications of letting unemployment rise to levels not seen before would be far costlier to the government in the long run. A UBI would give similar long-term societal benefits that would save future government spending. People could afford better food leading to fewer dietary diseases and less NHS spending. There would be less worry about meeting financial obligations such as rent leading to less spending on mental health facilities. People could invest time and money into their education leading to more innovation in society. The government could spend less on the administration needed for the current benefits system. In the long run a UBI will save governments spending in other areas and is therefore a worthwhile investment.

Change requires innovative and new policies that keep citizens healthy and inspired. Abiding by old economic theory like the markets invisible hand and business responsibility is only to that of the shareholder will lead to mass inequality, poverty and despair for millions. UBI could be the answer and would be a good policy.