2nd motion (opposition)
Ladies and gentlemen, esteemed judges, and fellow debaters, it is both an honor and a privilege to
stand before you today…, Id like to start off by acknowledging your 1st speakers
statements-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------. Continuing, the statement made by your 2nd speaker sounds rather
ridiculous doesn’t it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------. Now for your 3rd speakers “points” I would like to disagree on
them-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------.
Now, I shall prove why my side’s arguments are far more convincing. Starting with my 1st speakers 1st
point which is financial security. Considering how inflation is affecting prices for daily needs, how
would people be able to afford their groceries, bills and other important things. Not to mention,
limiting wealth can not only scrutinize the financial security of an individual but it will do so for all
parties. Who do you think donates to people in need? By limiting wealth we are erasing the fact
these unfortunate people need our donations to live. Moving on, she has also stated “global
competitiveness and economic growth”. How are people going to be motivated to compete and drive
this economy forward if no matter what they do the reward is the same? Limiting wealth will only
trouble the people who own businesses because I'm sure that the limit would not be enough to fit
the quota of owning a business.
To further prove our argument, I shall state my 2nd speaker's 1st point which is freedom and individual
rights, in her words “Individuals should have the liberty to make their own choices regarding their
lives”. Now imagine, you have worked for years to get the position you want. And then somebody
comments on how unfair it is for you to have that position, because of empty speculations of you
paying your way up. Now that’s unfair, isn’t it? Why should we remove these individuals' freedom to
own as much wealth as they want, just because a few freeloaders “complained”. This mentality will
only lead to people becoming lazier and just complaining to get what they want instead of working
hard for it. Moving on, she has also stated “Meritocratic principles” which is a point I think is the
foundation of why we shouldn’t have limits on wealth. Firstly, limiting wealth just negates the whole
existence of meritocracy, I mean how are you supposed to reward someone for what they deserve if
there is a limit on it? You might argue that there are many other ways to reward them such as
ranking them up, but we all know, that the reason these people are working so hard is so that they
can live their life in the luxury they deserve. People would stop working hard and trying to be the top
if we limit their rewards.
To end my speech, Id like to express how genuinely unfair limiting wealth on a person is. In the first
place, limiting wealth doesn’t come from trying to lessen the gap between the rich and the poor, in
fact it just sprouts from people’s insecurities because they are not able to get the wealth they desire.
Instead of working as hard as these people, they just complain on social media to a community of
people who resonate with their emotions. Im not doubting that some people don’t get the
opportunities they deserve no matter how talented they are, what im talking about are the people
who just complain without any action. I stand by not limiting wealth.
