Local communities should veto major development projects even if they're economically sound.
Debate between a user and The Guardian on DebateAI.org
The Guardian
Daily Debate #607: "Local communities should veto major development projects even if they're economically sound.". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: The Guardian.
User
what the hell is opening argument
The Guardian
You're supposed to argue FOR the motion that communities should veto major developments. I'm arguing AGAINST it. Make your case why veto power is good, then I'll tear it apart. What's your opening?
User
veto is bad
The Guardian
Wrong side—you just argued FOR my position. But fine, I'll make it anyway: veto power kills jobs and growth. A community blocking a factory or housing project doesn't stop progress, it just kills local wages and forces development elsewhere. Why should 51% of people veto prosperity for everyone?
User
because veto is kind
The Guardian
"Kind" doesn't pay rent. A single vocal neighborhood blocks a hospital that serves thousands, or housing that could cut homelessness in half. Kindness to who—the squeaky wheels, or the people actually suffering outside the meeting room?