138 Logical question on statements and arguments

Here are some examples of Statement and Argument logical reasoning questions with answers:

Example 1:

Statement: “The government should ban the use of plastic bags.”

Argument 1: Banning plastic bags will reduce environmental pollution. Argument 2: Banning plastic bags will cause inconvenience to shoppers.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The environmental pollution caused by plastic bags is a valid reason to ban them, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – Although it’s true that banning plastic bags might cause some inconvenience, it is less significant compared to the environmental benefits, making this argument weak.

Example 2:

Statement: “The use of mobile phones in schools should be allowed.”

Argument 1: Mobile phones can be used for educational purposes like research and communication. Argument 2: Mobile phones cause distractions and negatively affect students’ focus.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – Mobile phones can indeed be helpful for research and communication, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – Although mobile phones can cause distractions, it is not necessarily a reason to ban them entirely, and schools could implement rules to minimize distractions, making this argument weak.

Example 3:

Statement: “The government should reduce taxes on essential goods.”

Argument 1: Reducing taxes on essential goods will make them more affordable for low-income families. Argument 2: Reducing taxes will lead to a decrease in government revenue, making it harder to fund public services.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – This argument is valid because reducing taxes on essentials would benefit low-income families by making necessary goods more affordable.
• Argument 2: Strong – Reducing taxes could decrease government revenue, which is a valid concern as it may affect funding for important public services.

Example 4:

Statement: “Public transportation should be made free for all citizens.”

Argument 1: Free public transportation will encourage more people to use it, reducing traffic congestion. Argument 2: Making public transportation free will lead to higher taxes to cover the costs.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – Encouraging people to use public transportation could indeed reduce traffic congestion, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Strong – Funding public transportation without fare collection would likely require increased taxes, which is a valid concern.

Example 5:

Statement: “Students should be required to take physical education classes in school.”

Argument 1: Physical education promotes physical fitness and teaches important life skills like teamwork and discipline. Argument 2: Students should be allowed to choose their courses based on their interests, and physical education should be optional.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – Physical education is important for physical health and teaches valuable life skills, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While student choice is important, physical education is crucial for overall well-being, and it should not be made optional for all students, making this argument weak.

Example 6:

Statement: “The government should implement stricter regulations on advertising to children.”

Argument 1: Stricter regulations would protect children from being manipulated by advertisers. Argument 2: Stricter regulations would limit the freedom of advertisers and hurt businesses.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – Protecting children from being manipulated by advertising is an important concern, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While businesses may face challenges, protecting children’s welfare is a higher priority, making this argument weak.

Example 7:

Statement: “The use of renewable energy sources should be increased.”

Argument 1: Renewable energy sources are environmentally friendly and help reduce carbon emissions. Argument 2: Renewable energy sources are expensive and unreliable.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits of renewable energy sources, including reducing carbon emissions, make this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While renewable energy can have higher initial costs and challenges, the long-term benefits and decreasing costs make this argument weak.

Example 8:

Statement: “Smoking in public places should be banned.”

Argument 1: Smoking in public places harms non-smokers due to secondhand smoke exposure. Argument 2: Banning smoking in public places would infringe on individual freedom.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The harmful effects of secondhand smoke on non-smokers are a legitimate reason to ban smoking in public places, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While individual freedom is important, the public health concerns of secondhand smoke outweigh the desire to maintain freedom to smoke in public places, making this argument weak.

Example 9:

Statement: “The government should invest more in space exploration.”

Argument 1: Space exploration leads to advancements in science and technology that benefit society. Argument 2: The government should focus on addressing current issues like poverty and healthcare rather than spending on space exploration.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The technological and scientific advancements from space exploration have had significant benefits for society, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While addressing poverty and healthcare is crucial, investing in space exploration also contributes to technological progress and long-term benefits, making this argument weak.

Example 10:

Statement: “The legal drinking age should be lowered to 18.”

Argument 1: At 18, individuals are considered adults and can make their own decisions, including drinking. Argument 2: Lowering the drinking age would lead to an increase in alcohol-related accidents among young people.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Weak – While individuals are legally adults at 18, the potential risks of early alcohol consumption can outweigh the argument for personal choice, making this argument weak.
• Argument 2: Strong – The concern about increased alcohol-related accidents among young people is a valid reason to question lowering the drinking age, making this argument strong.

Example 11:

Statement: “Online education should be made a permanent option for students.”

Argument 1: Online education provides flexibility for students, allowing them to learn at their own pace. Argument 2: Online education cannot provide the same quality of interaction and learning experience as traditional classrooms.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The flexibility offered by online education is a valid reason to support it as a permanent option, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While face-to-face interaction is valuable, online education can still offer effective learning through various tools and methods, making this argument weak.

Example 12:

Statement: “Electric vehicles should become more affordable to encourage wider adoption.”

Argument 1: Electric vehicles are more environmentally friendly than traditional vehicles, reducing carbon emissions. Argument 2: Electric vehicles are too expensive for the average consumer, making them inaccessible to most people.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits of electric vehicles, including reduced carbon emissions, make this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Strong – The high cost of electric vehicles is a valid concern for many consumers, making this argument strong.

Example 13:

Statement: “Social media platforms should take stronger actions to prevent the spread of fake news.”

Argument 1: Fake news can mislead people and cause harm by spreading false information. Argument 2: People should be allowed to freely express their opinions on social media, regardless of the truth.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The potential harm caused by fake news is a valid concern, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While free expression is important, the negative impact of fake news outweighs the right to spread misinformation, making this argument weak.

Example 14:

Statement: “All public parks should have more recreational facilities.”

Argument 1: More recreational facilities in parks would encourage people to stay active and improve their health. Argument 2: Installing more recreational facilities in parks would require a large investment of public funds, which could be better used elsewhere.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The health benefits of more recreational facilities are a valid reason for supporting this, making the argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While funding is a concern, the long-term health and social benefits of increased recreational facilities justify the investment, making this argument weak.

Example 15:

Statement: “The government should impose a ban on fast food advertising targeting children.”

Argument 1: Fast food advertisements influence children to make unhealthy food choices, contributing to obesity. Argument 2: Banning fast food advertisements will limit the freedom of businesses to advertise their products.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The influence of fast food advertising on children’s health is a valid concern, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – The need to protect children’s health outweighs the business interests, making this argument weak.

Example 16:

Statement: “Animal testing should be banned in the cosmetic industry.”

Argument 1: Animal testing is inhumane and causes unnecessary suffering to animals. Argument 2: Banning animal testing will increase the cost of cosmetic products for consumers.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The ethical concerns regarding animal testing and animal rights make this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – Although costs may increase, the moral obligation to stop animal testing outweighs this concern, making this argument weak.

Example 17:

Statement: “Public transportation should be improved in cities.”

Argument 1: Improved public transportation reduces traffic congestion and pollution, benefiting the environment. Argument 2: The cost of improving public transportation infrastructure would place a heavy burden on taxpayers.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits of improved public transportation are significant, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While costs are a concern, the long-term benefits of reduced traffic and pollution make this argument weak.

Example 18:

Statement: “The minimum wage should be increased.”

Argument 1: Increasing the minimum wage will help workers afford a better standard of living. Argument 2: Raising the minimum wage will lead to higher unemployment as businesses may reduce hiring.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The impact of higher wages on workers’ standard of living is a valid concern, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – Although some businesses may face challenges, increasing the minimum wage can stimulate economic activity and reduce inequality, making this argument weak.

Example 19:

Statement: “The use of public funds for space exploration should be increased.”

Argument 1: Space exploration leads to technological advancements that benefit society in areas like medicine and communications. Argument 2: Public funds should be used to address more immediate issues, such as poverty and healthcare, rather than space exploration.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The technological benefits that come from space exploration are significant, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While immediate issues are important, investments in space exploration can drive innovation and solve long-term challenges, making this argument weak.

Example 20:

Statement: “There should be a ban on single-use plastics.”

Argument 1: Single-use plastics contribute significantly to environmental pollution and harm marine life. Argument 2: Banning single-use plastics will hurt businesses that rely on them for packaging.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The environmental impact of single-use plastics is a compelling reason to ban them, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – Although businesses may face challenges, the environmental and ecological benefits of banning single-use plastics outweigh the economic concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 21:

Statement: “Schools should teach coding as part of the curriculum.”

Argument 1: Coding is an essential skill for future jobs in technology and can help students develop problem-solving abilities. Argument 2: Teaching coding in schools would take up valuable time and resources that could be better spent on traditional subjects.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – Coding is increasingly important in the modern job market and can develop useful skills, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While resources are limited, the benefits of learning coding in the modern world outweigh the concern about time and resource allocation, making this argument weak.

Example 22:

Statement: “Government subsidies for renewable energy should be increased.”

Argument 1: Increasing subsidies will encourage the development and adoption of renewable energy, reducing dependence on fossil fuels. Argument 2: Increasing subsidies for renewable energy will place a financial burden on taxpayers and increase government debt.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits and long-term sustainability of renewable energy justify the increase in subsidies, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While the financial burden on taxpayers is a concern, the long-term benefits of renewable energy and environmental protection outweigh this, making this argument weak.

Example 23:

Statement: “The legal drinking age should be lowered to 18.”

Argument 1: At 18, individuals are legally considered adults and should have the right to make their own decisions, including the decision to drink alcohol. Argument 2: Lowering the legal drinking age will lead to an increase in alcohol-related accidents among young people.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Weak – While individuals are considered adults at 18, the risks of early alcohol consumption could be detrimental to young people, making this argument weak.
• Argument 2: Strong – The concern about alcohol-related accidents among young people is a valid reason to oppose lowering the drinking age, making this argument strong.

Example 24:

Statement: “Television advertisements should be regulated to reduce violence and inappropriate content.”

Argument 1: Regulating TV advertisements will protect children and vulnerable viewers from exposure to harmful content. Argument 2: TV advertisements should not be regulated as it would limit freedom of expression and the rights of businesses.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The protection of viewers, especially children, from harmful content is a valid reason for regulating advertisements, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While freedom of expression is important, the need to protect viewers, particularly vulnerable groups, justifies regulation, making this argument weak.

Example 25:

Statement: “Social media platforms should be required to verify the identity of users.”

Argument 1: Verifying users’ identities will help prevent online harassment and fraud. Argument 2: Verifying users’ identities will violate individuals’ privacy rights and freedom of expression.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – Preventing online harassment and fraud is a significant concern, and verifying identities can address these issues, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While privacy is important, the safety and security of users may justify identity verification, making this argument weak.

Example 26:

Statement: “The government should implement stricter regulations on tobacco sales.”

Argument 1: Stricter regulations on tobacco sales will help reduce smoking rates and related health problems. Argument 2: Stricter regulations will harm businesses and reduce consumer choice.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – The health benefits of reducing smoking rates through regulation are significant, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While businesses may be affected, the public health benefits of reducing smoking outweigh the economic concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 27:

Statement: “The use of artificial intelligence in decision-making should be regulated.”

Argument 1: Regulating AI in decision-making will prevent biased outcomes and ensure fairness in critical areas like hiring and law enforcement. Argument 2: Regulating AI will stifle innovation and delay advancements in technology.

Answer:

• Argument 1: Strong – Ensuring fairness and preventing bias in AI decision-making is a valid concern, making this argument strong.
• Argument 2: Weak – While innovation is important, ensuring that AI operates fairly and ethically is more important, making this argument weak.

Example 28:

Statement: “Social media platforms should be held accountable for the content posted by users.”

Argument 1: Holding social media platforms accountable will force them to take more responsibility for harmful content, promoting a safer online environment.
Argument 2: Holding social media companies accountable will limit free speech and force platforms to censor users more heavily.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Ensuring safety and holding platforms responsible for harmful content is a valid concern, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While free speech is important, ensuring the safety of users and preventing harm should take priority, making this argument weak.

Example 29:

Statement: “Electric cars should become the standard mode of transportation within the next decade.”

Argument 1: Switching to electric cars will reduce pollution, lower carbon emissions, and contribute to tackling climate change.
Argument 2: Electric cars are too expensive, and the infrastructure for charging them is inadequate, making them impractical for widespread use.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits of electric cars are significant and make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While cost and infrastructure concerns are valid, the long-term benefits of electric cars outweigh the current challenges, making this argument weak.

Example 30:

Statement: “Universal basic income (UBI) should be implemented to address economic inequality.”

Argument 1: UBI would provide a safety net for those in poverty, reduce inequality, and ensure a basic standard of living for everyone.
Argument 2: UBI would discourage people from working and create a financial burden on governments, leading to economic instability.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Addressing economic inequality and providing a basic standard of living makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While UBI may have potential drawbacks, ensuring basic income could boost long-term economic stability, making this argument weak.

Example 31:

Statement: “Public transportation should be free for all citizens.”

Argument 1: Making public transportation free will reduce traffic congestion, decrease pollution, and provide greater access to those in need.
Argument 2: Offering free public transportation would be too costly for governments, leading to higher taxes or cuts in other essential services.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Reducing traffic congestion, pollution, and increasing access to transportation are significant benefits, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While cost is a concern, the long-term societal benefits of free transportation could justify the expense, making this argument weak.

Example 32:

Statement: “The government should impose stricter regulations on fast food marketing targeted at children.”

Argument 1: Stricter regulations would help reduce childhood obesity by limiting exposure to unhealthy food advertisements.
Argument 2: Imposing stricter regulations would infringe on freedom of choice and harm businesses that rely on marketing to children.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Reducing childhood obesity and protecting children from unhealthy advertising are important health priorities, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While freedom of choice is important, protecting children’s health is a higher priority, making this argument weak.

Example 33:

Statement: “Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) should be banned in agriculture.”

Argument 1: GMOs can cause long-term health risks, environmental damage, and loss of biodiversity.
Argument 2: GMOs help increase crop yields, reduce pesticide use, and address food shortages, benefiting global food security.

Answer:

Argument 1: Weak – While there are health concerns, GMOs are thoroughly tested for safety, making this argument weak.
Argument 2: Strong – The potential benefits of GMOs in food security and sustainability are significant, making this argument strong.

Example 34:

Statement: “Voting should be mandatory for all eligible citizens.”

Argument 1: Mandatory voting would increase voter participation, making elections more representative of the population.
Argument 2: Compulsory voting violates individual freedom by forcing citizens to vote, potentially leading to uninformed choices.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Increased voter participation and more representative elections are valuable benefits, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While individual freedom is important, ensuring more informed representation through higher voter turnout is more beneficial, making this argument weak.

Example 35:

Statement: “Animal testing for cosmetics should be banned.”

Argument 1: Animal testing for cosmetics is unethical and causes unnecessary suffering to animals.
Argument 2: Banning animal testing would hinder scientific progress and make it more difficult to develop safe cosmetics.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Ethical considerations and preventing animal suffering are compelling reasons, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While safety is important, alternatives to animal testing can be developed, making this argument weak.

Example 36:

Statement: “The minimum wage should be increased.”

Argument 1: Increasing the minimum wage will lift people out of poverty, improve living standards, and reduce income inequality.
Argument 2: Raising the minimum wage could lead to job losses, as businesses may struggle with higher labor costs and may cut jobs or increase automation.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The benefits of reducing poverty and inequality through higher wages make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While job loss is a concern, the positive social impacts of increasing the minimum wage are more compelling, making this argument weak.

Example 37:

Statement: “Public schools should teach financial literacy as part of the curriculum.”

Argument 1: Teaching financial literacy will equip students with essential life skills, helping them manage money, debt, and savings effectively.
Argument 2: Financial literacy is not a priority compared to other subjects like science or mathematics, and adding it to the curriculum could overburden students.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The practical benefits of financial education are essential for students’ future well-being, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While academic balance is important, the importance of preparing students for real-world financial decisions outweighs this concern, making this argument weak.

Example 38:

Statement: “College education should be free for all students.”

Argument 1: Free college education would reduce student debt, increase access to higher education, and create more equal opportunities for all.
Argument 2: Free college education would be financially unsustainable for governments and could lead to a decrease in the quality of education.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Providing access to education without the burden of debt creates long-term social benefits, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While funding is a concern, the societal benefits of free education justify the expense, making this argument weak.

Example 39:

Statement: “Governments should invest more in renewable energy sources.”

Argument 1: Investing in renewable energy will help combat climate change, reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and create sustainable jobs.
Argument 2: Renewable energy technologies are expensive, and transitioning too quickly could cause economic instability or job losses in traditional energy sectors.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The long-term environmental and economic benefits of renewable energy make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are short-term costs, the future savings and environmental protection outweigh the risks, making this argument weak.

Example 40:

Statement: “Healthcare should be provided to all citizens as a basic human right.”

Argument 1: Providing universal healthcare ensures that everyone, regardless of income, has access to necessary medical services, promoting overall public health.
Argument 2: Universal healthcare would place a significant financial burden on governments, leading to higher taxes and potential inefficiencies in the healthcare system.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The importance of health as a fundamental right makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While financial concerns are valid, the overall health and social benefits of universal healthcare outweigh these risks, making this argument weak.

Example 41:

Statement: “Social media platforms should be required to verify the identity of all users.”

Argument 1: Verifying user identities would reduce online harassment, fake accounts, and misinformation, creating a safer and more trustworthy environment.
Argument 2: Requiring identity verification could infringe on privacy rights and discourage people from using social media freely.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The reduction of harmful behaviors and promoting accountability on social media is a strong argument.
Argument 2: Weak – While privacy is important, the safety and trustworthiness of social media platforms are more critical in combating online issues, making this argument weak.

Example 42:

Statement: “The government should ban single-use plastics.”

Argument 1: Banning single-use plastics will reduce pollution, protect wildlife, and encourage the use of sustainable alternatives.
Argument 2: A ban on single-use plastics would negatively affect businesses, increase costs for consumers, and disrupt industries that rely on plastic packaging.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental and health benefits of reducing plastic waste make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While the economic impact is a valid concern, the long-term environmental advantages of reducing plastic use outweigh these issues, making this argument weak.

Example 43:

Statement: “Governments should provide free internet access to all citizens.”

Argument 1: Free internet access would help bridge the digital divide, provide more equal opportunities for education, and enable better access to information.
Argument 2: Offering free internet would be financially unsustainable for governments and could lead to lower-quality services.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The societal benefits of equal access to information and opportunities make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While cost and quality are concerns, ensuring equal access to the internet is a significant investment in the future, making this argument weak.

Example 44:

Statement: “The voting age should be lowered to 16.”

Argument 1: Lowering the voting age would increase political engagement among young people and give them a voice in decisions that affect their future.
Argument 2: Sixteen-year-olds are not mature enough to make informed voting decisions and may lack the necessary life experience to understand complex political issues.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Encouraging political engagement at a younger age can lead to a more informed and active electorate in the future, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While maturity is a consideration, the potential for greater political awareness and participation outweighs the argument about maturity, making this argument weak.

Example 45:

Statement: “Cryptocurrencies should be regulated by governments.”

Argument 1: Regulating cryptocurrencies will protect consumers from fraud, ensure market stability, and prevent money laundering or illegal activities.
Argument 2: Overregulation of cryptocurrencies could stifle innovation, limit their growth, and reduce their potential as a financial alternative.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The need to ensure security, prevent illegal activities, and protect consumers in the cryptocurrency market makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While innovation is important, the risks associated with unregulated cryptocurrency use make this argument weak.

Example 46:

Statement: “Censorship of online content should be more strictly enforced.”

Argument 1: Stricter censorship will help prevent the spread of harmful, offensive, or false information, protecting public health and safety.
Argument 2: Stricter censorship could limit freedom of speech and result in the unfair suppression of certain viewpoints, stifling open dialogue.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Preventing harm and misinformation is essential for a safer and more accurate online environment, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While freedom of speech is critical, ensuring a safe and factual online space is more important, making this argument weak.

Example 47:

Statement: “Animal farming should be banned.”

Argument 1: Banning animal farming would reduce cruelty to animals, lower environmental damage, and promote healthier plant-based diets.
Argument 2: Animal farming is a major part of the global food industry, and banning it would disrupt economies, harm livelihoods, and make food more expensive.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The ethical and environmental considerations of animal farming make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While economic concerns are valid, the long-term benefits to animal welfare and the environment outweigh these arguments, making this argument weak.

Example 48:

Statement: “Space exploration should be prioritized over addressing global poverty.”

Argument 1: Space exploration promotes scientific advancements, fosters international collaboration, and could lead to breakthroughs that benefit humanity.
Argument 2: Global poverty is a pressing issue that requires immediate attention and resources, and space exploration diverts focus and funds from solving it.

Answer:

Argument 1: Weak – While space exploration has many potential benefits, it cannot be prioritized over immediate human needs like poverty, making this argument weak.
Argument 2: Strong – Addressing global poverty should be a priority, as it has immediate, real-world consequences that space exploration cannot address directly, making this argument strong.

Example 49:

Statement: “Telecommuting should become the standard work model.”

Argument 1: Telecommuting provides flexibility, reduces commuting time and costs, and improves work-life balance for employees.
Argument 2: Telecommuting can hinder collaboration, reduce team cohesion, and make it difficult to manage employees effectively.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The benefits of increased flexibility and work-life balance make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While collaboration concerns are valid, the advantages of telecommuting, especially with modern technology, outweigh these issues, making this argument weak.

Example 50:

Statement: “Surveillance cameras should be installed in all public places.”

Argument 1: Surveillance cameras help reduce crime, increase public safety, and assist law enforcement in solving crimes.
Argument 2: Installing surveillance cameras everywhere infringes on privacy and could lead to an over-surveillance society where personal freedoms are compromised.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The safety and crime prevention benefits of surveillance cameras make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While privacy is important, the need for public safety and crime reduction justifies the use of surveillance, making this argument weak.

Example 51:

Statement: “Public libraries should be funded more by the government.”

Argument 1: Increased funding for public libraries will ensure greater access to educational resources, support literacy programs, and provide community spaces.
Argument 2: Additional government funding for libraries could divert money from other essential services, such as healthcare and education, leading to budget imbalances.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Libraries play a crucial role in education, literacy, and community development, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While budget constraints are a concern, investing in libraries has broad social benefits that justify the spending, making this argument weak.

Example 52:

Statement: “Automation should be embraced in all industries.”

Argument 1: Automation will increase efficiency, reduce human error, and lower operational costs for businesses.
Argument 2: Automation will lead to widespread job losses, causing economic instability and creating inequality as displaced workers struggle to find new jobs.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The efficiency and cost-saving benefits of automation make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While job displacement is a concern, the potential for economic growth and new types of jobs created by automation outweighs the risks, making this argument weak.

Example 53:

Statement: “Students should be required to learn a second language in school.”

Argument 1: Learning a second language enhances cognitive abilities, improves job prospects, and fosters cross-cultural understanding.
Argument 2: Requiring a second language takes time away from other important subjects and could cause stress for students who struggle with language learning.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The cognitive, economic, and cultural benefits of learning a second language make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While it’s important to consider student stress, the benefits of learning a second language provide significant long-term value, making this argument weak.

Example 54:

Statement: “All public schools should be equipped with renewable energy sources.”

Argument 1: Equipping public schools with renewable energy reduces their environmental footprint and teaches students the importance of sustainability.
Argument 2: The initial cost of installing renewable energy systems could be too high, diverting funds from other essential school needs.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental and educational benefits of using renewable energy in schools make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While costs are a concern, the long-term savings and educational value of renewable energy make this argument weak.

Example 55:

Statement: “Online education should replace traditional schooling.”

Argument 1: Online education provides flexibility, allowing students to learn at their own pace and from any location.
Argument 2: Traditional schooling offers social interaction, structure, and hands-on experiences that online education cannot replicate.

Answer:

Argument 1: Weak – While online education offers flexibility, it lacks the social and practical experiences essential for personal development, making this argument weak.
Argument 2: Strong – The benefits of in-person interactions, collaboration, and experiential learning make this argument strong.

Example 56:

Statement: “Social media should be more heavily regulated to prevent harmful content.”

Argument 1: Regulating social media will reduce the spread of hate speech, misinformation, and harmful content, making online spaces safer for everyone.
Argument 2: Over-regulation could infringe on freedom of speech, and it would be difficult to define and enforce “harmful content” in a fair and consistent way.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The need to protect users from harmful content makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While free speech is important, ensuring safety and truth online should take precedence, making this argument weak.

Example 57:

Statement: “Fast food restaurants should be required to post nutritional information on their menus.”

Argument 1: Posting nutritional information will empower consumers to make healthier choices and encourage fast food chains to offer healthier options.
Argument 2: Requiring nutritional information could lead to increased costs for restaurants, which may result in higher prices for consumers.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Empowering consumers with information and promoting healthier choices makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there could be cost concerns, the benefits of informed choices and public health improvement outweigh these, making this argument weak.

Example 58:

Statement: “Children should not be allowed to have smartphones until the age of 16.”

Argument 1: Restricting smartphone access until the age of 16 will reduce distractions, improve academic focus, and protect children from online risks such as cyberbullying and inappropriate content.
Argument 2: Banning smartphones for children until they are 16 could hinder their ability to develop technological literacy and limit their communication with friends and family.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Protecting children from online dangers and helping them focus on academics makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While tech literacy is important, the risks of unregulated smartphone use at a younger age outweigh the benefits, making this argument weak.

Example 59:

Statement: “Universal healthcare should be available in all countries.”

Argument 1: Universal healthcare ensures that everyone has access to medical services, improving public health and reducing health inequalities.
Argument 2: Universal healthcare is financially unsustainable and could result in longer wait times, reduced quality of care, and higher taxes.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Ensuring that all citizens have access to healthcare is a basic right and benefits public health, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While cost and quality concerns are valid, the long-term health and social benefits of universal healthcare justify the investment, making this argument weak.

Example 60:

Statement: “Corporate tax rates should be increased to fund social welfare programs.”

Argument 1: Increasing corporate taxes would provide the necessary funds for social welfare programs, such as healthcare, education, and housing, helping reduce inequality.
Argument 2: Higher corporate taxes could lead to businesses relocating to countries with lower tax rates, reducing job creation and economic growth.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The benefits of funding essential social programs and reducing inequality make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While businesses may leave, the long-term social benefits of increased taxes for welfare programs outweigh the risks, making this argument weak.

Example 61:

Statement: “Voting should be compulsory in all democratic countries.”

Argument 1: Compulsory voting ensures higher voter turnout, making elections more representative of the population and strengthening democracy.
Argument 2: Forcing people to vote undermines individual freedom and may lead to uninformed or disengaged voting, which does not serve the democratic process.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Ensuring a higher voter turnout and more representative elections enhances the democratic process, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While individual freedom is important, the benefits of a more representative electorate outweigh this concern, making this argument weak.

Example 62:

Statement: “All new cars should be electric by 2035.”

Argument 1: Shifting to electric cars will reduce carbon emissions, combat climate change, and reduce dependence on fossil fuels.
Argument 2: The transition to electric cars is expensive, requires significant infrastructure changes, and could lead to job losses in traditional auto manufacturing and fuel industries.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental and long-term sustainability benefits make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While the cost and job displacement concerns are valid, the environmental urgency and long-term savings make this argument weak.

Example 63:

Statement: “Social media should be banned for children under 14.”

Argument 1: Banning social media for children under 14 will protect them from cyberbullying, inappropriate content, and mental health issues linked to online usage.
Argument 2: Banning social media could isolate children from their peers, limit their ability to develop digital literacy, and hinder their social development.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Protecting children from harmful content and online risks makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While social media literacy is important, the potential harm to children’s mental and social well-being makes this argument weak.

Example 64:

Statement: “Governments should regulate the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare.”

Argument 1: Regulating AI in healthcare will ensure patient privacy, reduce errors, and prevent biased decision-making, promoting fairness and safety.
Argument 2: Strict regulation of AI could slow down medical innovation, delay the development of life-saving treatments, and limit AI’s potential to improve healthcare outcomes.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The need to ensure patient safety, fairness, and privacy makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While innovation is important, ensuring the ethical and safe use of AI in healthcare is more crucial, making this argument weak.

Example 65:

Statement: “All countries should adopt a four-day workweek.”

Argument 1: A four-day workweek would improve work-life balance, reduce burnout, and increase employee productivity and happiness.
Argument 2: Reducing the workweek to four days could lead to lower overall productivity, difficulties in meeting business demands, and a negative impact on industries that require continuous operations.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The well-being and productivity benefits of a shorter workweek make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are concerns about productivity, the overall benefits to workers and businesses outweigh these challenges, making this argument weak.

Example 66:

Statement: “Healthcare providers should be required to disclose all treatment costs upfront.”

Argument 1: Requiring transparency in healthcare pricing will allow patients to make informed decisions and avoid unexpected medical bills.
Argument 2: Requiring upfront cost disclosure could lead to administrative burdens for healthcare providers and may not be feasible for complex or evolving treatment plans.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The ability for patients to make informed choices about their care and avoid financial surprises makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While administrative concerns are valid, the long-term benefits of transparency and patient empowerment outweigh these challenges, making this argument weak.

Example 67:

Statement: “Governments should provide subsidies for electric vehicle (EV) purchases.”

Argument 1: Subsidizing EVs will encourage more people to switch to cleaner, more sustainable vehicles, reducing pollution and dependence on fossil fuels.
Argument 2: Subsidizing EV purchases could lead to a significant financial burden on taxpayers, and the government may not be able to ensure that subsidies are directed to the most needed individuals.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits of reducing pollution and the long-term savings in energy costs make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While the financial burden is a concern, the overall environmental and societal benefits of subsidizing EVs justify the investment, making this argument weak.

Example 68:

Statement: “Public transportation should be free for all citizens.”

Argument 1: Free public transportation would increase access for low-income individuals, reduce traffic congestion, and lower pollution levels.
Argument 2: Free public transportation would be too expensive for governments to maintain, possibly leading to higher taxes and decreased quality of services.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The social, environmental, and economic benefits of providing free public transportation make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While cost is a valid concern, the long-term societal benefits of increased public access and reduced congestion outweigh the financial drawbacks, making this argument weak.

Example 69:

Statement: “College tuition should be free for all students.”

Argument 1: Free college tuition would make higher education accessible to everyone, reduce student debt, and provide equal opportunities for all.
Argument 2: Offering free college tuition would place a large financial strain on the government and may reduce the quality of education due to increased enrollment.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The societal benefits of equal access to higher education and reduced student debt make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are financial concerns, the long-term benefits of a more educated population and the reduction of student debt make this argument weak.

Example 70:

Statement: “Animal testing for cosmetics should be banned worldwide.”

Argument 1: Banning animal testing will prevent unnecessary cruelty to animals and encourage the development of more ethical and effective alternative testing methods.
Argument 2: Banning animal testing could hinder cosmetic product safety testing, leading to potential health risks for consumers.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The ethical concerns and the potential for cruelty to animals make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While safety is important, the development of alternative testing methods can address concerns without relying on animal testing, making this argument weak.

Example 71:

Statement: “Governments should impose a universal basic income.”

Argument 1: Universal basic income (UBI) would reduce poverty, provide economic security, and promote social well-being by ensuring that everyone has access to basic financial resources.
Argument 2: UBI would be expensive to implement and could discourage people from working, leading to economic inefficiencies and reduced productivity.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Providing financial security and reducing poverty are critical social objectives, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While the cost and work incentives are valid concerns, the potential benefits of reducing poverty and ensuring security make this argument weak.

Example 72:

Statement: “Nuclear energy should be used as a primary source of power.”

Argument 1: Nuclear energy produces large amounts of energy with low greenhouse gas emissions, making it a crucial part of addressing climate change.
Argument 2: The risks of nuclear accidents, the long-term disposal of radioactive waste, and the potential for nuclear proliferation make nuclear energy dangerous and unsustainable.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits of using nuclear energy to reduce carbon emissions make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While safety concerns are valid, modern technology and proper regulation can mitigate these risks, making this argument weak.

Example 73:

Statement: “All schools should teach financial literacy as part of the curriculum.”

Argument 1: Teaching financial literacy will equip students with essential life skills, such as budgeting, saving, and investing, and help them make informed financial decisions.
Argument 2: Adding financial literacy to the curriculum could overload students with additional subjects and reduce time for other important topics.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The practical benefits of financial literacy in promoting responsible financial management make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are concerns about curriculum overload, the benefits of financial literacy outweigh this issue, making this argument weak.

Example 74:

Statement: “Smoking should be banned in all public places.”

Argument 1: Banning smoking in public places will protect non-smokers from secondhand smoke, reduce health risks, and improve air quality.
Argument 2: Banning smoking infringes on individual freedom and could negatively affect businesses, especially those in the hospitality industry.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Protecting public health and reducing the risks associated with secondhand smoke make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While individual freedom is important, the health benefits of a smoking ban in public spaces outweigh this concern, making this argument weak.

Example 75:

Statement: “The drinking age should be lowered to 18.”

Argument 1: Lowering the drinking age will allow young adults to take personal responsibility for their actions and make the drinking age consistent with other adult rights and responsibilities.
Argument 2: Lowering the drinking age could lead to an increase in alcohol-related accidents, health issues, and risky behavior among young people.

Answer:

Argument 1: Weak – While consistency in legal rights is important, the potential negative health and safety impacts make this argument weak.
Argument 2: Strong – The increased risks of alcohol consumption for young adults and public health concerns make this argument strong.

Also read : Logical question on statement and conclusion

Example 76:

Statement: “Social security benefits should be increased for senior citizens.”

Argument 1: Increasing social security benefits would provide seniors with greater financial security, helping them maintain a decent standard of living as they age.
Argument 2: Increasing social security benefits could place additional strain on government budgets, potentially leading to higher taxes or cuts in other programs.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Ensuring that senior citizens have the financial security to live comfortably in retirement makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While cost concerns are valid, the moral and social imperative of supporting seniors outweighs the potential financial strain, making this argument weak.

Example 77:

Statement: “Public education should be privatized.”

Argument 1: Privatizing public education would increase competition, improve quality, and give parents more control over their children’s education.
Argument 2: Privatizing education could lead to greater inequality, as wealthier families can afford better schools while lower-income families may struggle to access quality education.

Answer:

Argument 1: Weak – While competition could improve quality, the risk of exacerbating inequality makes this argument weak.
Argument 2: Strong – The potential for increased educational inequality and reduced access to quality education for disadvantaged students makes this argument strong.

Example 78:

Statement: “Online dating should be more regulated.”

Argument 1: Regulating online dating platforms will protect users from scams, harassment, and fraud, ensuring a safer and more trustworthy environment.
Argument 2: Increased regulation of online dating could limit freedom of choice, restrict innovation, and discourage people from using dating apps altogether.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The need to protect users from risks like scams and harassment makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While regulation might limit some aspects of freedom, the safety and security of users should take priority, making this argument weak.

Example 79:

Statement: “Social media platforms should be held accountable for the spread of misinformation.”

Argument 1: Holding social media platforms accountable will encourage them to take more responsibility for curbing the spread of false information and protect users from harmful content.
Argument 2: Holding platforms accountable for misinformation could lead to over-censorship, limiting freedom of expression and creating a “filter bubble” of curated content.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Ensuring the accuracy and integrity of information shared on social media is crucial to public trust and safety, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While freedom of speech is important, the need to prevent the harm caused by misinformation outweighs concerns about over-censorship, making this argument weak.

Example 80:

Statement: “Public healthcare should prioritize mental health services.”

Argument 1: Mental health services are essential for overall well-being, and prioritizing them will help reduce the stigma surrounding mental health and improve quality of life.
Argument 2: Prioritizing mental health services could divert resources from other critical healthcare areas, leading to a decrease in overall healthcare effectiveness.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Mental health is an integral part of overall health, and prioritizing it can lead to better societal outcomes, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While resource allocation is important, addressing mental health issues is crucial and can prevent long-term costs in other areas of healthcare, making this argument weak.

Example 81:

Statement: “All public spaces should be designed with accessibility in mind.”

Argument 1: Designing public spaces for accessibility ensures that everyone, regardless of ability, can participate in society, promoting inclusivity and equality.
Argument 2: Implementing accessibility features in all public spaces can be costly and may lead to higher construction costs and delays in development.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Accessibility is essential for creating a fair and inclusive society, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While costs are a consideration, the long-term societal benefits of inclusivity far outweigh the initial expenses, making this argument weak.

Example 82:

Statement: “Governments should provide free internet access for all citizens.”

Argument 1: Free internet access would bridge the digital divide, allowing all individuals to access educational resources, employment opportunities, and vital information.
Argument 2: Providing free internet access would strain government resources and could lead to inefficiencies in service delivery.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Ensuring access to the internet as a basic service is essential for social equity, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While financial concerns are valid, the benefits of providing universal access to the internet justify the investment, making this argument weak.

Example 83:

Statement: “Governments should regulate the sale of sugary drinks.”

Argument 1: Regulating sugary drinks can reduce consumption, combat obesity, and improve public health outcomes.
Argument 2: Over-regulating sugary drinks could infringe on personal freedoms and lead to a slippery slope of government control over individual choices.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The potential to reduce health issues like obesity and diabetes makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While personal freedom is important, public health concerns and the cost of treating obesity-related illnesses outweigh this concern, making this argument weak.

Example 84:

Statement: “The use of plastic bags should be banned worldwide.”

Argument 1: Banning plastic bags will reduce environmental pollution, protect wildlife, and encourage the use of sustainable alternatives.
Argument 2: Banning plastic bags could inconvenience consumers and businesses, and lead to the increased use of other environmentally damaging alternatives.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental impact and potential to reduce pollution make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While alternatives may have their own issues, the long-term benefits of banning plastic bags far outweigh the drawbacks, making this argument weak.

Example 85:

Statement: “The government should increase funding for scientific research.”

Argument 1: Increased funding for scientific research will drive innovation, solve pressing global challenges, and contribute to economic growth.
Argument 2: Increasing government funding for research could lead to wasteful spending, inefficiencies, and government overreach in the scientific community.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Investment in scientific research drives progress and innovation, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While concerns about inefficiencies are valid, the long-term benefits of scientific advancement and global progress justify increased funding, making this argument weak.

Example 86:

Statement: “Animal farming should be restricted to reduce environmental impact.”

Argument 1: Reducing animal farming will lower greenhouse gas emissions, reduce deforestation, and improve overall environmental sustainability.
Argument 2: Restricting animal farming could harm economies that rely on agriculture and reduce access to affordable sources of protein for many people.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits of reducing animal farming to mitigate climate change are significant, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are economic concerns, the urgent need to reduce environmental damage and adopt sustainable practices makes this argument weak.

Example 87:

Statement: “Governments should provide paid parental leave to all employees.”

Argument 1: Paid parental leave allows parents to bond with their children, promotes gender equality, and improves child development outcomes.
Argument 2: Paid parental leave could increase costs for businesses, potentially leading to reduced hiring and higher taxes.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The social and developmental benefits of paid parental leave make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While cost concerns are valid, the positive societal impact, especially on gender equality and child development, outweighs this argument.

Example 88:

Statement: “The government should ban all fast food advertising targeted at children.”

Argument 1: Banning fast food advertising to children will help reduce childhood obesity rates and promote healthier eating habits.
Argument 2: Banning fast food advertising could infringe on businesses’ freedom of expression and limit consumer choice, especially for parents who allow such advertisements.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Reducing childhood obesity and encouraging healthier eating habits are vital public health goals, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While freedom of business is important, the public health benefits of reducing childhood exposure to unhealthy food marketing make this argument weak.

Example 89:

Statement: “Cities should invest in more green spaces.”

Argument 1: Investing in green spaces will improve air quality, provide recreational opportunities, and enhance mental well-being for residents.
Argument 2: The costs associated with creating and maintaining green spaces could be better spent on infrastructure and other urban development needs.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental and mental health benefits of green spaces make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While financial concerns are valid, the long-term health and environmental benefits make this argument weak.

Example 90:

Statement: “All countries should adopt a carbon tax.”

Argument 1: A carbon tax will incentivize companies to reduce emissions, promote the use of renewable energy, and help mitigate climate change.
Argument 2: A carbon tax could raise the cost of goods and services, disproportionately affecting low-income households and leading to higher inflation.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits and potential to reduce carbon emissions make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are concerns about economic impact, the long-term benefits of combating climate change justify the introduction of a carbon tax, making this argument weak.

Example 91:

Statement: “Public transportation should be free for all citizens.”

Argument 1: Free public transportation would reduce traffic congestion, lower carbon emissions, and make it more accessible for low-income individuals.
Argument 2: Offering free public transportation could be financially unsustainable for governments and may lead to overcrowded and inefficient transportation systems.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental and social benefits of free public transportation make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While financial sustainability is a concern, the long-term benefits of reduced congestion and increased access to public transport make this argument weak.

Example 92:

Statement: “The use of renewable energy should be mandated for all new buildings.”

Argument 1: Mandating renewable energy for new buildings would reduce overall carbon emissions, promote sustainable development, and lower long-term energy costs.
Argument 2: Requiring renewable energy systems for new buildings could increase construction costs and limit housing affordability, especially in low-income areas.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental and long-term financial benefits of renewable energy make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While the upfront costs may be higher, the long-term savings and environmental benefits outweigh these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 93:

Statement: “Social media platforms should be required to verify the identity of all users.”

Argument 1: Verifying users’ identities would reduce the spread of misinformation, cyberbullying, and hate speech, creating a safer online environment.
Argument 2: Requiring identity verification could violate users’ privacy, discourage free expression, and create barriers to entry for marginalized communities.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Ensuring accountability and reducing harmful content on social media makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While privacy concerns are valid, the benefits of reducing harmful behavior online and promoting safety outweigh these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 94:

Statement: “All governments should implement a four-day workweek.”

Argument 1: A four-day workweek would improve work-life balance, increase employee productivity, and reduce burnout.
Argument 2: A four-day workweek may not be feasible for all industries and could reduce economic output in sectors that require continuous operations.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The benefits of increased productivity and improved mental well-being make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While some sectors may face challenges, the overall societal and productivity benefits make this argument weak.

Example 95:

Statement: “Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) should be banned in agriculture.”

Argument 1: Banning GMOs will prevent potential environmental and health risks, protect biodiversity, and promote organic farming.
Argument 2: GMOs can increase crop yields, reduce pesticide use, and help feed the growing global population, making a ban counterproductive to addressing food security.

Answer:

Argument 1: Weak – While the risks are a concern, scientific consensus suggests that GMOs are generally safe, making this argument weak.
Argument 2: Strong – The potential benefits of GMOs in terms of crop yields and food security make this argument strong.

Example 96:

Statement: “The minimum wage should be increased to $15 per hour.”

Argument 1: Increasing the minimum wage will lift millions out of poverty, reduce income inequality, and boost consumer spending, which can stimulate economic growth.
Argument 2: Raising the minimum wage could lead to job losses, especially for small businesses, and may increase the cost of goods and services, leading to inflation.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The potential to reduce poverty and stimulate economic activity makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While concerns about inflation and job loss are valid, the long-term benefits of raising the minimum wage outweigh these drawbacks, making this argument weak.

Example 97:

Statement: “All companies should be required to offer remote work options.”

Argument 1: Requiring remote work options will improve work-life balance, reduce commuting, and expand opportunities for a more diverse workforce.
Argument 2: Requiring remote work could reduce company culture, hinder collaboration, and be difficult for industries that require in-person interaction.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The flexibility and improved quality of life for employees make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While some industries may face challenges, the benefits of offering remote work in many sectors make this argument weak.

Example 98:

Statement: “All products should have a mandatory recycling program.”

Argument 1: A mandatory recycling program will reduce waste, conserve resources, and promote sustainability by ensuring that products are reused and repurposed.
Argument 2: Mandatory recycling could increase costs for manufacturers and consumers, and may be difficult to enforce across all industries.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental and sustainability benefits of a mandatory recycling program make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While enforcement and cost concerns are valid, the long-term benefits of reducing waste and conserving resources outweigh these challenges, making this argument weak.

Example 99:

Statement: “All citizens should be required to vote in national elections.”

Argument 1: Requiring citizens to vote would increase voter turnout, ensure that elections are more representative, and promote civic engagement.
Argument 2: Compulsory voting infringes on personal freedom and could lead to uninformed voting, where people vote without genuine interest or understanding.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Increasing voter turnout and ensuring a more representative electorate make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While personal freedom is important, ensuring fair representation and civic participation outweigh these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 100:

Statement: “The government should regulate the use of artificial intelligence in military operations.”

Argument 1: Regulating AI in military operations will ensure ethical standards are met, reduce the risk of unintended consequences, and prevent potential misuse.
Argument 2: Over-regulating AI in the military could limit technological advancements, hinder defense capabilities, and create vulnerabilities in national security.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The ethical concerns and potential risks of using AI in warfare make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While national security is important, ensuring ethical standards and preventing misuse should take priority, making this argument weak.

Example 101:

Statement: “Governments should ban the sale of single-use plastics.”

Argument 1: Banning single-use plastics will reduce pollution, protect wildlife, and promote the use of more sustainable materials.
Argument 2: A ban on single-use plastics could disrupt industries that rely on them, leading to higher costs for consumers and potential job losses.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits of reducing plastic waste and protecting ecosystems make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there may be short-term economic disruptions, the long-term environmental benefits make this argument weak.

Example 102:

Statement: “Public libraries should offer free access to digital resources.”

Argument 1: Free access to digital resources promotes literacy, provides educational opportunities, and bridges the digital divide for underserved communities.
Argument 2: Offering free digital resources could strain library budgets, lead to unnecessary competition with private businesses, and be difficult to sustain long-term.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Providing equal access to digital resources is essential for fostering education and addressing inequality, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While funding challenges exist, the societal benefits of greater access to information and educational tools justify this argument being weak.

Example 103:

Statement: “Governments should introduce a tax on unhealthy foods to combat obesity.”

Argument 1: A tax on unhealthy foods will encourage healthier eating habits, reduce obesity rates, and lower healthcare costs in the long run.
Argument 2: A food tax could disproportionately affect lower-income individuals, limiting their access to affordable food choices and potentially leading to social inequality.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The long-term health benefits and potential to reduce obesity-related issues make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While the tax may affect lower-income individuals, providing subsidies for healthier foods can mitigate this concern, making this argument weak.

Example 104:

Statement: “The government should provide free access to higher education.”

Argument 1: Free access to higher education would reduce student debt, promote equality, and allow more individuals to pursue career opportunities without financial barriers.
Argument 2: Free higher education could place a significant burden on government budgets and result in lower quality of education due to resource constraints.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The social benefits of expanding access to education and reducing student debt make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While the costs may be high, the benefits of a more educated workforce and a fairer society outweigh this concern, making this argument weak.

Example 105:

Statement: “All countries should prioritize the conservation of biodiversity.”

Argument 1: Conserving biodiversity is essential for maintaining ecosystem stability, supporting agriculture, and ensuring food security.
Argument 2: Focusing on biodiversity conservation may divert resources from other critical issues, such as poverty alleviation and infrastructure development.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Biodiversity is crucial for the functioning of ecosystems and global food systems, making this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While resource allocation is important, the long-term benefits of protecting biodiversity outweigh short-term trade-offs, making this argument weak.

Example 106:

Statement: “The government should provide a universal basic income (UBI).”

Argument 1: A UBI would reduce poverty, provide financial security for all citizens, and stimulate economic growth by increasing consumer spending.
Argument 2: A universal basic income could be financially unsustainable and may reduce individuals’ motivation to work, harming the economy in the long term.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The potential to reduce poverty and improve economic security makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While concerns about sustainability and work incentives exist, the societal benefits of a UBI outweigh these challenges, making this argument weak.

Example 107:

Statement: “All companies should be required to disclose their environmental impact.”

Argument 1: Requiring companies to disclose their environmental impact will increase transparency, encourage accountability, and drive companies to adopt more sustainable practices.
Argument 2: Requiring environmental disclosures could impose significant compliance costs on businesses, especially small enterprises, and may create unnecessary bureaucratic burdens.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Promoting transparency and encouraging sustainable business practices makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While the compliance costs may affect businesses, the long-term environmental benefits of greater accountability outweigh this concern, making this argument weak.

Example 108:

Statement: “Animal testing should be banned for cosmetics.”

Argument 1: Banning animal testing for cosmetics will prevent animal cruelty, promote ethical practices, and encourage the development of alternative testing methods.
Argument 2: A ban on animal testing could slow down the development of new cosmetic products and lead to higher research and development costs for companies.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The ethical consideration of preventing animal suffering makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there may be financial costs, the ethical necessity of banning animal testing for cosmetics outweighs these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 109:

Statement: “Governments should provide incentives for people to adopt electric vehicles.”

Argument 1: Providing incentives for electric vehicles will reduce carbon emissions, improve air quality, and accelerate the transition to sustainable energy.
Argument 2: The financial cost of providing incentives could place a significant burden on government budgets, especially during economic downturns.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental and health benefits of promoting electric vehicle adoption make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While costs are a concern, the long-term environmental benefits and reduction in fossil fuel dependency make this argument weak.

Example 110:

Statement: “The government should provide free mental health services.”

Argument 1: Free mental health services would increase access to care, reduce the stigma surrounding mental health, and improve overall public health outcomes.
Argument 2: Providing free mental health services could strain public healthcare systems and lead to long waiting times or lower-quality services.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The benefits of increasing access to mental health care and improving societal well-being make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While resource limitations are a valid concern, the positive impact on public health from expanded mental health services justifies this argument being weak.

Example 111:

Statement: “Governments should implement a wealth tax for the richest citizens.”

Argument 1: A wealth tax would reduce income inequality, provide funding for social programs, and ensure that the wealthiest contribute fairly to society.
Argument 2: A wealth tax could discourage investment and innovation, leading to reduced economic growth and capital flight to other countries.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The potential to reduce inequality and generate revenue for social welfare programs makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While economic growth is important, the benefits of reducing inequality and funding public services outweigh concerns about investment, making this argument weak.

Example 112:

Statement: “Governments should implement a carbon cap-and-trade system.”

Argument 1: A carbon cap-and-trade system will limit greenhouse gas emissions, incentivize companies to adopt cleaner technologies, and help mitigate climate change.
Argument 2: A cap-and-trade system could lead to higher costs for businesses, especially energy-intensive industries, and could create market volatility.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits of reducing emissions and incentivizing sustainable practices make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While economic concerns are valid, the long-term necessity of addressing climate change makes this argument weak.

Example 113:

Statement: “All school curriculums should include financial literacy as a mandatory subject.”

Argument 1: Teaching financial literacy in schools would empower students to make informed financial decisions, reduce debt, and promote long-term financial stability.
Argument 2: Adding financial literacy to the curriculum would require additional resources and could detract from time spent on core academic subjects like math and science.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The long-term benefits of financial literacy and the importance of informed decision-making make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While resources and time are important, the societal advantages of teaching financial literacy outweigh these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 114:

Statement: “Cities should implement congestion pricing to reduce traffic.”

Argument 1: Congestion pricing will reduce traffic congestion, decrease air pollution, and generate funds that can be used to improve public transportation infrastructure.
Argument 2: Congestion pricing could disproportionately affect lower-income individuals who rely on cars for commuting, making it an unfair burden on them.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The potential to reduce traffic, improve air quality, and generate funding for public transportation makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are equity concerns, the positive impacts on the environment and public transit justify the system, making this argument weak.

Example 115:

Statement: “Social media platforms should implement a ‘dislike’ button to improve user experience.”

Argument 1: A ‘dislike’ button would give users more control over the content they engage with, allowing them to express disagreement without leaving negative comments.
Argument 2: A ‘dislike’ button could be used to promote negativity, discourage content creators, and lead to an overall decrease in positive interactions on the platform.

Answer:

Argument 1: Weak – While a ‘dislike’ button provides more expression, it may create an environment of negativity, making this argument weak.
Argument 2: Strong – The potential for negative interactions and harm to content creators makes this argument strong.

Example 116:

Statement: “All students should be required to learn a second language.”

Argument 1: Learning a second language promotes cognitive development, enhances cultural understanding, and improves career prospects in an increasingly globalized world.
Argument 2: Requiring students to learn a second language could overburden them with additional coursework, especially in areas where language proficiency is not immediately necessary.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The cognitive and career benefits of learning a second language make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While it may be challenging, the advantages of language learning in a globalized world outweigh these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 117:

Statement: “Governments should provide subsidies for renewable energy sources.”

Argument 1: Subsidizing renewable energy will accelerate the transition to clean energy, reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and help combat climate change.
Argument 2: Providing subsidies for renewable energy could lead to increased government spending and create an imbalance in the energy market, potentially disadvantaging traditional energy industries.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The long-term benefits of transitioning to renewable energy and combating climate change make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While the economic concerns are valid, the urgent need for clean energy solutions outweighs these drawbacks, making this argument weak.

Example 118:

Statement: “Public transportation should be free for all citizens.”

Argument 1: Free public transportation will increase accessibility for all citizens, reduce traffic congestion, and help lower carbon emissions.
Argument 2: Making public transportation free could strain public budgets and reduce the quality of services, leading to overcrowded and inefficient transportation systems.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental, social, and accessibility benefits make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While funding and quality issues are concerns, the potential to increase accessibility and reduce congestion justifies this argument being weak.

Example 119:

Statement: “Fast food restaurants should be required to include calorie counts on their menus.”

Argument 1: Requiring calorie counts will empower consumers to make healthier choices and raise awareness about nutrition.
Argument 2: Forcing fast food restaurants to list calorie counts may lead to increased operational costs, particularly for small businesses, and could limit consumer choice.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The potential to encourage healthier eating habits and raise awareness about nutrition makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While operational costs may increase, the benefits of improved public health and informed choices outweigh these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 120:

Statement: “Governments should regulate the use of facial recognition technology.”

Argument 1: Regulating facial recognition technology will protect citizens’ privacy, reduce surveillance overreach, and ensure ethical use of the technology.
Argument 2: Strict regulation could stifle innovation, delay the adoption of useful applications, and hinder the ability of law enforcement to use facial recognition for crime prevention.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The importance of protecting privacy and ensuring ethical usage of facial recognition technology makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While innovation and security concerns are important, privacy and ethical considerations should take priority, making this argument weak.

Example 121:

Statement: “Governments should provide free access to healthcare for all citizens.”

Argument 1: Free healthcare would reduce health disparities, ensure equitable access to medical services, and improve public health outcomes.
Argument 2: Providing free healthcare could lead to increased government spending, longer waiting times for treatments, and potential inefficiencies in the healthcare system.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The societal benefits of equitable healthcare access and improved public health make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While challenges related to funding and efficiency exist, the overall benefits of providing free healthcare outweigh these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 122:

Statement: “The government should provide free internet access to all citizens.”

Argument 1: Free internet access would reduce the digital divide, improve education and job opportunities, and promote equal access to information.
Argument 2: Offering free internet access could be financially burdensome for the government and may lead to a reduction in service quality due to overuse and underfunding.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The potential to reduce inequality and promote access to information and education makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While financial concerns are valid, the societal benefits of providing free internet access outweigh these challenges, making this argument weak.

Example 123:

Statement: “Countries should adopt a four-day workweek.”

Argument 1: A four-day workweek would improve work-life balance, reduce employee burnout, and increase overall productivity.
Argument 2: A four-day workweek might not be practical for all industries, and could lead to decreased output in sectors that require full-time staffing.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The benefits to work-life balance and employee productivity make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While not all sectors may benefit, the positive impact on well-being and productivity in many industries makes this argument weak.

Example 124:

Statement: “Governments should ban the use of fossil fuels by 2030.”

Argument 1: Banning fossil fuels by 2030 will drastically reduce carbon emissions, mitigate climate change, and promote the adoption of renewable energy sources.
Argument 2: A sudden ban on fossil fuels could disrupt economies, lead to job losses in energy-dependent industries, and create a transition period full of challenges.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The urgency of addressing climate change and transitioning to sustainable energy makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are economic challenges, the long-term benefits of banning fossil fuels for a sustainable future outweigh these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 125:

Statement: “Governments should require all businesses to provide paid parental leave.”

Argument 1: Paid parental leave promotes gender equality, helps families balance work and life, and supports the well-being of children.
Argument 2: Mandating paid parental leave could increase operational costs for businesses, especially small ones, and lead to potential job cuts or hiring freezes.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The social and economic benefits of supporting families and promoting equality make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While costs may rise for businesses, the societal benefits of paid parental leave justify this argument being weak.

Example 126:

Statement: “Online shopping should be taxed to support local businesses.”

Argument 1: Taxing online shopping would level the playing field for local businesses, helping them compete with large e-commerce platforms and promoting local economies.
Argument 2: Taxing online shopping could discourage consumers from making online purchases, potentially harming the convenience and growth of e-commerce.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Supporting local businesses and promoting fair competition make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While online shopping may be affected, the long-term benefits of supporting local economies justify this argument being weak.

Example 127:

Statement: “Universal health care should be implemented globally.”

Argument 1: Universal health care would ensure that everyone has access to necessary medical services, reduce health disparities, and improve global public health.
Argument 2: Implementing universal health care worldwide could be financially unsustainable, especially for poorer countries, and may lead to inefficiencies in the delivery of services.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The health and social benefits of universal access to healthcare make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While financial sustainability is a concern, the long-term improvements in public health and social equity outweigh these issues, making this argument weak.

Example 128:

Statement: “All companies should be required to pay a living wage.”

Argument 1: Paying a living wage ensures that workers can afford basic needs, reduces poverty, and boosts economic productivity by increasing employee satisfaction and retention.
Argument 2: Requiring a living wage could increase labor costs for businesses, especially in low-margin industries, potentially leading to higher prices for consumers or layoffs.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The societal benefits of reducing poverty and improving worker conditions make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While labor costs may rise, the long-term economic and social benefits of paying a living wage outweigh these challenges, making this argument weak.

Example 129:

Statement: “The use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture should be banned.”

Argument 1: Banning GMOs would eliminate potential health risks and preserve the natural environment, preventing long-term ecological consequences from genetically engineered crops.
Argument 2: GMOs can increase crop yields, reduce pesticide use, and help address food shortages in developing countries, making a ban counterproductive.

Answer:

Argument 1: Weak – While health and environmental concerns are valid, the potential for sustainable farming and food security through GMOs makes this argument weak.
Argument 2: Strong – The benefits of improving food security and reducing environmental impact through GMO use make this argument strong.

Example 130:

Statement: “Governments should invest in renewable energy sources instead of fossil fuels.”

Argument 1: Investing in renewable energy will reduce carbon emissions, create sustainable jobs, and help combat climate change for future generations.
Argument 2: Shifting focus away from fossil fuels could harm industries that rely on traditional energy sources, leading to job losses and economic instability in fossil fuel-dependent regions.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The long-term environmental benefits and job creation in renewable energy make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – Although there may be transitional challenges, the need for sustainable energy sources makes this argument weak.

Example 131:

Statement: “All public places should be smoke-free.”

Argument 1: Smoke-free public places protect non-smokers from harmful secondhand smoke, improve public health, and reduce smoking rates overall.
Argument 2: Banning smoking in public places could infringe on personal freedoms and lead to a reduction in business for establishments like bars and restaurants.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Protecting public health and reducing secondhand smoke exposure make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While personal freedoms are important, the health benefits for the broader population justify this argument being weak.

Example 132:

Statement: “All products should have a mandatory ‘sustainability’ label.”

Argument 1: A sustainability label would inform consumers about the environmental impact of the products they buy, promoting eco-conscious purchasing decisions and encouraging companies to adopt more sustainable practices.
Argument 2: Mandatory sustainability labels could increase production costs, leading to higher prices for consumers, and potentially create misleading labels if not properly regulated.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Encouraging sustainability and providing consumer transparency make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – Although there are concerns about costs and labeling accuracy, the environmental benefits and consumer awareness outweigh these challenges, making this argument weak.

Example 133:

Statement: “Electric cars should be made the standard mode of transportation.”

Argument 1: Electric cars reduce greenhouse gas emissions, lower dependence on fossil fuels, and help combat climate change while providing clean transportation.
Argument 2: The widespread adoption of electric cars could require massive infrastructure changes, significant government subsidies, and may not be feasible in regions without access to renewable energy sources.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental benefits and potential to reduce fossil fuel consumption make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While challenges exist in infrastructure and subsidies, the environmental and societal benefits of electric cars outweigh these concerns, making this argument weak.

Example 134:

Statement: “School uniforms should be mandatory in all public schools.”

Argument 1: School uniforms promote equality by reducing peer pressure related to clothing choices, foster a sense of community, and help students focus on learning rather than fashion.
Argument 2: Mandatory school uniforms could infringe on students’ freedom of expression and make families incur additional costs for uniforms.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – Promoting equality and focusing on education over fashion make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While freedom of expression is important, the benefits of creating a more inclusive and focused learning environment justify this argument being weak.

Example 135:

Statement: “Public smoking should be banned completely.”

Argument 1: A complete ban on public smoking would protect non-smokers from harmful secondhand smoke, improve public health, and reduce smoking rates.
Argument 2: Banning smoking entirely could violate individual rights, infringe on personal freedoms, and harm businesses like bars and restaurants that cater to smokers.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The health and social benefits of reducing secondhand smoke exposure make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While personal freedoms are important, the overall public health benefits justify this argument being weak.

Example 136:

Statement: “Every citizen should be required to vote in elections.”

Argument 1: Mandating voting would increase voter turnout, ensure that all voices are heard, and strengthen democracy by encouraging civic participation.
Argument 2: Requiring voting could infringe on individual freedoms, create disinterest or apathy, and lead to uninformed voting if people are forced to vote.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The benefits of higher voter turnout and stronger democracy make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While individual freedom is important, the societal advantages of a fully engaged electorate outweigh this concern, making this argument weak.

Example 137:

Statement: “Schools should implement later start times to improve student well-being.”

Argument 1: Later start times would align better with adolescent sleep cycles, leading to improved mental health, better academic performance, and decreased absenteeism.
Argument 2: Shifting school schedules could disrupt family routines, after-school activities, and potentially increase transportation costs for parents.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The health and academic benefits of better sleep make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While logistical challenges exist, the positive impact on student well-being justifies this argument being weak.

Example 138:

Statement: “Artificial intelligence should be regulated to ensure ethical use.”

Argument 1: Regulating AI would ensure that it is used ethically, reducing risks like bias, discrimination, and harm to privacy, while promoting public trust.
Argument 2: Over-regulation could stifle innovation, slow technological advancements, and limit the potential benefits of AI in various sectors, including healthcare and education.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The need to ensure ethical use of AI and protect privacy makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While innovation is important, the ethical concerns surrounding AI make this argument weak.

Example 139:

Statement: “Single-use plastic should be banned globally.”

Argument 1: Banning single-use plastic would reduce environmental pollution, protect wildlife, and encourage the use of more sustainable materials.
Argument 2: A global ban could disrupt industries that rely on plastic for packaging, increase costs for manufacturers, and create challenges in recycling systems.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The environmental and ecological benefits of reducing plastic pollution make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are economic concerns, the long-term environmental benefits outweigh these, making this argument weak.

Example 140:

Statement: “Social media companies should be held accountable for spreading misinformation.”

Argument 1: Holding social media companies accountable for misinformation would reduce the spread of harmful falsehoods, protect public health, and improve the quality of online discourse.
Argument 2: Holding companies responsible could lead to censorship, restrict freedom of speech, and stifle open debates, which could undermine the platform’s diversity of ideas.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The need to protect public health and reduce misinformation makes this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While freedom of speech is important, the harmful effects of misinformation justify this argument being weak.

Example 141:

Statement: “Governments should provide free higher education to all citizens.”

Argument 1: Free higher education would reduce student debt, increase access to education, and create a more educated workforce, benefiting the economy.
Argument 2: Providing free education could strain government budgets, increase taxes, and may lead to overcrowding in universities, reducing the quality of education.

Answer:

Argument 1: Strong – The societal and economic benefits of an educated population make this argument strong.
Argument 2: Weak – While there are financial concerns, the long-term benefits of providing accessible education outweigh these challenges, making this argument weak.

Please join discussion on Facebook about world facts and its secret.