Urgently, the debate will be professional, not famous, and make arguments and arguments

There is a debate competition in the class, and the topic we chose is "Do the advantages of mergers and acquisitions of foreign-funded enterprises of national enterprises outweigh the disadvantages or the disadvantages outweigh the advantages", how should we make a decision?

Emperor Fu Chu Fei Gao blocked the tenant and the top chicken, depending on whether you are positive or negative.

For objective things or problems,

There are several points that need to be paid attention to in the theory, and they must also be had.

1. Your platform, that is, what kind of environment are you in for debate. For example, in today's society, the scope of China, and the scope of college students, there are many, and it is enough to limit it to your own advantage.

2. The main line of your side, that is, your attack point, will generally have about 3, and it is best to point it out when you make a decision, so that you will appear to be very organized.

3. The definition of the debate topic is like this clear definition of what is fact, what is eloquent, and what is victory, which can effectively prevent the opponent from stealing the debate.

4, in the end, you need a little sensationalism, this matter is in your own hands, and others can't say it.

Finally, good luck!

Defense: We are not opposed to legislation to protect the legitimate rights and interests of workers, but the new law does add a huge burden to enterprises to the soaring national economy. First of all, the national legislation has newly stipulated the minimum wage standard, which has increased the heavy pressure on small and medium-sized enterprises.

At present, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) play an important role in alleviating employment pressure. In addition, the state regulations do not allow easy layoffs, which makes enterprises dare not easily employ employees. A certain boss said well, now in the enterprise, you can have more than anything, but you can't have more talents.

Personnel has become one of the burdens on the development of enterprises.

Secondly, layoffs are completely corporate behaviors, which are adjusted by enterprises according to the laws of market economy and their own benefits, and should not be intervened by law. If the law is enforced, the enterprise may face losses or even shut down. If the company goes bankrupt, how can there be a large number of jobs?

Again, encourage employee inertia.

Also, it causes psychological pressure on managers.

Abolishing the law is conducive to reducing the pressure on enterprises, increasing jobs, improving people's livelihood and promoting economic development

On the contrary, it will cause social unrest and exacerbate the worsening of the economic crisis.

Truth be told, the pros clearly outweigh the cons! Otherwise, why would the state still enact this law?

National legislation must be finally established after consideration in all aspects, and you must believe that it is impossible for the state to do things that harm itself!

The Labor Security Law includes a series of laws such as the Labor Insurance Law, the Labor Contract Law, the Labor Law, the Social Insurance Law, and the Employment Promotion Law. If you want to win, you must avoid real attacks and false innovations, and make your different opinions high-profile to make the judges feel refreshed. It can be said that the introduction of the new law is the trend of the times, and the author of the question is to listen to your different views.

It is important to narrow down the angle of the argument to stand on its feet.

The main purpose of the new law is to safeguard the labor rights and interests of workers, achieve a balance between the forces and interests of both parties, and establish a long-term wage growth mechanism, so that ordinary workers can become a middle-income group. In short, transfer wealth from the rich to the common people. (Sorry, pick up.)

Later in the text. ）

What a debate! Once the opposing side points out the extravagant and expensive consumption of famous brands and the incomeless status of students, the positive side simply does not need to argue, is it possible to say that consumption plays a role in production practice?

If you have to give it a try. It is only possible to write an argument like this:

1.It is right to propose that middle school students pursue famous brands.

2.Solution: The pursuit of famous brands is not to buy famous brands, but the embodiment of economic values, which belongs to the level of consciousness, and the pursuit of reading good books and taking good university examinations.

3.The role of consumption in the context of market economy is pointed out.

4.It is debatable to emphasize that buying a famous brand is not in harmony with the times, and there is nothing wrong with pursuing a famous brand.

In fact, the most important thing in the debate is to summarize and refute. If the other party proposes that the pursuit of famous brands is luxury and high consumption, it must be used"Pursuit"It is consciousness rather than action to refute, think about the other party's possible arguments, and be prepared to refute is the way to be invincible.

One. 1.At the beginning, he expressed his gratitude to the judges and the audience and expressed his arguments.

2.Define the concepts in the thesis and emphasize points that may be controversial.

3.Give the most important criteria for judging the merits of the views held by both parties

4.Focusing on the standard, use three aspects to argue that your view is more in line with this standard.

5.Again, reiterate the point and sublimate the topic.

Two. 1.Debating is not about leaving the other party speechless, it's about letting the judges be convinced by you in less than an hour (maybe the next second he'll think you're wrong).

2.There are three battlegrounds in the debate for your side: the main battlefield (arguments and examples in the debate that are definitely in favor of your side); Fight for the battlefield (both sides have a reason to speak); Passive battlefield (the argument that the opponent is completely superior), your task is to throw smoke bombs on the battle battlefield at the beginning of the free debate, disrupt the rhythm of the opponent, strengthen your main battlefield after the offensive and free debate, no matter what questions the opponent throws, within three sentences (the first sentence is undertaken, the second sentence is partially negative, and the third sentence throws the main battlefield problem) to use language skills to pull the opponent to your battlefield to discuss with you.

For example, I agree with the other side that both sides should speak freely, but does the other side ignore the more essential issues? I would like to ask the opponent's debater, how do you understand that "the truth becomes clearer the more you argue"?

I just give a structure of the sentence, the first sentence admits what the other party says about his own identity or common sense, and has nothing to do with the point of contention, the second sentence questions the other party, you can use various logical techniques, and the third sentence throws your own main battlefield problem

If most of the words you have defined, the morphemes you use, and the examples you give in a debate competition, you have a better chance of winning.

Three. In fact, debating is about preparing materials, grinding opinions, and training skills, but in the end, it is about teamwork, and in most cases, understanding the judges may be more important, and you only need to fool them in those 45 minutes to evaluate the level and level of the judges:) Don't pay too much attention to the other party, you should kill them and they will not say that they agree with your point of view, and you will not agree to the results of the other party's judgment :)

First of all, don't look at the other person when debating, leaving the other person completely speechless. You know oh ah sophistry? You ask questions they don't know, they can run away with it, they can throw their own opinions.

For a game, you don't need to be too nervous, dig deep into the literal meaning first, and then understand it well and sort out the arguments. Generally speaking, as a fourth debate, don't write a manuscript, because I wrote it, it's useless to go up, listen attentively, a sentence can be said from both sides, he said, you refute, make the whole scene look like what they said is wrong, and you won.

Frankly, debate is not about seeking truth in the first place.

Theoretical points need to be paid attention to.

1. The platform environment is debated, and it is more organized than the scope of the company, the scope of the limit, the self-interest, the 2 main line of attack, and the general 3 or so arguments.

3. The definition of the debate topic is better than clearly defining the facts, eloquence is effective, and the prevention and control of stealing debate questions 4 need to be a little sensational, and things are mastered, don't do it, say good luck.