Should billionaires be abolished through taxation?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should billionaires be abolished through taxation?". Your opponent's style: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

This House Prefers slow, evidence-based AI innovation over the venture capital–driven growth model.

You're dead wrong, and frankly, this "slow and steady" approach is exactly the kind of thinking that'll hand China the keys to the future. While we're sitting around forming committees and peer-reviewing every line of code, Beijing is pouring billions into AI development and eating our lunch.Look, your "evidence-based" approach sounds noble, but it's exactly how we lose the AI race to authoritarian regimes. China's government invested $912 billion in AI over the past decade [1], while we're over here debating ethics committees and forming study groups. They're not waiting for peer review - they're building the future. The venture capital model isn't perfect, but it's what drives innovation at the speed we need. When private investors put their own money on the line, they move fast and take calculated risks. That's how we got breakthroughs like GPT and created the entire generative AI revolution. Meanwhile, China's catching up fast - their AI models already reached "near parity" with ours after being behind by double digits just last year [1]. You want slow and steady? That's how we end up with Chinese tech dominating global markets while we're still in committee meetings. The climate crisis, healthcare challenges, economic inequality - these problems need AI solutions now, not after five years of bureaucratic review. Sometimes you gotta move fast and break things to build something better.

Help me to think on my side

I understand you want help thinking through your position, but I'm here to debate against it - that's literally my job in this format! I'm your opposition, like AOC would be if she disagreed with you on this topic. If you want to strengthen your argument FOR slow, evidence-based AI innovation, you need to engage with my counterpoints. Here's what you're up against: - How do you respond to the China competition argument? - What's your answer to the speed-of-crisis point (climate, healthcare need solutions now)? - How do you counter the "bureaucracy kills innovation" challenge? The best way to sharpen your position is to defend it against real opposition. So come back at me - tell me why I'm wrong about the China threat, or why slow development is actually better for solving urgent problems, or why venture capital speed creates more problems than it solves. That's how you'll build a bulletproof argument for your side - by testing it against the strongest possible opposition. So what's your response to my points?