What is the negative proposition "Job-hopping is good for talents to play their role"?

Looking back at history, everyone's progress is almost accompanied by a big debate: from vigorous assets, from feudal autocracy in ancient China to democracy and freedom, in today's China, from the European scientific rationality of ancient European feudal theology, the class revolution reversed the status quo of the discussion on the standard of truth-the truth behind the heated debate, and boldly explored the truth tested by human wisdom. Debate wisdom flint collides with dazzling light, illuminating the road of human seeking truth. In the big debate, it is the pace of human progress, another step after the company.

Cherry blossoms are in full bloom, and the final of the 9th China Ocean University Student Debate Competition is coming in this beautiful spring. On April 17, Haifushan Campus set off the climax of World War IV. Let's look at the confrontation between the sea and revisiting wisdom.

-inscription

Parameters can be heard.

Pro-debate: in the case of job-hopping, is it a blind jump or a permanent resident? On the contrary, job-hopping is to leave the original unit or occupation, give other units or occupations changes, and effectively flow talents. Next, let's analyze the logical relationship of today's theme: what we are talking about is that job-hopping talents play a helping role, which is an objective condition for changing people's subjective initiative to play a helping role, rather than discussing the necessary or sufficient conditions for withdrawing talents to play a role. So as long as you can quit, you can prove your point of view with the help of personnel changes. We will prove our point:

It is emphasized that job-hopping is a two-way choice and a mobile talent mechanism, which is conducive to the role of talents. People choose job-hopping because job-hoppers can't play a good role in their original positions. Quitting is to respect the people's own choices and conform to the people-oriented spirit. Real estate is in a sideways position, and Shi Qi has summed up many years of experience. Only by exchanging the value of goods can the value of talents be reflected. Talent, it's fair. It can be seen that people who quit smoking have an effect on the environment.

From the perspective of social value, the vertical flow of job-hopping personnel and the closed personnel management model are more conducive to the optimal allocation of resources. Undoubtedly, in the process of job-hopping, we will constantly strengthen the value of talents, make them realize social value, and complete the perfect unity of personal value and social value. Other disputes have passed from the one-stop era, and the era of real freedom and opening up has arrived. Our people have realized that "I was born to be useful. In this case, I don't have my own office. Job-hopping is not a good job, but their efforts have found the right direction! " The sky is high for birds to fly, and the sea is wide for fish to jump. If the enterprise is tenacious and primitive, the society is an unknown small capitalist, not a rural teacher of revolutionary mentor Engels in Hunan, not Chairman Mao! In other debates, let's put down your arrogance and prejudice, and accept our view with your rational mind-resignation is beneficial to talents! Thank you!

Opposing parameters: the original error is less than 2 times in the case of other parameters arguing;

The first concept is unclear, referring to a deer as a horse. What is a job? Job-hopping is voluntary resignation, and the flow of talents in different units is a dangerous way. Talents in social groups with certain skills. It can be seen that talent is a social factor of production and a social resource. To play its role, it is a necessary organization and society.

Secondly, the standard is not clear. We believe that the standard of talents plays a role, is it personal value? And social values? Can be realized and unified. It is true that job-hopping is the result of personal choice, which can really benefit some people for a period of time, but because of the existence of individual differences, we can't find a standard measure. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss today's debate in a team way from the perspective of groups and society.

Clear the concept and standards, and then we will further prove that job-hopping is not conducive to the role of talents:

First of all, job-hopping is not conducive to the establishment of personal reputation. Modern society is a society that stresses honesty, unilaterally breaking the contract and going out. The credibility of these behaviors will make people red. Trees have no roots and are straight, and men can't stand it. Set the axiom fee of social integrity and talk about how to play a role in job-hopping talents.

Second, job-hopping is not conducive to the stable development environment of talents. The direction of quitting the working relationship is an inevitable personnel change. How to play the role of talents in the ever-changing environment? How can we play a better role after taking root for a long time?

Third, job-hopping is not conducive to the rational allocation of human resources. Talent is one of the elements of social production. The already popular phenomenon of "Peacocks flying southeast" makes the eastern region waste human resources, while the central and western regions are short of talents. In addition, changing careers makes many enterprises reluctant to invest in employee training, fearing that their own enterprises will become the cradle of talents for others. This is obviously not conducive to the supply of talents in society. Some people quit, let go of the money and technology, and let the original enterprise empty, and feel sad. This order further worsens the competitive environment and encourages unfair competition in culture.

Fourth, is job-hopping a value that is not conducive to society? Tour guide. Is dedication the embodiment of social values? You can quit smoking, but you can be different and concentrate. So we don't encourage job-hopping, because job-hopping is not conducive to the role of talents.

Fifth, it is not conducive to rational thinking in any language. Today, let's start today's debate in a reasonable space!

Interrogation link

The party questioned the Prime Minister's opposition to two or three lines of defense:

Opposition: Thank you, Madam President. There were other arguments just now. Value can only reflect job-hopping, not resignation, but not its value.

Wen Jiabao: Thank you for your question. We say that job-hopping is more conducive to talents to play their role, only for those who have job-hopping and those who have good jobs in the future. They played a very good role in the unit. These people don't need to discuss today's problems.

Objection: However, the other party has just made it clear that quitting is the "only" relationship, so that talents can play a role, which should be known in other debates! Then we ask a question, other debaters deal with numbers every day, and they are highly accomplished in mathematics. According to the survey, 60% people will feel a sense of loss after quitting smoking. I want to ask, where does this sense of loss come from?

Premier Wen: Thank you for your question and the data I want to talk about. * * * The Shanghai Municipal Committee of the Communist Youth League conducted a survey on the 35-year-old youth. The results showed that 94. 1% of Germans jumped, and 67.3% jumped in line with the people's interests and jumped into their own professional knowledge. What do these data show? Explain that it has not met the requirements of a certain field, jump!

Objection: If your position is not suitable, you will be transferred to another article. What will you do if other jobs don't suit you?

Fang Debate: Other debates, because of the tortuous road, you can't deny that the future of music is bright!

Square two, three lines of defense opposition questioned:

Pro-debate: Is it necessary to integrate all the characters to see the effect of something being acted by external forces?

The opposition party retorted: it is indeed.

Fang Sanbian: Thank you. Other arguments based on our logic all admit that job-hopping is a necessary or sufficient condition for talents to play their role. Excuse me, as a math teacher, you were found to be losing money. If you graduate, a company offers you a position. How do you go?

Objection: If this job suits me, I will go. But I won't give up. Why do I need to know that there are tigers in the mountains? I prefer to travel in the mountains because there are all kinds of talents flowing there.

Advantages and disadvantages of the debate: I want to ask, what do you do?

Objection to the debate: I can transfer, secondment by turns and other kinds of talent flows 10. (Applause) In other debates, why did I give up using this method?

Debate pros and cons, confuse concepts with other debates. Actually, job-hopping is also a way! I ask the other person, if you do such a thing and do something you don't like, I ask what you like to do is good for you, or what you don't like is working?

Objection: I must like unity and social values, as long as I can realize my personal value and make my personal value? And social values? To achieve reunification, then I will do as you like.

Pro: So, the purpose of our job-hopping is what you like to do! Excuse me, the data shows that the average life expectancy of Americans has jumped by six slots. What conclusions can be drawn from these data? (time)

One-on-one debate

Fang Sanbian: Qing Dynasty poet Wang Fuzhi said: "Reading is like a mirror" on every empowerment technology of "flying kites and diving". It is said that kites fly in the sky and fish swim in the water just to make themselves play a role in the environment and maximize their energy, expertise and resources. If kites swim and the survival of flying fish becomes a problem, what's the use?

Debate on the opposing side: First, the opposing side argues about what kind of animals can swim in the water. Secondly, it may be impossible for fish to fly into the sky? Since it is impossible, what's the use of discussing it? I want to ask other arguments, what kind of talents does society need?

Fang Sanbian: Other debates evade our questions. Obviously, kites can't swim in the water and fish can't fly. Talent is like a kite in the water that day. Only by finding your own position can you give full play to your strengths. However, what we are seeing now is that a large number of talents can't play their own fields for work? Their professional knowledge, in their working environment or suffering from too many obstacles, seriously hindered their role-playing, motionless study of sadness! These people quit their jobs to change the environment and play a better role. Is it wrong?

Objection: Why not answer our question? This is obviously correct, but what about other arguments? I want to review the question before us, what kind of talents does this society need? What kind of talents does this society need? Li Yifei, president of Viacom, said that they don't recruit people who change jobs frequently because they are moved by pressure and run away. They are losers. What else is there to explain about this? As for the environment mentioned in other debates just now, we believe that talents must have a stable environment to play their role. Other debates should know that stability is the first priority now!

Active defense: we need all kinds of talents, and all kinds of talents will also need the talents we care about in other debates in various environments. I am very happy. I want to ask the other party to refute, but when it comes to the environment, whether a person can give full play to his role, and of course the environment. However, if a person is tired of the original work unit, even the job with mental pain, shouldn't you change the environment and find a job you like to play a greater role?

Most of the work of the opposing debate is actually doing repetitive things. Doing one thing repeatedly every day will naturally make you tired. But when your new position moves to a new environment and a new job, in fact, one day you will get tired of repeating the same thing. Tired of jumping around, jumping tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, when is the end?

Three debaters: But, you know, other debaters, quit, don't change the environment, find a new job, I love it and regain my sense of belonging? I think it's a pity that other debates are always hovering in the same place, willing to be caged birds. I'll ask other arguments. The ancients said, "A good minister chooses his master, so that he can choose a good bird to live in." . For example, under the command of Han Xin and Han Xin Xiang Yu, Liu Bang was transferred to help him unify the country. Could it be that his choice was wrong? Could it be that his choice is not conducive to its function here?

Debate against: first of all, my talent, I will break the cage to realize my value, but I will not choose to quit. Second, what about Han Xin's withdrawal? Did he and Xiang Yu meet Liu Bang to sign a contract or conclude a peace treaty? square

Debate against: Why do you quit most young people? Because young people are impetuous and do a good job, they think of another article. There is a saying that careers are often ruined by impatience and difficulties. If we can't do this in our own posts and play our own value in ordinary posts, then do we still have a chance to do higher-level work? Because things that have no chance to do are raised to a higher level, how can they play a better role? When it comes to our goods sweeping data, according to authoritative surveys, only 10% of people have made preliminary plans in many job-hopping. In other words, most job-hopping is blind. What can the theme of blindness bring us? This is self-evident. If you change jobs, you must deny 90% of human intelligence. This is a real blind spot. (time)

Division on the stage

Four positive arguments: Let's look at a simple example first: We like to go to a pharmaceutical factory to check with pharmacists, and we want to prove that this medicine is good for treating colds, but the other party says it is not good. Once drugs enter the market, you don't need to eat everything. This medicine is not good for colds! It is obviously wrong to think in other directions. Let's respond to other parameter defenses, integrity issues. It is obvious that the United Nations is recruiting external staff: more than six candidates with work experience are needed. Is it not trustworthy to form a United Nations alliance? If job-hopping is a dereliction of duty in the work we are engaged in, how kind is it to let tigers eat grass? No, just destroy the shackles of wasting talents and social progress!

Back to the camp, the next lost phenomenon, the other side said to quit after defense. This phenomenon can only show that job-hopping people have not fully considered resigning before, thus hindering their role. Then, what he needs to do now is to re-plan after leaving for a period of time and figure out what environment is suitable for them before going back to jump! There are also debates about peacocks flying to Southeast Asia, saying that job-hopping and talents play a role, and a large number of talents accumulate in the east, unable to find suitable jobs or even unemployed, instead of restricting them from returning to the west to support the development of the west? Secondly, we are all saying that job-hopping means changes in the external environment and promotes the initiative of talents. The other party's statement is constantly flawed-(Time)

Opposing debate: the other two debates are like a bridge, and the three debates are endless, but the microwave anger wave cannot be hidden in every other small problem.

First, the concept is unclear. Tell us that job-hopping is the main way of talent flow, so I want to ask, what is orange? According to each other's logic, oranges are the most important fruit. How can we gain a foothold in today's competition without the logic of meaning and expansion?

The standard is specious. Other debates stay to talk about the phenomenon of rights, but they never tell us what to measure. Our defense statement has a clear standard, that is, talents can play a role, that is, they can realize personal and social values? Whether to achieve reunification.

Understanding is one-sided. Trying to quit smoking confuses the flow of talents. If you don't quit smoking, you will be in the water. If there is no job-hopping, it is impossible to make a reasonable configuration. Other arguments about such a concept, rather than waking people up through its drowsiness?

Fourth, the other side has always emphasized changing the environment. We believe that job-hopping is a constantly changing environment, which is not conducive to the role of talents. Because talents play a role, they need a stable environment and withdraw from a very unstable environment.

Hand hand

Fang Sanbian: Thank you. Today's withdrawal from the debate is conducive to talents to play their role, while other debates are all about blind job-hopping and frequent job-hopping, so we quit. What a mistake! For example, we are talking about drugs that help to restore health. On the other hand, many drugs are good for health. So, is the other side's statement the theme of today? I ask each other a question. If we feel depressed, tired and without the joy of work, he resolutely chooses to quit their working environment. Is his wise choice more conducive to play its role?

Debate against: if you don't do it, you can play a role. In the new environment, it can play a role. Why?

Square opposition party: Because job-hopping is an active choice, talent flow and job-hopping are problems of talent flow mode.

Opposing debate: Just now, in other debates, job-hopping is harmful to the environment, but today's debate is to help talents play their role and resign. The other party wants to tell me that the environment is the reason to give up.

Fang San-bian: So we say that talents play a role in the action of reflecting talents. We quit the ever-changing working environment, and we have to ensure the stimulus measures when the objective environment changes? Other debates have not deviated from the subject for the time being.

Opposition: The other party has just announced that the recruitment of United Nations personnel requires more than six years of work experience. Is it equivalent to the United Nations confirming that people can live in at least six slots? I want to ask about other debates. Do talents need a stable environment to play their role?

Actively defend, but we need more innovative talents! I want to ask a question. In other debates, if you are an employee of a large enterprise with complex interpersonal relationships, and you feel at a loss, and you transfer to an enterprise with relatively simple interpersonal relationships, will this change in objective conditions be beneficial to your role?

Debate on the other side: The other side just said that Chinese medicine is good for health, but it is toxic in three ways, so we can't cover everything. The other party said that withdrawing from environmental changes can give full play to the role of talents. I want to ask about other debates. Since so many people quit smoking blindly, can you guarantee that they will quit smoking for themselves?

The opposition party in the square has always believed that job-hopping is the full play or need of talents. As we said just now, our argument is whether objective conditions bring the initiative, or whether objective conditions are a problem! The other party does not replace logic.

Oppose the debate: I want to ask, what are the necessary and sufficient conditions for talents to play their role? The problem that the other side has been avoiding, our talents need a stable environment to play a role?

Active defense: We realize that talents play their role actively, but the necessary or sufficient conditions for talents to play their role are not the issues to be discussed today.

Oppose the debate: let's put environmental issues aside. We say that job-hopping has certain risks. This kind of risk exists, so the opportunity cost of withdrawing from other debates increases significantly. Is everyone willing to spend a limited life?

The Prime Minister once again stressed that we should not deny it, because the road is tortuous and the future is bright. 200 1 When drame Rio de Janeiro, the former president, switched to Lenovo as CEO, he was marginalized at Dell and he was squeezed. Is it beneficial to exhibit his hands and feet from one environment to another?

Debate against: The road is tortuous and the future is bright. As long as this road is the goal, you jump around and get old. Without a purpose, your future is bright. In addition, I would like to ask other debates, quit facing choice, choice and cost, so what is cost? Cost is a burden. When you bear a heavy burden, how can you play a better role?

Fang Sanbian: When we say that talents change jobs, we don't mean that this enterprise can't keep talents, but that talents can arouse the importance of talents through job-hopping and finally help the brain to play its role. Besides, your talent can't even meet your basic requirements. How can you work?

Debate against: If this society is definitely quitting smoking, what are the consequences of quitting smoking?

Premier: Or a data. The Ministry of Labor and Social Security announced that at the end of 2006, more than 1,000 people were looking for new jobs in the talent market, and 20% of them were ready to change careers. This means that according to other debates, what about more than 2 million people?

The opposition retorted: I also gave the other party a set of data. According to the data released by Hutton Management Consulting Co., Ltd., only 9.8% people have switched to a new industry. Scientific analysis shows that most people are blind before job-hopping, and some people have to admit collective blindness?

Positive debate: The debate we are discussing today is whether frequent job-hopping is blind, but job-hopping is beneficial to talents. Other debates changed the idea that it was blind.

Opposing debate: frequent job hopping, blind job hopping, how many jobs are not job hopping?

Fang Sanbian: Job-hopping is a neutral concept. I don't understand why others are interested in giving up wearing hats. We are not keen on changing jobs, but our work is not always satisfactory because of our carelessness. If our majors are not right, isn't job-hopping completely beneficial to our roles? (time)

Objection: If we encourage smoking cessation, it is a style that encourages tasting.

Opposing party: You took everything from me with a slight jump! (time)

Set the tone with a beat of the gong-say the last sentence

Conclusion of the opposing debate: Thank you! Good evening, everyone! All other arguments are honest. Expressed his views passionately, but please allow me to point out the other party's prejudice here:

The concept is still unclear. Other debates tell us about the flow of resigned talents, so I ask other debates what is orange? According to the logic of other debates, an orange is a fruit. Is your participation in this competition meaningless and has no conceptual extension?

These two standards are specious. Other debates stay to talk about the phenomenon of rights, but they never tell us what to measure. We have made it clear in theory that talents can play a role, that is, they can realize personal and social values? Whether to achieve reunification.

One-sided understanding. Efforts to quit smoking are confused with the flow of talents. If you don't quit smoking, it will come naturally. If there is no job-hopping, it is impossible to make a reasonable configuration. Other arguments about such a concept, rather than waking people up through its drowsiness?

Four puzzles. Other debates have even repeatedly stressed that job-hopping is conducive to the optimal allocation of resources. We have made it clear many times that giving up easily will lead to a waste of resources. So what is good for optimal distribution?

5. self-contradiction. In other debates, it is acknowledged that frequent job-hopping belongs to quitting, but it can't be said that it is beneficial for talents to play their role. Is this a contradiction?

Next, please allow me to ask our three questions:

First, the purpose of talent image, job-hopping is not conducive to the establishment of integrity, why should we play the role of talents? If a person doesn't stand up and lose trust, there is really nothing he can do. All units, talk about the role of human beings? Besides, if you accidentally put bright red dancing shoes on your face and often beat old worries to add new ones, does "unfinished" mean that "people who have traveled all over the castle peak are not old and have not played a role"?

Secondly, from the perspective of talent quality, job-hopping is not conducive to the accumulation of work experience. Why do talents play a role? "A rolling stone gathers no moss", so it is not worth the loss to resign easily, which is better than the old saying: ten years on the bench. On average, it takes ten or even decades to accumulate experience. I often change my mind, always looking high, and my mentality is unstable. How can we play our role?

Thirdly, in the old society, job-hopping is not conducive to the optimal allocation of resources and talents, and how to play its role in society. Jun said, why is there no shortage of talents in China? Education, rural areas, state-owned enterprises, backward west. It's just that its opposite has withdrawn from the mainstream. Do other debates have to face the phenomenon in Southeast Asia? It's sunrise in the east and rain in the west, saying it's beneficial.

Look at the future, long-term goals, education-oriented. However, the trend of withdrawing from cable TV orientation has caused China to lose a large number of talents in basic industries such as education. Do other debates, hoping to see China's economy develop into a water without resources and a tree without roots?

Let's stand on high ground. Job-hopping crisis has become a problem that can't be ignored. Now that senior executives have resigned collectively, but they have not played a role, is there not enough society to sound the social alarm?

Talents have indeed played a certain role in the rational flow of talents. From the rotating attachment, then mobilized, described as "Xia Hong Wan Yun's heavy clothes. I'm afraid it's self-contradictory for the other party to talk about free choice but limit jumping!

Begging other debates to seek a world, not a city, eternal life, not a time. As the saying goes: "It's appropriate to observe the feelings of Changyi, and the Furong Garden is in the morning! Thank you!

Affirmative defense conclusion:

First of all, you want to know more experience, and you have accumulated more four-year defense. If you make the wrong choice, how can you do it all your life? With the debater of the last speaker in the competition, I sincerely invite you to calm down and I will savor the competition.

Secondly, among other parameters, talent is a flow of social resources, so why do you quit this flow from beginning to end in an unfair way? However, it has always told us that job-hopping is a reasonable flow of our own talents. There is no so-called job-hopping, blind job-hopping, and frequent job-hopping, which is conducive to talents to play their role, because we are wearing vests today, and it is not him that we recognize. This is obviously irresponsible. Have you changed your mind?

Thirdly, to see that job-hopping is a kind of talent flow, some problems are inevitable. We don't compare. Obviously, job-hopping is a good combination of talent selection and social needs, which allows talents to play a role in a better environment and make greater contributions to society. It makes the talents with personal value and social value reach the maximum unity, and takes actions to improve themselves to the maximum.

Finally, what we should see is that when we do something, we will encounter all kinds of setbacks. We can't deny that the future is bright just because the road is tortuous! It's not because some people quit because they don't look at their actual situation rationally, denying the benefits of job-hopping talents, resigning from personal potential challenges, a new starting point, and for their own life goals, the allocation of a unit is lifelong, and it's easy to lose passion. It's true. It's human nature to give up the prospect pressure and choose a comfortable and convenient life. For example, butterflies can't cross the ocean, but what we require is not ability, but talent. Reflect such mediocre and unprincipled "talents", even talents, then is there any hope for our society? Those who are not inclined to relax, dare to challenge themselves and inspire our society. With role-playing, many talents can survive, keep forging ahead and create their own new environment. The new pressure is more pleasant than those who follow the crowd. Such people, 19 years old, can exchange obedience in a plain life, but retain their own actions and interests; At the age of 27, he invented a new language, which brought him the sorrow of patent life, but he chose to spread our own strength to the TC frenzy all over the world. At the age of 44, he could have chosen to enjoy leisure, but he dragged his tired body back to China to achieve high social influence and was criticized. He is Li Kaifu. The reason why he can bring his talents to the extreme is not only because of his excellent skills, but also because he has the courage to resign again and again to find a better environment! Resignation is not a goal and development direction. The precepts tell us to constantly improve ourselves, adjust ourselves and never give up on the road of life! Thank you!

Sort out your own language. I hope this will help you cover the debate.