Problem description:

What do you mean before and now?

It's best to explain everything in detail.

Analysis:

Please refer to the following information:

——————————————————————————————

At 7: 00 pm on April 4, 2006, in Room 309 of the Intermediate People's Court, an intense and harmonious debate was held in the Information Exchange Center and the Organization Activity Center of the Student Party Construction Research Association of Shanghai Jiaotong University. The meeting was composed of four members of the Information Exchange Center: Rong Intelligent, Wang Wei, Yan Jingyi and Hu Yicheng. On the other hand, the organization activity center has four members: Luo Qi, Ren, Zou Ruijun. Viewpoint: Hard work will not limit consumption. The host of the debate is Colin, deputy director of the Information Exchange Center. The guest lineup of this event is also spectacular: Duan, Du, Li, president of the Party Construction Research Association, and directors of various centers were all present. The game between the two is wonderful everywhere.

This debate was launched in response to the slogan of "Eight Honors and Eight Disgraces" and the background of building a harmonious society on the occasion of the two sessions in the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. Around the fine tradition of "hard struggle", the debate is carried out step by step.

The first part of the debate: know yourself, know yourself. In this session, the debaters of both sides first speculate on each other's ideas and state their views concisely. The opponent's third argument, pengpeng, said: "Restrain the growth rate of consumption ≠ restrict consumption", followed by the second argument: "To prove that hard work will limit consumption, it is only necessary to prove that it will reduce the growth rate of consumption". Efforts have different meanings in different times. In the past, we advocated hard work because China's overall economy was backward and there were not enough products for people to consume. Now, with the vigorous development of the national economy, hard work naturally has a new meaning, that is, promoting moderate consumption to ensure rapid economic development. The opposing party then quoted the epigram of "two musts". First of all, hard work is not afraid of suffering. Only by working hard can we increase social wealth and improve people's living standards. Secondly, a thrifty lifestyle is still necessary today. "Looking forward to the sages, diligence is defeated by luxury";

The second part of the debate: see the confession and open the confession. On the positive side, the gross national income is certain in a certain period of time. If it is accumulated too much, it will inevitably lead to a decrease in consumption, thus affecting the improvement of people's consumption level. Hardship = unremitting efforts, struggle = efforts to achieve a certain goal, consumption = consumption of material wealth for the needs of production and life. On the other hand, the opposing party believes that consumption in a broad sense also includes consumption of means of production. Without accumulation, China's existing limited means of production will inevitably be unable to meet the people's growing living needs. In the long run, the country must save resources and unnecessary expenses, "good steel should be used in the cutting edge" and create unlimited wealth with limited resources. For hard work, we should advocate and use it for the benefit of future generations.

The third part of the debate: tit for tat. In this link, the argument involves the distinction between waste and consumption, and positively points out that waste is aimed at hard struggle. Hard work will limit consumption. "Will" only represents a kind of ability, which does not necessarily have an effect. For example, if you say you want to jump from the third floor, will you really jump? Don't! The opponent points out that the purpose of advocating hard work is to save money and make better consumption in the future.

The fourth part of the debate: final decision. The opposing side takes the lead: if we give up our efforts, do not accumulate materials, lack reproduction resources and fail to develop productive forces, what will we consume? In view of the time, there are still many bright spots on the opposing side that have not been expressed. The four arguments of the opposing side sum up: "Our view is that' hard work will not limit consumption'. In terms of connotation, it is necessary to be diligent and thrifty, build a conservation-oriented society, and correctly distribute the means of production through resource utilization, which will effectively promote the development of productive forces. Without hard work, the cause cannot be successful; Without hard work, there can be no greater improvement in future life. " At this point, the guest teacher Duan asked a question: When will efforts limit consumption and when will they not? What is the difference between consumption and consumption growth rate? The four major arguments reiterate: "We believe that we should oppose excessive consumption, advocate sustainable development and advocate hard work."

One of the highlights of this debate is the addition of live interactive links. An audience at the scene asked: "From the viewpoint of dialectical materialism, no viewpoint is completely correct, and no viewpoint is completely wrong. How do the two sides understand each other's views? " The opponent replied: "The other side thinks that hard work will limit consumption, which is a short-sighted view, while we look at it from a long-term perspective. Saving now is precisely to increase future consumption." Another audience asked: "Is it too big for the Orthodox Party to make a fuss about the word' meeting'?" Founder said humorously, "Debate means talking about your own advantages." The enthusiasm of the audience seems to be increasing. There is an audience who is very interesting. He asked each other what waste was. This question seems a bit difficult to answer. After being silent for more than ten seconds, he asked himself, "How can it be wasted without consumption?" Why limit waste? In a sense, waste is also a kind of consumption, but the party who opposed it just now did not admit that waste is also a kind of consumption. "... the wonderful speech won the laughter and applause of the audience.

The debate is drawing to a close. Guest Duan and Du made summaries respectively. The two teachers are very satisfied with the outstanding performance of the students, and think that both sides have made full preparations for the debate, especially the four debates, which are rigorous, agile and professional. In the debate, we should grasp the key points of the other side and don't beat around the bush. I hope students will hold more such activities in the future.

Finally, Mr. Du announced the result: Hu Yicheng won the best debater, and his opponent was slightly better and won the championship of this debate. Two guests presented awards to the winners respectively, and four students from medical college performed guitar playing and singing. Finally, in the warm and harmonious music, a heated debate came to an end. ...

This debate was held in Mu Feng after the two sessions. I believe that after the education of this debate, students will be able to better participate in the army of building a harmonious society!