Overview:
Identifying and spawning subdebates is the one of the tasks of the mediator. Rather than have a linear debate, arguments on the Argument Clinic are structured like trees.
In a normal debate, it is very difficult to keep track of all discussions going on, much less an exhaustive exploration of all arguments. With the ability to split parts of debates into subdebates, this becomes quite feasible.
Example:
Debate: What were the impact of Reagan's economic policies?
Conservative: Reagan's policies were good for the economy
Liberal: No they weren't, his tax cuts only helped the rich, and also caused a huge deficit.
Conservative: First off, Reagan's tax cuts boosted production, which actually increased tax revenue. The deficit was the Democrats' fault for spending. Secondly, the rich had a huge tax burden. Cutting taxes for them allowed them to make more purchases and investments, which employed many more people with lower incomes.
Liberal: First, "Trickle-down economics" is a proven myth. Secondly, don't blame the Democrats for deficit spending, Reagan signed off on it! Finally, your claim that tax cuts increased revenue is dubious.
Mediator: Ok, I think we can agree that we have three independent issues here. 1) Both of you agree that deficit spending happened and is bad for the economy. The only question implicating Reagan is, can he be blamed for it, or does the blame rest with the Democrats in congress?. 2) You both agree that Reagan took a so-called "trickle-down" approach to improving the economy. The question implicating him is, does it fail to help? 3) Again, we both agree that a deficit is bad for the economy, and that higher tax revenues offset a deficit. The question implicating him on tax revenue is, did his lowering taxes increase tax revenue?
--> split to "trickle-down economics" -->
--> split to "deficit spending" --> ...
Subdebate: Did Reagan's tax cuts increase tax revenue?
Conservative: Tax cuts allow for more money to be invested, thus increasing incomes, which increase tax revenue overall.
Liberal: The dollar amount for tax revenue went up dramatically, but it is much smaller when taking inflation into account...
Subdebate: Does so-called trickle-down economics work?
Liberal: Trickle-down economics is a failure. It failed in the late 1800s and it failed in the 1980s. If you legislate to benefit the rich, the poor will only benefit marginally. Instead, policies that help the poor directly must be implemented.
Conservative: You have to take into account how the economy works. You can't just legislate wellbeing for the poor. Somebody has to guide actual production of wealth. And if you choke them with taxes as they did in the late 70s, they will be less able to produce, which isn't good for anybody.
Subdebate: Does Reagan deserve blame for deficit spending?
Conservative: Reagan only got through what he could get away with, given his opposition in congress. He was willing to accept deficit spending in order to pass much needed tax cuts.
Liberal: That's an awful compromise. The long-term damage to the economy wasn't worth it.