Unlock the full potential of ChatGPT with this simple trick As a powerful and versatile language model, ChatGPT from OpenAI has the ability to engage in complex debates on a wide range of topics. However, to truly showcase its analytical capabilities and produce deep and thought-provoking responses, a trick can be employed to elicit more detailed and structured answers. The trick is to include a request for ChatGPT to generate a hierarchical table of contents for each argument. This prompts the AI to carefully analyze the structure of the issue at hand and organize its thoughts in a logical manner, much like a human writer would create an outline to plan and organize their ideas before composing an essay or speech. By generating a table of contents, ChatGPT is able to break down the topic into smaller, more manageable chunks and examine each aspect in turn. This allows the AI to consider the topic from multiple angles and provide a well-rounded and balanced argument. Furthermore, the hierarchical nature of the table of contents allows ChatGPT to clearly present its ideas in a logical and coherent manner, making it easy for readers to follow and understand. Once the table of contents has been generated, ChatGPT can then use this outline to generate an essay or speech on the topic, with each section of the text corresponding to a section in the table of contents. This ensures that the AI's response is well-structured and logically organized, making it more coherent and persuasive. In conclusion, the trick of including a request for a hierarchical table of contents in the prompt can greatly enhance ChatGPT's ability to engage in debates on social topics. By carefully analyzing the structure of the problem and organizing its thoughts in a logical manner, ChatGPT is able to provide deep and thought-provoking responses that are well-structured and persuasive.

1. Speech for the coalition:
Ladies and gentlemen,
We stand before you today to support the motion “This house supports universal income for all
citizens”. As a coalition, we believe that universal income has the potential to address many of
the challenges faced by our society, including poverty and inequality, economic stagnation, and
social problems.
Firstly, universal income would reduce poverty and inequality. By providing a guaranteed income
for all citizens, we can ensure that everyone has enough money to meet their basic needs. This
would be a major step forward in reducing poverty and inequality, which are major issues in
many countries.
Secondly, universal income would stimulate the economy. By providing a consistent source of
income for individuals, we can encourage them to spend money on goods and services, which
would create new jobs and support economic growth. This is particularly important at a time
when many countries are facing economic challenges.
Thirdly, universal income would improve social mobility. By providing a safety net for individuals
who are unable to work due to illness or other circumstances, we can enable them to pursue
education or training to improve their skills and increase their chances of finding employment.
This would be a major step forward in increasing social mobility and reducing barriers to
opportunity.
In addition to these economic arguments, there are also strong social arguments in favor of
universal income.
Firstly, universal income would increase individual freedom. By providing a guaranteed income,
we can give individuals the financial security to make choices about their lives without worrying
about meeting their basic needs. This would increase their freedom and autonomy, and allow
them to pursue their goals and dreams.
Secondly, universal income would improve mental and physical health. By reducing stress and
anxiety among individuals who are struggling to make ends meet, we can improve their mental
and physical health, leading to better overall well-being. This is an important consideration in a
society that is facing a mental health crisis.
Thirdly, universal income would increase social cohesion. By providing a sense of social solidarity
and fairness, as everyone would receive the same income regardless of their circumstances, we
can increase social cohesion and reduce feelings of resentment and exclusion. This is particularly
important in a world that is becoming increasingly divided and fragmented.

2. In conclusion, we believe that universal income has the potential to address many of the
challenges faced by our society. By reducing poverty and inequality, stimulating the economy,
improving social mobility, increasing individual freedom, improving health, and increasing social
cohesion, universal income would be a major step forward in creating a better and more just
world. We urge you to support the motion “This house supports universal income for all
citizens”.
Opposition Speech:
Ladies and gentlemen,
We stand before you today to oppose the motion “This house supports universal income for all
citizens”. As an opposition, we believe that universal income is not the answer to the challenges
faced by our society, and that it would have significant negative consequences.
Firstly, universal income would be a high cost to taxpayers. In order to provide a guaranteed
income for all citizens, a significant amount of funding would be required. This would have to be
provided by taxpayers, who may already be struggling to meet their own financial obligations.
This is not a sustainable solution, and it would create additional burden for taxpayers.
Secondly, universal income would create a disincentive to work. By providing a guaranteed
income for all citizens, regardless of whether they are employed or not, we may create a
disincentive to work. Individuals may choose to rely on the universal income rather than seek
employment, which would be damaging to the economy and to society as a whole.
Thirdly, universal income could lead to misuse of funds. By providing a consistent source of
income for individuals without any accountability for how the funds are used, it is likely that
some individuals may choose to misuse their income. This could lead to an increase in
unproductive or unhealthy activities, which would be damaging to society.
Fourthly, universal income could lead to a loss of individual responsibility. By providing a
guaranteed income without any requirements or expectations for how it should be used,
individuals may become dependent on the universal income and lose the motivation to take care
of themselves or contribute to society.
Finally, universal income could lead to a lack of fairness and equality. By providing the same
income for all citizens, regardless of their circumstances or contributions to society, it would
undermine traditional values such as hard work, self-sufficiency, and responsibility. This could
lead to a decline in social norms and a loss of the sense of community and solidarity.
For all these reasons, we oppose the motion “This house supports universal income for all
citizens” and urge you to reject it. Thank you.