The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Rich nations should not aid poor nations

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/6/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 476 times Debate No: 27894
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




If rich countries give aid to poor countries then the poor counties wont have to work as hard to produce goods.


For the reader's information, this was a challenge to me. I will be debating pro-aid. Let us begin.

Con's argument is that aiding a poor country will mean that the poor country will not have to work as hard to profuce goods. I have two ways to respond to that:

1. Aid is not always in producing manufactured items.

2. If a country does not have to work as hard to produce manufactured goods, it can be a positive thing, as it can help develop the country and bring it closer to riches.

My arguments:

1. The act of aid is an act of kindness, and the rich country's reputation will become better.

2. The poor country may feel indebted to the rich country, thus it will feel in the future that it should repay the rich country, will will help the rich country.

I would like to thank Con for starting this debate. Back to Con.
Debate Round No. 1


Ibraham_Moizus_18 forfeited this round.


Okay, this will go really weirdly. I kinda took the Con position in my arguments by accident (the title says "should not aid"), so as well as refuting my opponent's argument, I will have to refute my own.

Con's argument: If the poor country does not needs less work to produce goods, then the government of the country may lose its independence, and will not be able to function on its own.

My arguments from before:

1 and 2. Almost all forms of aid could lead to the poor country's loss of independence.

1. If our reputation adds that we are nice, it can send a message to foreign enemies that we could be an easy target.

2. When it comes to being indebted, that is a horrible position for any poor country. If the poor country would be incapable of paying the rich country back, we may be brought back to the time in which we had colonies, whereas the rich country is the mother country and the poor country is the colony. All of this is relevant to independence. Remember what New France was like under French control? It wasn't that good.

I'm sorry for the potential confusion I have caused, but I have refuted my opponent's and my own arguments that support aid (I was playing the devil's advocate in this round). Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Luggs 3 years ago
Whoops. Just realized the title said "should not". That was a fail on my behalf. Should we restart this debate?
No votes have been placed for this debate.