The Instigator
I-am-a-panda
Pro (for)
Losing
18 Points
The Contender
comoncents
Con (against)
Winning
36 Points

The U.S. should sell Wyoming and Florida to China.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/28/2009 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,118 times Debate No: 9353
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (58)
Votes (10)

 

I-am-a-panda

Pro

I thank in advance whoever accepts this debate.

===DEFINITIONS===

Sell - To transfer (goods) to or render (services) for another in exchange for money; dispose of to a purchaser for a price [http://dictionary.reference.com...]

Wyoming - http://en.wikipedia.org...

Florida - http://en.wikipedia.org...

U.S. - http://en.wikipedia.org...

China - http://en.wikipedia.org...

I think I have done enough to stop semantics

=== PRO ARGUMENT===

Currently, the U.S. $772 billion dollars to the People's Republic of China [1]. The debt is currently growing, and the U.S. lack the capital to pay off this debt.

Therefore, I propose the U.S. should sell Wyoming and Florida, who's worth is more than enough to pay off China [2] . Currently, they make, combined, 764,080 billion dollars [2], enough to stave off their debt to China, and wipe out almost 1/4 off their foreign debt [1].

[1] = http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] = http://en.wikipedia.org...
comoncents

Con

I want to thank you for starting this. I do understand where you are coming from.

===DEFINITIONS===

"Sell" or not to "sell"
You are from Ireland or so your profile says, so I will start there.
How would you feel if Ireland started to sell off property to a country that is opposite to you countries belief in freedom?
We are in debt to china and yes we do need to deal with that, but it is not fair to sell parts of our country to a society of communistic rule.

We should not be in the business of selling America with prejudice to any state
Wyoming, Florida, or even California (as it seems to be more popular among other believers in the system of selling off America"

=== Rebuttal to PRO ARGUMENT===

I understand that America did this to them selves.
If you have a debt and to pay off that debit you just start selling off everything you have, would you really learn your lesson?
Spending is like a drug; in theory your proposal will have us sell all of America to countries we are in debt to.
When you say it is ok to sell portions of America you open up the can of worms proposing if we don't turn the spending problem around, it will be a trend of selling America.
When we sell to china, who is to say that Japan would not accept anything less.

You do state that the two states you are proposing are "worth is more than enough to pay off China" then why would we even settle for what is not even completely fair.

Voters…. Think about it as if the United States were selling your state to china… would you agree…

It not vote…

Con
Debate Round No. 1
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I sincerely thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

===REBUTTAL===

"How would you feel if Ireland started to sell off property to a country that is opposite to you countries belief in freedom?"

--> Interesting question. Interestingly enough, Ireland has sold off parts of the Island. We sold the 6 counties which now compromise of Northern Ireland [1] [2], in exchange for Independence. I so no reason why America would not make a similar deal in exchange for the removal, for the most part, of her debt to China.

"We are in debt to china and yes we do need to deal with that, but it is not fair to sell parts of our country to a society of communistic rule."

--> CON brings up a good point here, however, I now ask my opponent to suggest another way which America could deal with this debt.

"We should not be in the business of selling America with prejudice to any state
Wyoming, Florida, or even California"

--> The U.S., for the most part, is a bought nation [3] [4]. Buying land was a method of expansion, at the cost of money to other superpowers at the time. It was a way to reduce debt over all. I see no reason why the U.S. can't reduce debt by giving up some of it's territory.

===PRO ARGUMENT===

"I understand that America did this to them selves.
If you have a debt and to pay off that debit you just start selling off everything you have, would you really learn your lesson?"

--> Of course you would have learned your lesson. You would have sold off your property to relieve a portion of your debt. People do it all the time. They downgrade their house to reduce their mortgage, or business' close factories for the same purpose.

"in theory your proposal will have us sell all of America to countries we are in debt to.
When you say it is ok to sell portions of America you open up the can of worms proposing if we don't turn the spending problem around, it will be a trend of selling America.
When we sell to china, who is to say that Japan would not accept anything less."

--> Not necessarily. The concept off selling off land isn't to the ends of completely reducing your debt. If a corporation is in debt, they don't sell of 3/4 off their buildings simply to get rid off their debt. They sell of some buildings. And they
make cutbacks elsewhere. In terms of Japan, they'll be more than happy to take land, as well as money.

"You do state that the two states you are proposing are "worth is more than enough to pay off China" then why would we even settle for what is not even completely fair."

--> I would please ask CON to rephrase this statement.

"Voters…. Think about it as if the United States were selling your state to china… would you agree…"

--> I would kindly remind voters the object of debate isn't who you agree with, but who argues the debate better.

===SOURCES===

[1] = http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] = http://en.wikipedia.org...
[3] = http://en.wikipedia.org...
[4] = http://en.wikipedia.org...
comoncents

Con

===REBUTTAL===

"Ireland has sold off parts of the Island. We sold the 6 counties which now compromise of Northern Ireland [1] [2], in exchange for Independence."

Yes but great Britain is not communist.
Northern Ireland had to compromise its laws in the processes.
I am a Cuban American and do not want to compromise my freedom and liberties in order to pay off a debit… it is not worth it.
And what about those people who fled china that now live in Wyoming and Florida.
I understand that you are looking to clear the debit but this is not the way… this would be the most extreme method that should not be considered till all other options are exulted.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"I now ask my opponent to suggest another way which America could deal with this debt."
Well we need to stop needless spending on a war that makes no sense.
We have at least 10 million in pork-barrel projects we can get rid of… it is all about chipping away at it and not trying to do crazy things to pay it off… and we need to stop spending more.

" The U.S., for the most part, is a bought nation"
Yes, buying land that we could claim and bring freedom to. Not selling land that is unconstitutional for the federal government to just sell states with out the people approving.
http://www.usconstitution.net...
"The purchase was a vital moment in the presidency of Thomas Jefferson. At the time, it faced domestic opposition as being possibly unconstitutional. Although he felt that the US Constitution did not contain any provisions for acquiring territory,"
http://en.wikipedia.org...

===CON ARGUMENT===

"Not necessarily. The concept off selling off land isn't to the ends of completely reducing your debt. In terms of Japan, they'll be more than happy to take land, as well as money."

If you give a piece of our land to china then all of the people that we are in debt to will want a piece.
Completely against what our country was founded on.
We would be a tiny America with a ton of foreign compromise.

"I would please ask CON to rephrase this statement."

I was stating that you said your proposal was more then worth what the debit is… so I was just stating that it was not really fair for us then.

I stand to my original statement even if people do not like it or not.

Voters…. Think about it as if the United States were selling your state to china… would you agree…

It not vote…
Debate Round No. 2
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I thank my opponent for this debate

The videos show how bad the national U.S. debt is. It shows you can't pay it off.

===REBUTTAL===

"Yes but great Britain is not communist."

--> And? This doesn't make China less of legit buyer than Britain or Japan. Furthermore, Britain has a monarch. The appeal to emotion here fails in that the fact that the U.S. could be in serious debt they can't tax or cut back their way out of.

" I am a Cuban American and do not want to compromise my freedom and liberties in order to pay off a debit… it is not worth it."

--> You have the freedom to leave the new Florida or Wyoming dominion of China a whim, no-ones forcing you to live there.

"And what about those people who fled china that now live in Wyoming and Florida"

--> If they could flee China, I'm pretty sure they could flee Florid or Wyoming.

"I understand that you are looking to clear the debit but this is not the way… this would be the most extreme method that should not be considered till all other options are exulted."

--> All other options have been done. They aren't the solution.

"Well we need to stop needless spending on a war that makes no sense."

--> I agree on this, but this will only cut some spending. It won't be the path to cutting all debt.

"We have at least 10 million in pork-barrel projects we can get rid of… it is all about chipping away at it and not trying to do crazy things to pay it off… and we need to stop spending more."

--> $10 million is nothing in terms of trillions of dollars of debt.

"Yes, buying land that we could claim and bring freedom to. Not selling land that is unconstitutional for the federal government to just sell states with out the people approving."

--> What the people think is irrelevant in this debate. If the U.S. congress was debating it, yes, the people's thoughts are extremely relevant. The U.S. bought huge tracts of land from foreign nation. Why can't we just reverse the logic and sell the land? There is also no reason why the Chinese wouldn't give them freedom, like Macau or Hong Kong, which are largely self governed. (http://en.wikipedia.org...) (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

===PRO ARGUMENT===

"If you give a piece of our land to china then all of the people that we are in debt to will want a piece."

--> Evidence of?

"Completely against what our country was founded on."

--> America was founded largely on the right to freedom of speech and democracy. If it was constitutional to buy land, it's constitutional to sell land.

"We would be a tiny America with a ton of foreign compromise."

-->America would only be selling of two states.

"I was stating that you said your proposal was more then worth what the debit is… so I was just stating that it was not really fair for us then."

--> The cost I gave was an indicator of how much it was worth. If you have a different system of valuing the land of Florida and Wyoming, please show us it.

"Voters…. Think about it as if the United States were selling your state to china… would you agree"

--> Again, the debate is about who has better argument, not what your agree with. There's a box for that, and it doesn't count for any points.

Thanks for the debate.
comoncents

Con

I want to thank my opponent for this debate and tell him that is was a lot of fun.

===REBUTTAL===
"This doesn't make China less of legit buyer than Britain or Japan."

But to allow communism to come into our country will compromise the very liberties that make us America.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"You have the freedom to leave the new Florida or Wyoming dominion of China a whim, no-ones forcing you to live there."

But someone is forcing me to move out, giving up my land and my "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"

This clearly is against our constitution in many places, such as the 12th amendment

Twelfth [Amendment X]
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

"If they could flee China, I'm pretty sure they could flee Florid or Wyoming."

The constitution was written to give the people laws and to protect our liberties. It is completely against your theory. you have the adasity to easily brush off these facts. It show you do not have the proper knowledge of what America is all about.

"All other options have been done. They aren't the solution."
Where is the proof that we have done everything possible aside of selling off America off to pay off our debit. You have none because it is just not true

"What the people think is irrelevant in this debate."

By people, I mean Americans. To say it is irrelevant in this debate shows that you really do not know much about the topic you presented. If you want to sell off America piece by piece then you have to make sure the law is on your side. America's law.

"If the U.S. congress was debating it, yes, the people's thoughts are extremely relevant."
It is not extremely relevant but the only relevance as evidence of the constitution.

"Why can't we just reverse the logic and sell the land?"
Because it is no longer protecting Americans form opposing rule and national security.

===CON ARGUMENT===

""If you give a piece of our land to china then all of the people that we are in debt to will want a piece."
⇒Evidence of?"… Common sense

"America was founded largely on the right to freedom of speech and democracy."
You prove me right is this one incriminating statement… it is all about democracy.
1 a: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

It is all about the people… of those states…

(sarcastic statement)
yeah that sounds like something Americans will go for
"Please give up your land to china. I know there communist but come on it will free some of our debt… you know you want to"
(sarcastic statement)
Not so much. America will never go for it.

"America would only be selling of two states."
So you must be the authority of control when it comes to allowing states to be sold. Only two states, as stated before, it is naive to think that other country will not demand any less then what china is getting.

----------------------------------In conclusion-----------------------------------

"The U.S. should sell Wyoming and Florida to China."
The statement my opponent raised is not only false but it is not well thought out.
He is not an American and should not be held in contempt for that, but should be held in contempt for the blasphemous statement that started this debate.
To sell off any state is completely against the constitution of the United States and the people it was sworn to protect. I have proven with out a shadow of a doubt that this is not only immoral but against the epitome of what America is.
America has never been in the business of selling its states and never will be, for one reason. It is never in the interest of Americans.
It is never in the interest of Americans to sell to a communistic society and open itself up to more national security liabilities. Again I ask a simple question to help you make your decision…

Voters…. Think about it as if the United States were selling your state to china… would you agree…

If not vote…Con, Vote con because you are American, vote con because you believe in our forefathers, vote con because you believe in America

Vote CON
Debate Round No. 3
58 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by sadolite 7 years ago
sadolite
OK, lets see. If I barrow money at 5% interest and pay it back plus interest How much money have I made? The govt does not and has never borrowed money for investment purposes nor should it. Nor should it attempt to do so not now not ever. Govt needs to be cut off at it's knees and be made to live within a budget period. The federal reserve is the worst thing that ever happened to this country. It allowed our govt to just print worthless counterfeit money and devalue the dollar to it's now worthless value we see today. It is going to get much much much worse in the coming years. How anyone can not see this coming has their heads in the sand. There are only three ways for govt to reduce debt: 1) raise taxes and cut spending 2) Induce hyper inflation to artificially create higher tax revenues and cut spending 3) Go bankrupt and enter into a depression and screw everyone in one fell swoop. Which of the 3 do you think will happen?
Posted by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
Sadolite, as Mr. Latham pointed out we could make good use of debt whereby we make more money out of the debt than we spend on it. Having no debt at all is not necessarily ideal, or to be worked toward. Compiling "good debt", as explained by Mr. Latham, should be our goal.
Posted by sadolite 7 years ago
sadolite
This country shouldn't owe any money period. Corruption is the only reason this country is in debt.
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
sadolite, The difference as to who we owe debt to is the emotional contention that we are owned by the forces of evil, or something like that. The idea that having any debt constitutes ownership is completely ridiculous. The US ratio of debt to GDP is lower than either Europe or Japan. Having foreign ownership of debt is an incentive for the debt owning countries to be somewhat cooperative, because if the US economy crashes they lose their money. The bonds are not callable, so the only thing that can be done with them in the short term is to sell them on the open market.

There is a serious debt problem, but it derives from the money being spent on interest being unavailable for more productive use. If we borrowed money at 5% interest and put it to work earning 10%, that would be great and we would want more of it. However, that's not what we are doing. It's a serious drain on the economy.
Posted by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
The easy way out would have been to point out that the federal government does not have the authority to sell states.
Posted by sadolite 7 years ago
sadolite
"Incidentally, the largest holder of US debt is Japan, not China." Oh that changes everything' Whats the friken difference? Now two countries own America. That makes it all better now.
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
comoncents, I think you did fine in the debate. It was an absurd proposition, and you made all of the correct arguments. I think you could have started off stronger, immediately pointing out the proposition of selling people into slavery and violating all of their Constitutional rights. Pro tried to perpetuate the fition that there was nothing involved but money. It would have worth pointing out that productive assets are valued at something like ten or twenty times the revenue they produce, but th many point of that would be to add to the general absurdity of the proposition. Incidentally, the largest holder of US debt is Japan, not China.
Posted by sadolite 7 years ago
sadolite
EH, Our govt has sold the entire country to China already!!
Posted by comoncents 7 years ago
comoncents
RoyLatham

So do you think my approach was wrong?
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
I get the feeling that Pro might have propose some topic that was remotely defensible, but chose not to.

Incidentally, the value of something is at least ten times the revenue it produces. In this case it would be many times more.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Danielle 6 years ago
Danielle
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by alwaz4dam 7 years ago
alwaz4dam
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by CrusaderDebater 7 years ago
CrusaderDebater
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Lifeisgood 7 years ago
Lifeisgood
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Vote Placed by Rezzealaux 7 years ago
Rezzealaux
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by DebateSpirit 7 years ago
DebateSpirit
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by KeithKroeger91 7 years ago
KeithKroeger91
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by comoncents 7 years ago
comoncents
I-am-a-pandacomoncentsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06