The Instigator
ChosenWolff
Pro (for)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
Adam2
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

The US should buy Greenland

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 4 votes the winner is...
ChosenWolff
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/9/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 873 times Debate No: 56342
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (4)

 

ChosenWolff

Pro

Greenlandic independence is sought by most of Greenland's population. For the purpose of the debate, we will assume that Greenland can be bought. Which is not totally unrealistic, given the people wanted us to in 1946.

My opponent will begin in R1.

Adam2

Con

I accept. My premise is this. Hasn't Denmark has done enough to these people as it is? Why do we want another country doing the same thing? Greenlanders have had enough of the rape, theft, looting, murders that they suffered at the hands of Danish troops and conquerers for so long.
Debate Round No. 1
ChosenWolff

Pro

I. Economic Potential of Greenland

Greenland is predicted by researchers and scientists, to be one of the most resource rich places on earth. Unfortunately, we can't mine gold on another countries territories. They are also loaded in fish and mollusks. You might be asking, if Greenland has so much economic potential, then why is the nation have such a low complexity score?



This is due to a massive trade deficit that Greenland has undertaken with its colonial relation to Danemark. Greenland is exporting only 500 million, most of which goes to feed the Danish fish. In return, Greenlands infrastructure is trying to sustain 400 million more. The Danish Economy is unwilling to pay off Greenlands debt, and even though 50% of their revenue is produced by Danemark, they can not get out of the deficit hole, of 36 million.

Lets move over to the black figure on that graph. That represents Greenlands Aluminum exports. Aluminum is cheap material, but is much more valuable than fish. The reason its so large, is due to the cheap amount of money it takes to extract from the earth. Greenland, unfortunately, can't pay off its debt, and develop the industry. Even though 36 million is cheap, you can't spend what you don't have.

If the US were to buy Greenland, and pay off its debt, the aluminum deposits would more than pay off all our expenses.



As you can see, the Greenland economy has more than just aluminum. They have everything from gold to coal. These things are much harder to mine, and Greenland has no money to pay for boreholes. The Inatsisartut, is willing to allow multi national companies from all over the world in. It is designated as one of the most desirable places for mineral companies. The US could recieve unprecedented access. 55% of the mining industry is controlled by multi nationals already.

Lets move on to fishing. Which is more than profitable. Let me show you a surreal map of the world....



You see the lakes around the Falkland Islands? Those are sources of light pollution. They are created by fishing boats. Fish tend to concentrate around areas above polar ice caps. The same lucrative industries are not present in Greenland. This is due to a lack of licensing. Let me explain.

Greenland has one of the largest fish depots in the world. Enough fish, that with enough people, could sustain a quarter of the world. Why aren't they taking advantage of it?



Their population growth is dirt low. Can you blame them? They live on a ice chunk not that has nearly no suitable farmland. How can the US change this?



We have a huge seafood business, but also a trade deficit, like Greenland. We are paying a exteme amount more than we can consume on imports. The US has 1000's of eager investors who would love to get their hands on Greenlands fishing industry. We have the population, money, and resources to take Greenland where it can't go. This is more than a win-win solution. Now, why the US and not Danemark?

The Danes are only paying 40% of Greenlands GDP, which gets smaller and smaller each year. Given Greenlands economic potential, I project the US could afford to give a aid bloc 300% larger than Danemark can. Come on, there's no loss here.

http://ec.europa.eu......

http://www.alcoa.com......

http://atlas.media.mit.edu......

http://www.resourceinvestor.com......
Adam2

Con

I forfeit
Debate Round No. 2
ChosenWolff

Pro

I accept my opponents concession
Adam2

Con

You win, ChrisWolff
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
You conceded. Which means you never really fought.
Posted by Adam2 2 years ago
Adam2
Don't shove your victory in my face, please...
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
Sweet......... sweeeeeet, sweet victory, OH!
Posted by Adam2 2 years ago
Adam2
I said "I forfeit"
Posted by Adam2 2 years ago
Adam2
I posted mine already
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
Can you post, so we can get this over with?
Posted by Adam2 2 years ago
Adam2
Chosenwolff
you win
I don't want to debate this anymore.
I graciously give you the win...
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
ChosenWolffAdam2Tied
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:50 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
ChosenWolffAdam2Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: ff.
Vote Placed by Ajab 2 years ago
Ajab
ChosenWolffAdam2Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:51 
Reasons for voting decision: Since Con gracefully conceded I give him conduct points. Because of the FF Pro gets the argumentation points, and he used sources.
Vote Placed by ESocialBookworm 2 years ago
ESocialBookworm
ChosenWolffAdam2Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: FF and concession. Also, Pro provided better written, well-sourced arguments.