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

The United States Should Expand Immigration

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 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/24/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,420 times Debate No: 72278
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)





This will be a debate on whether or not legal immigration should be expanded in the United States. I will be supporting the expansion of worker visa programs and a streamlined process for citizenship.

Con must not have less than 3 debates completed and must have knowledge that he or she will be able to complete the entire debate without worry. If you wish to accept this debate, then say so in the comments. People who have a higher elo than me are free to accept without requesting.

Burden of proof will be shared. I must convince the voters that expanded immigration would benefit society, while con must convince them that it would be a disadvantage to society.

The debate will be 4 rounds, with Round 1 being for the guidelines set on my part, and acceptance / first arguments from Con. Rounds 2-4 will be for arguments and rebuttals.

I hope for a thought-provoking debate!


I accept. Thank you for starting this debate, I wish my opponent good luck!
Debate Round No. 1



I thank my opponent for accepting this debate. Although I requested con to make the first arguments in round 1, I will start off the debate with my own arguments.


1. Immigrants are a net benefit to the US Economy

One of the most important aspects of the immigration debate is whether immigrants are economically beneficial or harmful to the United States. My first claim is that immigration increases the value of the US economy.

To understand how, it’s important to understand the economics of immigration. The consensus among economists is that free trade increases efficiency of the market and produces the greatest amount of wealth in society. This holds true with the labor market as well.

For evidence, Michael Clemens wrote in the Journal of Economic Perspectives that “If only 5% of the population in poorer countries immigrated to richer countries global incomes would rise by four to nine trillion dollars.(1)

This happens because, when a poor individual moves to a richer country, he or she is able to produce much more wealth for the same amount of effort, and thereby increasing his/her own income while also adding more value to the economy. This increases efficiency in the market, which can be measured by economists. The table below (from same source) shows various efficiency gains that result from partial or complete removal of immigration barriers.

Wealthier immigrants also greatly benefit the US economy. Currently, there is a way to immigrate to the US using an H1-B visa. The data that economists have gained from looking at the cost and benefits to the US economy from these immigrants show it is clear that they increase wealth in the economy. By looking at only a few entrepreneurs that came with this visa, it is clearly the benefits outweigh the costs. The table and graph below show individuals who founded major companies, and wages paid to by immigrants vs the wealth created by immigrants. (2)

I would support greatly increasing the current cap of 65,000 H-1B visas to allow for many other college-educated immigrants to come to this country and enhance the economy.

2. Expanded Legal Immigration and Unemployment

Another common contention among skeptics of immigration expansion is the idea that they steal jobs from other Americans. Although some citizens in a narrow range of occupations can be negatively effected by immigration, this is greatly offset by the amount of jobs and wealth that are created by having immigrants come to the country.

So, how do immigrants create jobs? It’s easier to see when an immigrant takes a job somewhere, but it’s much harder to see what’s happening behind the scenes in the economy.

In the economy, there is a supply and demand of labor just as there is for all other things. When there is the introduction of a new consumer into the economy, there is more demand for goods and services, which increases the demand for labor to produce these goods and services. For proof, we can look at the past 60 years where baby-boomers, women, and immigrants have all entered the work force with no effect to long term unemployment rates.

The table below demonstrates how unemployment rate does not have a significant correlation with immigration rates within the different regions of the country (3).

Also, the short video above will explain more in depth on how immigration relates to unemployment and income.

3. Expanded Legal Immigration Leads to less Illegal Immigration

My third argument for expanded immigration is that it would help with reducing the amount of illegal immigration the country receives.

To understand why, we need to look at our current immigration system. The complicated system we have in place makes it so that it is nearly impossible for an unskilled worker without any family ties in the US to come to this country legally. The graphic below explains in detail how the system works (4).

As you can see, our system is very restrictive in the type of people that can come to the USA legally, and so if a poor worker has a strong desire to come here, there is little other options besides coming here illegally and hoping for the best.

It is rational to have a system in place where even poor workers are given the chance to legally come to this country to work, even if it not with full citizenship. It would help curb the demand to come here illegally while also benefiting the US economy and the workers themselves.

As I have ran out of time, I will go more into depth on the topics I mentioned, as well as introduce new topics in relation to immigration next round.

I look forward to viewing my opponent’s response!








I'd like to define Immigration first since it wasn't defined in the first round.
[1] I'm·-mi·-gra·-tion
1 the act of immigrating.
2. A group or number of immigrants.

Rebuttal 1
Immigrant's don't save us or make us more money. We loose money.
I have one of 2 reasons.
[2] Illegal immigrants generally don’t pay taxes. The vast majority of illegal aliens would never even dream of paying income taxes, but Mexicans living in America send billions upon billions of dollars out of the United States and back to Mexico every single year.
[3]Although illegal aliens pay next to nothing in taxes, they have no problem receiving tens of billions of dollars worth of free education benefits, free health care benefits, free housing assistance and free food stamp benefits. Many communities in the United States now openly advertise that they will help illegal aliens with these things.
All of the illegal immigrant's don't have to pay for schooling or any type of insurance, including medical insurance. So who pays for this stuff? The state right? How is this any far to people whom were born in the U.S and work very hard and yet still have to pay for all of these basic necessities?
Rebuttal 2
It has been proven on many multiple occasions that immigrants steal jobs from hard working U.S citizens. U.S citizens work and train very hard for their jobs, and then they get let go because immigrants are cheaper to pay.
[4] Illegal immigrants take jobs away from American citizens. According to a review of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and Census Bureau data, legal and illegal immigrants gained over a million additional jobs between 2008 and 2010 even as millions of American citizens were losing their jobs during that same time period.
As you can see, its not just a fib but it's been proven. How is this fair to American families who have been working their butts off their whole entire life and then to get fired over some else because they are cheaper labor?

Why Illegal Immigration is bad

Impact on the Economy
"If a wealthy person is to hire unskilled laborers, he is more likely to go for illegal immigrants as he can pay them less as compared to what he will have to pay a legal immigrant or a local unskilled laborer. (The latter has to be paid in accordance to the stipulated pay scale.) This, in turn, will not just affect migrants who have entered the nation legally, but also those poor Americans for whom such labor work is the only means of livelihood - and further widen the rich-poor divide. Similarly, skilled professionals also form a significant portion of illegal immigrant population - most of who enter the country legally, but eventually violate visa terms by overstaying and continuing to work here. While many people suggest that even the illegal immigrants pay taxes, they fail to understand that the taxes these aliens pay are not sufficient to offset the cost of services that they avail while staying here illegally. Unabated influx of illegal immigrants also put tremendous pressure of public sector services, such as health care, education, etc."
This is just like what I have stated in my rebuttal, many Americans loose their job because they get replaced by immigrant's who aren't trained and aren't knowledgble in the field. They are cheap laborer's to the employers.
Not only dose illegal immigration cause economic problems, but it also causes danger and harm.
[6] The relationship between illegal immigration and crime rate has been making a lot of noise in the United States, with those against the practice often citing that illegal immigrants are responsible for the rising number of crimes in the society. The Secure Communities project initiated by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency identified 240,000 illegal immigrants who were convicted for criminal activities. The trend is most obvious in border states of the country, especially the US-Mexico border, wherein smuggling and related violent crimes are rampant. Other crimes which are often associated with illegal immigration include gang wars, identity thefts, rape, financial frauds, etc. Some sources also argue that this practice also gives rise to illegal activities such as prostitution and exploitation of workers as there is no monitoring authority to keep a check on what these illegal immigrants do.
Read more at Buzzle:;
Much violence takes place by borders due to drug smuggling and human trafficking and many more crimes. By allowing more immigration its like we are making it okay for these crimes to be committed, its okay for drug smuggling to take place. Then when there is stuff taking place at the borders, many officers get harmed and hurt trying to protect the border. Then just letting them in makes it all ok? No.
So not is illegal immigration bad for just the economy by loosing and wasting money , but for the safety of our states and the people.


Debate Round No. 2


Legal Immigration or Illegal Immigration?

I am very disappointed in Lee’s rebuttal, as it was completely unrelated to the premise of this debate, which is explained in the first round. As I said, “This will be a debate on whether or not legal immigration should be expanded in the United States.”

All of Con’s arguments and rebuttals completely ignored every argument I made in support of legal immigration, and instead she talks exclusively about illegal immigration. Thus, I have nothing to rebut in relation to the topic of this debate, expanded legal immigration.

I’m also unsure why con would define immigration by using immigrating within the definition. That is not very helpful.

Here is a more proper definition of immigration:

Immigration: "the process by which people come in to a foreign country to live there, or the number of people coming in.


I understand that there is a debate to be had about illegal immigration, but that is not the topic of this debate. This debate is about the pros and cons of the expansion of legal immigration.
In fact, the only time I even brought up illegal immigration is when I said legal immigration would decrease illegal immigration, which is something con would evidently support. I’m uncertain why she would ignore that argument.

There’s also a point in her arguments where she states a quote, “If a wealthy person is to hire unskilled laborers, he is more likely to go for illegal immigrants as he can pay them less as compared to what he will have to pay a legal immigrant or a local unskilled laborer.”

This claim actually demonstrates that she is supportive of legal immigrants, as she has concern over the pay of these immigrants. Again, why would Lee not support expanded legal immigration to cause a decrease in the demand of illegal immigration?


For the sake of keeping the debate professional and respectable, I’m going to bring up sources.

To start, Lee did not correctly quote most of her sources. She simply copy and pasted many of the words from these sources and didn’t add any quotes or context.

One of the most disturbing issues with con’s arguments is they have such terrible sources. First off, the first buzzle source leads to nowhere and the second buzzle source is an opinion piece of some random guy that didn't correctly source his article. It's much more reputable to find the original sources of any statistics, or atleast use a respected news organization or journalist.

The primary source con uses throughout her arguments, Western Voices World News, is a white supremacist organization that has hateful, jingoistic propaganda all over their website. I welcome all to open the website and judge for yourselves.

On the topic of immigration, their motives are clearly based on racial division and ensuring white supremacy. On the same website, you can find propaganda pieces like this flyer.

As a Hispanic myself, I’m offended that this source was cited, and I would like con to be more careful with her choice of sources in the future.


My opponent has failed to quote many of her sources, failed to debate on the actual topic, failed to even acknowledge my arguments, and sourced the most white supremacist organization I’ve ever seen.

So far, it’s clear that I deserve the conduct point on the grounds that she has not debated the given topic and failed to give the first arguments in round 1 as I requested. I have earned the argument points because I have been the only one to give arguments on legal immigration. I deserve the source points because my sources were reputable and hers were horrendous. I also deserve the spelling/grammar point as there was an abundance of spelling and grammar errors in her arguments last round.

I will give Lee next round to explain her reasons for using these sources (I am assuming negligence), rethink her entire argument, actually respond to my round 2 arguments on legal immigration, and debate expanded legal immigration. I will be not adding new arguments this round for expanded legal immigration in order give her this chance.

I sincerely hope con redeems herself in the next round.



Lee001 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Sadly, it looks like Lee has deleted her account. I really hope her decision to do so wasn't influenced by this debate. I am sorry if I was too harsh in my last round. I've seen some other debates of hers and she seemed liked a pretty good debater. She most likely didn't put too much time into this debate which is understandable. If it means anything to her, I think she could have made this a fantastic debate if she had the time to work on her arguments.



Lee001 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Zarroette 2 years ago
Pro's economic arguments are pretty damn good, but the cultural and/or racial aspect is completely neglected. Lee fell into the trap in arguing purely on economic terms. I'm not even sure Con can wins this debate, purely on economic terms, after reading Pro's arguments.
Posted by That1User 2 years ago
Lee001 disabled her account do to other reasons outside of this debate. She is a good debater, but it seems she rushed her arguments.
Posted by ColeTrain 2 years ago
I should clarify. I meant on the Con side. I'm sure Valladarex can get some good arguments in the round. ;)
Posted by ColeTrain 2 years ago
Those reasons are morally based. In reality, economic benefits and the purpose of foundation for our country override those very easily. If someone can put forth good arguments, I'll be surprised. Nothing against you, Valladarex, I don't want to sound rude. :)
Posted by Valladarex 2 years ago
Many people would disagree with you, Cole. A lot of people think we should be limiting both legal and illegal immigration more so than we already have been.
Posted by ColeTrain 2 years ago
This debate is unfairly weighted to the Pro side. Almost the only argument Con could make is in regards to a possible spike in illegal immigration. Other than that, legal immigration has benefits for the economy that can't be countered by any arguments, moral or otherwise.
Posted by Gabe1e 2 years ago
Interested but I have two more debates going on. Maybe some other time.
Posted by Kevin_Cardinale 2 years ago
I am the editor for eb5magazine. However, I don't meet the criteria to accept your challenge. I will be watching this with mild interest. I wish everyone well.
Posted by Valladarex 2 years ago
72 hours, and there's a 10,000 world limit.
Posted by Lee001 2 years ago
What's the time limit to post you're argument?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: FF. Latinos ftw
Vote Placed by Atheism_Debater 2 years ago
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 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 dsjpk5 2 years ago
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Ff