The Instigator
notpolicydebategod
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
brian_eggleston
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

We should ship all strong Liberals to Sweden.

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  
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: 4/20/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,423 times Debate No: 3724
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (25)
Votes (7)

 

notpolicydebategod

Pro

Sweden is a strong liberal state. I think that America should give all Liberals a free flight to Sweden, along with a little money for an apartment and food.

Liberals make us raise taxes tremendously and spend tons of money. The investment would be well worth it. The couple million it would take to send all the Liberals to Sweden would pale in comparison to a year of the Liberals in Congress.

This would significantly lower taxes because Conservatives and Libertarians would keep them low and this would significantly lower spending for the same reason.

Besides they would be happier in a liberal state with liberal laws and regulations.

And this would be a choice so nobody would be forced.

Imagine saying to the next Liberal that wants to raise your taxes, "I'd be happy to have my tax dollars pay for you to go on a flight to Sweden!"
brian_eggleston

Con

I would like to thanks my learned opponent for starting this debate, as is customary, and beg leave to humbly respond as follows:

You wrote: "The couple million it would take to send all the Liberals to Sweden would pale in comparison to a year of the Liberals in Congress."

I would contest that the U.S. Government would have to give each left-wing dissident quite a lot of money as Fairtrade herbal tea, organically-grown lentils and carbon-neutral, sustainable-sourced, ethically-aware, dolphin-friendly, line-caught tuna are all very expensive in Sweden.

In fact, they would have to financially underwrite each bearded sandal-wearer until they had learnt enough Swedish to get jobs as special-needs teachers, paediatric social workers or gay and lesbian workshop facilitators, and, given that the average salary in Nordic countries is EUR84,800 (US$129,720)* and that you would realistically need to subsidise them for an average of a year, US$2million would only allow you to deport 15 liberals, which would not make a significant difference in the number of tax and spend legislators.

* http://www.macdonaldandcompany.com...
Debate Round No. 1
notpolicydebategod

Pro

notpolicydebategod forfeited this round.
brian_eggleston

Con

My opponent has not responded in the allotted time, I assume he has more pressing matters to attend to, which is understandable.

I was aware that this debate was intended to be light-hearted and I have duly treated it as such, though my first response may have given the impression that I agreed that shipping left-wing legislators overseas was a desirable objective – it isn't.

The US must be one of the most right-wing countries in the developed world, even when the Democrats are in power could do with importing a few radical lefties from Europe in order to balance things up a bit!

They might start by introducing a national health service, free at the point of use. Yes, this would mean higher taxes, but you would no longer need to pay for private health insurance.

A story to illustrate my point: because my muscles get very tense at work, I go for a physiotherapy session every week. My masseuse (a blond stunner in her early twenties, but that's irrelevant) spends 45 minutes giving me a professional massage (and no, she doesn't do "extras") which leaves me totally refreshed and relaxed. This wonderful service is provided absolutely free of charge because I am resident in the UK.

The British National Health Service was created by left-wing legislators in the teeth of fierce opposition from the right. However, it is so popular now that no right-wing politician would dare to suggest anything other than to continue to increase funding for it.

I move you Vote Con for a healthier America.
Debate Round No. 2
notpolicydebategod

Pro

Sorry. Internet down for couple of daysbut I'm back.

- I would contest that the U.S. Government would have to give each left-wing dissident quite a lot of money as Fairtrade herbal tea, organically-grown lentils and carbon-neutral, sustainable-sourced, ethically-aware, dolphin-friendly, line-caught tuna are all very expensive in Sweden.
+ Sweden is socialistic democratic. Their welfare system will take good care of those Liberals. And they could eat on a budget. The health care taxes will be incredible like in Britain or Sweden. The taxes they impose on us when they have control of the house, senate, and white house, will cost us huge! Shipping them to Sweden will be a one time cost, not annually like taxes, and we'll save a huge amount of money. And the Liberals will be happy in their own country.

- They might start by introducing a national health service, free at the point of use. Yes, this would mean higher taxes, but you would no longer need to pay for private health insurance.
+ Free health insurance causes many problems. In Sweden, they have free health insurance. There is less money to be made in the medical profession there, so there are less doctors, which makes longer waiting lists. Those waiting can often go up to six months. 6 months of excruciating pain and ultimately, potentially, death. They have less resources and people die while waiting for heralth care. This is why people in the states go to Canada go there to buy drugs cheaper but if Canadians need surgery and fast they sneak over to the good ol' USA for quick surgery because waiting lists on free health care are incredible and you will likely die on that waiting list. A good alternative is tax breaks. If we give a tax break to pay for health care, there will remain competition. There will be a lot of resources and taxes wont grow. Taxes are way higher in Sweden, something those Liberals wouldn't mind.

Look at our private schools, they perform better than public by far, If we have public health care it will deteriorate further. Private schools have to compete so they do better. If our health care systems have to compete, they will do better and retain doctors and resources. If they have no incentive to compete, they will buy bad equipment, do bad service and pay little like in Sweden or Canada. A tax break for health care allows competition and a great health care system for free. The poor will have their care paid for because they dont pay very many taxes. Why not use this LIBERTARIAN plan?

Thank you. Please consider these arguments and the financial future of our country: VOTE PRO!
brian_eggleston

Con

Nice to see you back. While you were away I did the quiz on the Libertarian website (lp.org) which I seem to recall you recommended somewhere. What a nightmare! I always considered myself to be left wing but it appears that I am, in fact, a centrist with distinct Libertarian leanings! Since I trust the Libertarians to pose the questions in an unbiased manner, I'm now going to have to cancel my membership of the Labour Party!

Okay, back to the debate.

We both agree that introducing free health care would mean a hike in taxes, but that's not a bad thing if it means everyone in society receives decent treatment, regardless of their ability to pay.

Personally, I have a sense of noblesse oblige and am therefore happy to pay higher taxes in the knowledge that they may benefit someone less fortunate than myself.

Also, public health services can work if enough money is pumped in – in Britain there are few waiting lists and if a public hospital doesn't have space, a patient can go to a private hospital, home or abroad, and the NHS will pick up the bill.

Anyway, this debate was supposed to be about shipping lefties over to Sweden.

This would only be fair if the same amount of right-wingers were shipped to somewhere with few or no social provisions, where it's dog-eat-dog, survival of the fittest and let the devil take the hindmost, like Zimbabwe.

Since my opponent's proposal has not made does not include this essential provision, his plan is fundamentally unjust and undemocratic and your conscience should dictate that you vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
25 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by shwayze 8 years ago
shwayze
I couldn't have said it better.
Posted by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
Liberals should not be shipped out, but they should learn to appreciate the country in which they live, rather than trying to turn it into another garden-variety liberal European country. I think we have enough of those. Besides, the amount of socialism in which we partake today has already made us ideologically unrecognizable from what our founding fathers had in mind. We actually need to reverse the trend and get back to the disciplines that helped this country outgrow all of Europe in just 200 years.
Posted by notpolicydebategod 8 years ago
notpolicydebategod
u dont understand the debate. arg.

but thts fine. ship the conservatives to the vatican. they can b bible pushers there and no1 will mind. they will have tremendous security. and the money is not an issue.

but let the libertarians stay in the nation they started...the united states of america...
Posted by attrition 8 years ago
attrition
"And if we've learned anything in studying major history events, it is that human nature is separatist, and separatism can only lead to terror, tragedy, and catastrophes."

Great retort Korezaan
Posted by shwayze 8 years ago
shwayze
Handsoff is on the money.
Posted by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
BTW: Helping people is does not require much discipline or force as liberals believe. It is one of the most rewarding activities you can involve yourself in. Ask those evil capitalists, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet about charity.

It is hard work and self-reliance that takes discipline. If you don't believe me ask your parents and grandparents.
Posted by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
Yraelz,
My apologies on the spelling.

"I think helping people that you don't necessarily need to or have to takes a greater deal of discipline."

Good point, except that liberals want to make it so that we DO necessarily need to help others by imposing forced charity in the form pf taxes and wealth redistribution.

The bigger question is this: Why do you think it requires discipline to give away other people's money? And why do liberals consider themselves generous for wanting to give away that which belongs to others? Would you consider Robin Hood both disciplined and generous?
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Damnit... you totally spelled my name wrong and I didn't even notice.
Posted by Korezaan 8 years ago
Korezaan
Inherently selfish.... Oh hey, it's Libertarianism!
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Hmmm... I disagree Handsoff. I think helping people that you don't necessarily need to or have to takes a greater deal of discipline. Humans in my opinion are usually inherently selfish, without thinking things through anyways.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
notpolicydebategodbrian_egglestonTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by bexy_kelly 8 years ago
bexy_kelly
notpolicydebategodbrian_egglestonTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by attrition 8 years ago
attrition
notpolicydebategodbrian_egglestonTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Oolon_Colluphid 8 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
notpolicydebategodbrian_egglestonTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by ChevySdyme99 8 years ago
ChevySdyme99
notpolicydebategodbrian_egglestonTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by independent 8 years ago
independent
notpolicydebategodbrian_egglestonTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by brian_eggleston 8 years ago
brian_eggleston
notpolicydebategodbrian_egglestonTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03