The Instigator
George.Hollsinger
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
bvand
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Would the Gulf States Work More Efficiently as a Separate Nation

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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/18/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 769 times Debate No: 15468
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

George.Hollsinger

Pro

With recent developments, such as the oil spill, it's a wonder there hasn't been one word about the gulf states(Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and Florida) from succeeding from the U.S.. Texas even has the legal right to do so. It's obvious that the rest of the nation has anything but completely forgotten the spill. It was not even mentioned in President Obama's State of the Union. It is clearly evident that the oil is not gone. When you make something smaller and disperse it over a larger area it does not go away. Hence the term "dispersant". The oil is now at a molecular level working it's way up the food chain and most locals have stopped eating fish caught in our area. Meanwhile the process of snatching a claim from BPs iron clasp has made it impossible for many people to get a fraction of what they are owed. To top it off the U.S. government decided to hand it's air tanker contracts to a company well known for fraud instead of sending it to the hard working and honest Northrop-Grumman facilities in Alabama, a state which most northerners few as primitive and mostly agricultural. Alabama in fact has well balanced agricultural and industrial settings. Don't get me started on how idiotic Obama's response was either. Instead of consulting any of the gulf states he decided to put a huge halt on off shore drilling which is a major workforce for the coast. The United States may have finally gotten to big and divided to function as a whole. Why should the gulf be able to act only slowly through it's senators which are generally looked down upon by other states. Southern states are viewed much the same way many Americans view Islam. The public singles out the extremes and broadcasts them all over the world. We are much more intelligent than the rednecks you see on TV and the sleazy slow talking politicians that couldn't succeed as lawyers or in Bentley's case doctors. The latter is mainly due to the fact that the intellectuals in southern states know the prejudice faced by politicians from our state and as such stay well away from the title governor and senator
bvand

Con

Although I am not from the south and I am not as informed as you on the goings on there, I will accept your debate in good fun.

It seems as if ever since the the Civil War there has been talk about individual states or regions and how they would be able to fair on their own. I have heard a similar argument with California which currently comprises 13% of Americas GDP [1]. I have also heard that if California seceded it would be one of the 10 most powerful countries in the world (I am sure this would be similar with Texas as well). I think it is important to recognize that even though it may seem like California or the Southeast is not being treated fairly given the enormous role they play in our nation, there are many benefits to being part of America. Just because the global spotlight has turned away from the Gulf does not mean that the U.S. will stop cleaning it up (although more donations may be headed towards Japan).

Let us look at the benefits of remaining in the U.S.:
- Interstate commerce
- Federal grants for interstate highways, railways, etc.
- Military benefits
- Would the citizens of said country move to the U.S. or be happy with an unstable, new government?
- Drafting a new constitution
- Maybe silly but tourism. A majority of North-easterners (many Americans in general) travel to Florida for vacation. Would they still do so if they had to travel internationally/ not stay in the U.S.?
- The fine print of the American constitution. The way our constitution is structured is to keep us dependent on one another and keep us united.

I am sure there would be benefits to making the Southeastern states a new country. I simply think they do not outweigh the costs.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
George.Hollsinger

Pro

George.Hollsinger forfeited this round.
bvand

Con

I will wait for my thoughts to be challenged.
Debate Round No. 2
George.Hollsinger

Pro

George.Hollsinger forfeited this round.
bvand

Con

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by general52 6 years ago
general52
"the intellectuals"

Isn't their a phrase (this statement is more negative than the first one read it before you respond to this)
that you are ether apart of the solution or your a part of the problem. You appear condecending to other people in your neck of the woods.
Posted by general52 6 years ago
general52
I get the initial point about the oil and the economic fact I agree. However this question reminds so much about the civil war, and the southern states intially seceding because the northern states they were afraid would not let them perform economically in a certain way.

I think it is a terrible idea for the to leave the country I think it is a good idea to give permission to drill, we could easily I am sure drill for another hundered years at least oil would be so much cheaper if we would just produce more of it, also the unemployment rate would drop a lot I imagine if we created so many more jobs from it. I wish we also could just come up with a way to filter the co2 emissions to make people worried about the climate calm. I do not necessarily believe in man caused global warming but I do not disagree that destroying wild life and making people breathe smog is good.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
George.HollsingerbvandTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
George.HollsingerbvandTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF