The Instigator
kameron
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Mac
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

when in conflict the us should prioritze global poverty reduction over enviromental protection.

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...
Mac
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/2/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,733 times Debate No: 12891
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

kameron

Pro

Our president is currently trying to find alternative energys for the earth. This is great and all but i believe that we must prioritze reducing poverty because the people who are in trouble with no food and water don't care about the enviroment because they are the ones who eat from the trash and drink from a pond. so if we get these people that are in poverty to house them and feed them maybe they will start helping out the enviroment in the long run so this debate can be leaned toward either side but i choose prioritizing poverty reduction.
Mac

Con

I would like to thank Pro for the opportunity to debate on this topic. I look forward to a good debate.

"so if we get these people that are in poverty to house them and feed them maybe they will start helping out the enviroment in the long run so this debate can be leaned toward either side but i choose prioritizing poverty reduction."

REBUTTAL: In this point, Pro asserts that the poor would aid in helping the environment if we provided housing and resources for them. This is clearly a fallacy, as poor people wouldn't automatically become environmentalists if housing and food were provided to them. Additionally, the consumption of resources would harm the environment because various wastes that are produced in the aftermath of consumption.

Environmental protection should be prioritized over poverty reduction. The environment is the source of natural resources that humans need to survive, including food. If we don't prioritize the environment, third-world countries will collapse since these countries' economies depend largely on the agricultural industry.

For example, in Africa, desertification is currently affecting the state of its environment. If the issue of desertification is not prioritized, then by 2025, Africa would only be able to produce enough food to feed 25% of its population. Poverty will only continue to increase if the environment is not cared for because the environment helps produce food and other important resource.

Source of desertification in Africa: http://socyberty.com...

I look forward to my opponent's response.
Debate Round No. 1
kameron

Pro

Ok let me say this then since you believe that we depend on third world countries and that they depend on there economie's agricultural society than why did the united states loose 600 million eggs due to a salamonella out break. why you ask it is because of all the disease that comes from oh let me think homelss people whom live in poverty. Where is the number one cause of AIDS and HIV'S and again this comes from malnutrition and poverty levels that are so extreme that no amount of money can help it. So tell me this why is it that you would rather let people suffer from hunger and no water and focus more on the enviroment. The enviroment changes naturally and goes through constant changes so what we are going through is just a natural cause.
Mac

Con

Firstly, I would like to make it clear that I'm not against all measures to reduce poverty. I agree that poverty reduction is a significant global issue and I'm all for decreasing poverty rates. What I'm insisting is that protecting the environment is a more important issue than reducing poverty because the environment affects /everybody/ in the world. Pro's position only regards the well-being of those in poverty, while my position regards the well-being of every human, both wealthy and poor.

Without further ado, I will make my first arguments.

Definition of prioritize:
1. To arrange (items to be attended to) in order of their relative importance
2. To give priority to or establish as a priority
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Given these definitions for the word "prioritize," I will be arguing that environmental protection is an issue that is of more significance than reducing poverty. Con's duty is to prove that poverty reduction should be held as a higher priority than environmental protection.

1) The poor benefit from the improvement of the environment

The Nile River is an important source of water for those who live near the river. Unfortunately, water pollution is a large problem (Source 4) for the river. Toxic waste-water and agricultural pollutants often go into the river and this is crucial, considering that the Nile is a large source of fresh water for nearby inhabitants. If the water is contaminated, the people wouldn't be able to use the water for agricultural and personal uses. Even the poor would benefit from the improvement of the environment because it would enable them to have a wider access to resources (such as fresh water).

2) Water pollution is an issue that affects every person in the world

Consider China's environmental situation. Zhou Shengxian, the head of the State Environmental Protection Administration stated in an environmental conference that "(Source 1) If environmental protection efforts continue to lag behind economic growth, pollution will become even more rampant." Shengxian indicates that if environmental protection efforts are not prioritized as much as economic growth, pollution will eventually become a severe problem that will drastically affect China's future economic and social stability. In 2005, there were over seventy-six severe incidents of pollution in China. One of the many incidents included a spill of cadmium in the Beijiang River, which threatened the drinking and agricultural water source in that province. As you can imagine, providing a safe water supply to those in poverty cannot even be possible if efforts are not taken to protect water sources from pollution.

Water pollution is one of the most serious and important problems in the world. Humans depend on clean water for industrial, household, agricultural and recreational activities. Large bodies of water are constantly contaminated by organic water pollutants, inorganic water pollutants and macroscopic wastes that come from untreated sewage waste.

Organic water pollutants include: (Source 2) detergents, food processing wastes, insecticides, fuels, chloroform and tree and bush debris.

Inorganic water pollutants include: ammonia, chemical wastes, fertilizers, heavy metals, silt and acidity that is produced by industrial discharges.

Macroscopic pollution: various types of trash.

As you can see from the various types of water pollution, it is important to reduce as much water pollution as possible. Countries, such as Canada, are putting effort into reducing water pollution. The province of Ontario recently implemented a ban on pesticides (Source 3) because pesticide runoff harms the water and the biodiversity of life in bodies of water. Such laws are crucial for the well-being of the environment.

Fresh water is important to sustain life on earth. The need for fresh water not only affects those in poverty but affects those not living in poverty as well. Environmental protection is clearly a more significant issue than poverty reduction because environmental protection affects people in poverty AND people who don't live in poverty. Environmental protection should be prioritized over poverty reduction because the well-being of the environment affects every person in the world, while poverty reduction only affects people who are in poverty.
I await my opponent's response.

Source 1: http://worldcup.china.com.cn...
Source 2: http://en.wikipedia.org...
Source 3: http://www.thestar.com...
Source 4: http://sitemaker.umich.edu...
Source 5: http://abcnews.go.com...
Debate Round No. 2
kameron

Pro

kameron forfeited this round.
Mac

Con

My opponent forfeited this round and has yet to refute my points. That's not fun :(
Debate Round No. 3
kameron

Pro

kameron forfeited this round.
Mac

Con

My opponent forfeited the past two rounds and did not address any of my points. My argument remains unrefuted.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
:p :)
Posted by 4tunatecookie 6 years ago
4tunatecookie
Nationals. I'm so jealous. My partner and I went to state and district, but we didn't rank high enough to go to nationals.
This was our first topic together too! But we sucked so bad. We had the most cliche, straight-from-PF-briefs arguments ever. In retrospect, our contentions for this topic were kind of embarassing.
And yes. PRO and CON need to step it up.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
oh you don't even know. I don't know (that's a funny way to start this sentence :P) if you've debated that topic in your high school before, but my ex-partner and I [we graduated] had such ridiculously convoluted contentions. The thing is, it was our first tournament together, and after winning first there we went on to go state and national. We also became reaaaaally close friends, and I accredit it to this topic. This debate in specific, on the other hand, saddens me :/
Posted by 4tunatecookie 6 years ago
4tunatecookie
M93samman, you read my mind.
Unfortunately, judging by the way the debate's been progressing, the PRO and CON won't cover nearly as much material as the typical PF team would. Which is a shame, because this is such a multi-faceted topic, and you can take it in so many directions.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
this is oddly reminiscent of the PF topic from last year... "Resolved: When in conflict, the UN should prioritize poverty reduction over environmental protection"...
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
kameronMacTied
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 Jurn77 6 years ago
Jurn77
kameronMacTied
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:16 
Vote Placed by Mac 6 years ago
Mac
kameronMacTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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