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

Donald Trump's proposed border wall is more beneficial than not.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/14/2018 Category: Economics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,030 times Debate No: 110709
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (36)
Votes (2)




Debates like these are the reason I came back to this site.

I'm happy I found someone who knows what they're talking about when it comes to subjects such as this, too many times I can't have a debate let alone conversation without someone throwing baseless accusations and insults around instead of explaining their point of view, so thank you in advance, Nd2400, for debating me on this topic.

I believe a border wall between Freedom Land and Mexifries is benefical overall.

Nd2400 believes it not beneficial, to say the least. You can elaborate more on your stance in round one if you like.

Anyway, round one is acceptance. Whatever happens after is whatever.

Good luck and thanks again for accepting this debate!


We'll first i want to thank Mister_Man's for this debate. To be honest, i been waiting for this type of debate to show itself. Mostly people on this site been on my side of the wall on this issue. So, i couldn't debate them with i agree with them. So, finally i have a challenger, Mister_Man's who will argue for the wall.

I could elaborate on my stance. But you already know some of the details i will point out. So, i will wait until round two to show you and the viewers why I'm against this wall proposal.

"I would build a great wall, and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me, and I"ll build them very inexpensively. I will build a great great wall on our southern border and I"ll have Mexico pay for that wall." Donald Trump said this during his campaign trail.
But he lied.
Mexico already said they will not pay for this wall. So, "his administration also seeks taxpayer money to cover the costs"(1) With that said, i will ask you why would want American taxpayers to pay for this Wall when in fact Trump lied about how he would fund this project?


I'm looking forward to your response. And I'm looking forward to this highly important discussion.

By the way the answer is Yes, i will accept this debate.....
Debate Round No. 1


Thanks, Nd2400. In regards to Trump saying he'll get Mexico to pay for it, it was a great idea, but wasn't ever feasible and was just another case of Trump implying that what he wants to happen will happen, before even looking into it. He isn't a politician (one reason I like him), and he has no idea how implementing policies work, so I don't blame him for thinking he can just snap his fingers and have a cheque delivered from the president of Mexico, dotting his I's with hearts.


My immediate argument in favour of the proposed border wall will be from a financial standpoint. It is estimated that illegal immigrants cost the country approximately $116billion per year [1]. This is just way too much, and a wall would have cut this number in half if implemented not too long ago, considering approximately half of all illegal immigrants in the US arrive by "hopping the border" [2]. And of course we need to bring up the cost of the wall, which is estimated to be at $18billion [3] - I'm sure you'll have a different number, lol.

So taking these three statistics into account, implementing a border wall will eventually reward the US by saving more than it costs. Yes, people will continue to overstay visas etc, however cutting illegal immigration in half will benefit the country financially, in a major way.

In the case of criminal offenses, Illegal immigrants are upwards of 146% more likely to commit crimes than citizens, and almost twice as likely to commit serious crimes such as murder, rape, etc [4]. There is a large cultural divide between illegal immigrants and American citizens, for a plethora of reasons which I won't get into now, but these cultures take some time to integrate with others. Not saying one is bad or worse than the other, but life in Mexico and South American countries is significantly harder, poorer, and subjected to more violence than in America, so it's natural that these are ways of life and many people bring this way of life with them when they sneak into the country.

To add to our divide, the amount of illegals that don't have the ability or resources to learn or speak English just adds to a major barrier between us. It would be a whole other story if we could communicate flawlessly and held similar moral/cultural values, but about half of Latino immigrants (not illegals, so imagine what that number would be) don't believe they should learn English. While yes, the other half believe they should, half believe they shouldn't, which is way too many [5].

Another argument to actually help the illegal immigrants with their own personal well-being would be the fact that implementing a border wall will stop them from attempting to walk to the US, which has resulted in thousands of deaths in the past few years [6].

I'm all for people looking for a better life, and if that means they wish to immigrate to a new country, by all means I'm happy that they want to do so. I also understand that the immigration process is quite lengthy and I'm for an immigration reform to significantly lower the wait time and cost of immigrating to the US, but that doesn't change the fact that in the meantime, coming into the country illegally means 1) you most likely aren't paying taxes, so you're a drain on the economy, 2) nobody has any idea who you are or what you're doing here, and 3) you're contributing to a major cultural divide. The amount of illegal immigrants and people in support of illegal immigrants who rioted and acted overly aggressive during anti-Trump protests were absolutely disgusting, and basically proved that a large number of these people are not fit to live in America, and implementing a border wall will keep more aggressive, violent people out.

And I'm of course not saying every single illegal immigrant is a horrible person, but it doesn't change the fact that they're breaking America's laws in a multitude of areas, and unless laws all of a sudden don't apply to people because they're from another country, I can't see how keeping it the way it is now is beneficial at all.

Thanks, and on to you!



We'll firstly i want to thank Mister_Man's for this debate again. You did a good job on your opening act. But there were some misguided information you posted in your argument. I will elaborate on this soon. But i will talk about why the wall isn't a good idea first.

I'm against this wall proposal for variety of reasons.

But before i go further. I just need to mention this again because it's a pretty big piece. During Trump campaign trail he said more than once he wanted Mexico to pay for this wall. And a lot of his votes was base on this false hood. Now Trump is seeking Congress and then the US tax payers to fit the bill. That sound ludicrous to me. Saying one thing and then back tracking and now saying the opposite. Plus it not like it will be cheap, or fix any of the problems anyway. Now i will talk about the facts about this wall proposal.

The cost of the Wall.

The estimates for the wall vary greatly. It" was once said it would cost no more than 10 billions dollars. Well now this figured keep on growing. We have 12 to 15 to 15 to 20 billions. "Peters" spokesman Jacob Peters said the congressman used the $21.6 billion estimate because it "comes from the internal report done by the Department of Homeland Security." (2) But there was another report on this." "Democratic staff of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee said"nearly $70 billion " not including the significant costs and legal resources required for land acquisition". (3) At this point in time it hard to determine the actual price tag on this wall, because it lack of clarity.

"Physically imposing in height," ideally 30 feet high but no less than 18 feet, sunk at least six feet into the ground to prevent tunneling under it" (4) "Undocumented workers and drugs will still find their way across any barrier the administration ends up building". (5) So, such a wall will be irrelevant. "Smuggling tunnels can be as deep as 70 ft." (6) So, the wall will go only six feet into the ground. So, this does nothing to stop the drugs from coming in. There are other ways this wall will be exposed. One going though it. By digging a hole though the wall. Going over the wall by rope and other supplies. Another way is this going around the wall, like going though the river or by using the Pacific ocean. So, no the wall would not help, nor deter anyone from crossing illegally.

"The wall is increasingly irrelevant to the drug trade as it is now practiced because most of the drugs smuggled into the U.S. from Mexico no longer arrive on the backs of those who cross illegally. Instead, according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, most of the smuggled marijuana as well as cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines comes through the 52 legal ports of entry on the border". (7) So, again this will not stop anything. Just waste of money and time. Imagine where this 21 billions or more could go! Like school, hospital, feeding the less unfortunate, and more. I will get to this part more in detail in the later rounds.

I wanted to point out something, before i go on." You said this "considering approximately half of all illegal immigrants in the US arrive by "hopping the border" Your source is kind of out dated because it was back in 2006. It 2018 right now. So, this was published 12 years ago. The reason I'm bring this up is this it Irreverent to this debate. Because it just outdated. There are new facts and new information out there. I will go over this topic actually right now.

You being misguided on where the illegal immigrants are coming from. You mentioned Mexico is the main source of our so called problems. And saying Mexico is the only problem. "43.2 million immigrants living in the U.S. in 2015, making up 13.4% of the nation"s population" (8) that's a big number. But when you break that number down, it not all coming from Mexico. Actually you may be surprised but they actually only rank second for illegal immigrants at "11,576, 253 at 26.8%" the first on this list is "South and East Asia at 11,615,903 at 26.9%" (9) So, if you count both of these numbers that barely over half at 53.7%. It not just Mexico who you claim to be the problem, but they are other nations who are coming in illegally.

"Number from Mexico declining and the number from other regions rising, according to the latest Pew Research Center estimates". (10) In the same research it also stated this "Mexican been declining in recent years: There were 5.6 million Mexican unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. in 2015 and 2016, down from 6.4 million in 2009". (11) Another key stat to keep in mind is this. There are "Six states account for 59% of unauthorized immigrants: California, Texas, Florida, New York, New Jersey and Illinois" (12) So again, it doesn't add up to build a wall. To keep a very small fraction of illegals out. When you have only two out of the six states that would have the wall.

The U.S. BORDER PATROL have seen declining numbers over the last couple of years on Illegal immigrants crossing the Border. "In 2016 the number was 274,821 then in 2017 it went down to 199,844" (13)
"inadmissible refers to individuals encountered at ports of entry who are seeking lawful admission into the United States but are determined to be inadmissible." (14)

You suggested that illegal immigrants steal U.S. jobs and suppress U.S. wages.
"There is little evidence to support such claims. According to a comprehensive National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine analysis, immigration does not significantly impact the overall employment levels" (15) Most undocumented workers get paid less. And work in "include agriculture, construction, manufacturing, hospitality services, and seafood processing." (16) So, moving these individuals will actually hurt the economy. Not make it better. "According to the state and local tax data analysis"published by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)"undocumented immigrants contribute about $11.6 billion to the economy annually, including nearly $7 billion in sales and excise taxes and $3.6 billion in property taxes". (17) I will go further in details on that later. As for now the floor is yours.






10, 11, & 12.



Debate Round No. 2


Well, that was definitely an interesting rebuttal.

From arguing against points I never made, to bringing up Trump's statements after we agreed beforehand that his comments weren't relevant to this debate, this was not the response I was expecting. However you did bring up several great points, so thanks for that!

I agree that Trump made quite the rash statement by saying Mexico will pay for the wall before he even began negotiations, but this is irrelevant to the implementation and pros/cons to the wall itself, and on top of that, we already agreed not to bring this up (although I can understand if you were confused by my sarcastic name for Mr. President in the comments).

You addressed later in your argument the following: "Imagine where this 21 billions or more could go!" So I think it makes sense to use the same number you ended on, as you're right that there are multiple sources claiming multiple figures. So $21billion is the cost of the wall. Considering the US is in $20trillion of debt, adding $21billion to it for long-term gain/saving would make sense.

You claim that the wall "will not help," "will not deter anyone from crossing illegally," and is "irrelevant." I beg to differ.

The Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, implemented a border wall on multiple border crossings along several bordering countries to Israel, and it cut illegal immigration and acts of terrorism down by up to 99 percent [1]. When his plan was in the brainstorming stage, I'm sure multiple people told him that people would just tunnel under or climb over the wall as well, but as the facts clearly show, border walls are extremely helpful when it comes to putting a major dent in illegal immigration and in many cases, terrorism.

Another amazing example of a border wall being incredibly effective would be Spain's border wall with Africa [2]. Approximately 2,100 illegals crossed the border before implementation of the wall, and a mere 100 crossed afterwards. This is a 95% decrease in illegal immigration, thanks to a border wall. Again, I'm sure when this plan was in the brainstorming stage, people were criticizing the wall in the same way you are now, but they were quickly shut down when it was proven to be one of the most effective ways - if not the most effective way - of cutting down illegal immigration.

So to say a border wall is ineffective, irrelevant, etc. is just a lie. You bring up some possible tactics to bypass the wall, but this is probably the only irrelevant thing in this argument, as the same thing was most likely said when multiple other countries were thinking of implementing a border wall, and their idea - same one as yours - was quickly proven to be not true.

Drug Trade
You're right, drugs enter primarily through other ports of entry. This wall is not meant to put a halt to the drug trade. Unfortunate.

Amount of Illegals that hop the Border
You misunderstood me. I never said Mexicans are the primary problem, I said illegal immigration over the US-Mexico border is. I mentioned South America in my argument because people from South America go up to Mexico and hop the border into America. It's also possible that people fly or boat into Mexico to jump over the border, but that's less likely. So my argument isn't "Mexicans are the problem," it's "illegal immigration from Mexico is the problem," which could literally be anybody.

My source is a bit outdated, but your source is for legal immigrants, not illegal immigrants. So your entire argument is irrelevant.

Illegal immigrants may be less of a problem than they were in previous years, however less of a problem =/= no problem. There are still millions, and there are still plenty illegally entering the country. And the idea that illegals only hop the border and stay in the bordering State falls pretty flat, as illegals could (and do) very easily keep on migrating north to different States. However, over five million illegals live on border States [3], so to suggest a wall is useless because you think the only way illegals get into non-border states would be by plane or boat, doesn't make much sense. If the wall were implemented earlier, by your own logic, it would have kept out over five million illegals.

You're reading the wrong stats. Although you're right that illegal immigration has slowed down a bit, according to your own source [4], there were still 310,000+ apprehensions of people who were illegally in the country in 2017. That's a lot. And that's simply people who were caught. Less people were caught than the year before, but there are still plenty that haven't been caught.

"You suggested that illegal immigrants steal U.S. jobs and suppress U.S. wages."
No. I never said that in my argument. You also copied and pasted about 90% of your "response," which isn't very helpful.

What I said was, illegals don't pay much in taxes. You say they contribute about $11.6billion in taxes per year. If current trends continue, the US will take home about $6.34trillion in taxes for 2018 [5]. According to your source [6], illegals make up 3.4% of the population. And if my math serves me right, 215,560,000,000 is 3.4% of 6,340,000,000,000. So they seem to be about two hundred billion dollars short of what they should be paying in taxes. So yeah, taxes (or lack of) are an issue with illegals, considering they're paying about five percent what they should be.

Well, that's about it. Thanks!



Thank you again for your reply. Getting pretty interesting here. And maybe a little heated. What a debate for without a little passion? Anyways my actual first round has a lot of facts in it. So, yeah my was probably like 50% from quotes. But i believe i won't need to much more as we proceed.

Oh yeah, i only brought up trump again because i did so in my opening round. Way before we agree on not too mentioned him. Anyways i will go on with this debate. Because it is more than what he said or they said.

The wall part in other countries

"The city of Jerusalem has been surrounded by walls for its defense since ancient times".(17) The reason for Jerusalem, is much different to have these walls than just for illegal immigrants. Actually they have these walls for war purposes and for holy reasons. They didn't built these walls, for illegal. They build them because they were under attack. In fact they still are by the terrorist group called Hezbollah. Another factor is this. There not many people who wants to live there. And Jerusalem, don't let just anyone live there. It hard to get a citizenship there.
Europe is a little bit interesting. Like Spain you mention. But all the credit can't be on there barbed wire fences. It "called refugee relocation programme. According to the plan devised by the EU last autumn to redistribute a quota of refugees throughout its 28 Member States"(18) this is the main reason why the numbers are down for Spain immigrants. The Great Wall of China have a wall too. But they build it for self defense. Like in a war. What Trump, wants this wall is totally different. It not for war, it not for drugs, it not for illegal getting in. Because the facts are they are less and less immigrants crossing the border this way. It just doesn't add up in my opinion. Another thing you said, other countries had the same worry of building a wall. Is false. Most of them build the wall for self defense like in a war. Most of the other countries didn't have tunnels running from one side to the other end. Like we have in Mexico and the US. Mexico have hundreds of tunnels. So, this Is just one example why the wall isn't a good idea. The wall will not go deep enough to stop anyone from crossing. Plus the other ways i mention in my previous round.

"Considering the US is in $20trillion of debt, adding $21billion to it for long-term gain/saving would make sense." Yes it will add to this deficit. But they is no proof that this wall will save in the long run. That just presuming things will add up on your end. When it not actual factual.

Amount of Illegals that hop the Border

"Most South American immigrants obtained lawful permanent residence in the United States (also known as receiving a green card) through family ties."(19) Plus it's a very small size in actual illegal crossing form the border. I give you the wrong stat from that source i give. So, sorry for that. Now here is the actual stat "In 2016 there were 415,816 Apprehensions And in 2017 there were 310,531 Apprehension."(20) this mean those numbers are declining. And you agree on the declining part. So, there for it not Irrelevant. Why build a wall that does absolutely nothing in return. If anything we need to hired more border patrol. That could help the local economy much better than a wall. Border patrol actually have proof on having a better impact on illegal immigrants than a wall. You said the wall will benefit the whole US, in the long run. Sorry i do not agree nor see that out come as realistic.

"Three-fifths of those who don"t owe income tax work and thus pay Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. And almost everyone pays state and local sales taxes, excise taxes, or some other levy." (22); So, yes that includes illegal immigrants. They pay sales taxes, and local taxes just like the rest of us. Another important factor here is this not every one pay income taxes. Look at the big corporations, and people who make a lot of money. They try to pay the least amount possible or none at all. That's a problem too. So you say illegal don't pay there share. While then you have to look at US citizens too. Mostly at the very top. They don't pay their fair share. By the way, the 116 billions you mention in your earlier round. Counts for every illegal immigrants. And that way less than Mexico illegal immigrants who only count toward 1/4 of the illegal population. So, again the wall Doesn't add up to any values. Just waste of money. Kind of like fixing a old boat. You never really found the real cause. Just keep adding money toward it, until everything is fix. That's why it called a money pit. Another thing that is a fact illegal immigrants do the work that most Americans don't want. Like farming, construction, agriculture, and get paid less for these type of jobs. So with out some illegal immigrants our economy would suffer. You can't say American would love to work these jobs. Because it wouldn't be true. You think most Americans would love the less pay? With no benefit? I don't think so....

I also have a friend who actually a illegal immigrants. He gave me permission to tell his side of his story. I won't give out his real name, on this public display. But his story is pretty interesting. I won't have enough space to tell his whole story. His mother and father was born in Mexico and so was he. But his two younger sisters and younger brother was born here in the States. Same with his nieces and nephews. He went to High School and Graduate. Then he was deported to Mexico. Then he came back, from the same tunnels i mention earlier. He got married to a US citizens. He was working up in the farm area picking onions, and tomatoes. He then went up to Alaska, and worked at the sea duck, where he worked, one of his many jobs like skinning salmon. He then came back to California then got deported again. He has his working vasa and green card. But he didn't actually get them until he was married. He work at a car place right now and going to a community college. By the way he came back again form a different tunnel. His personal opinion also translate, toward this debate. He don't believe the wall is the answer. They are so many tunnels, the wall won't even scratch the surface. Plus he not getting anything form the government, no SSI, no medical card, no food stamps. He still pays sale taxes And local taxes, just like the rest of us. And it not just his story there are many like him.

We can buy other more important things. Instead of a wall.

1. Hire more "teachers like 50,000 more."
2."50,000 miles of road repair"
3."Feed more than 3.4 million people three meals a day for a year".
4."Build new streetcar systems in 50 cities"
5. "Power more than 700,000 homes with solar energy"
6. "Build 294,000 homes and end homelessness for families in America" (23)

I though i had more to say in this round. Oh well. I guess i will use my character count in my final round. LoL
The floor is your again....
Debate Round No. 3


Haha no problem, I was referring to your final paragraph as it was mostly made of quotes lol

Also thanks in advance for a good debate. Glad it was four rounds instead of five actually, I think five would have gotten a bit repetitive.


Walls in other countries
I was referring to the country of Israel, not the city of Jerusalem. Good to know border walls have been effectively implemented there as well, though. Regardless of the reason for implementation of these walls, the fact that they keep out illegals is proof enough that they'll work for the reason Trump wants to implement his.

Good point about the refugee relocation programme, however the fact still stands that 3,700 people have tried to illegally sneak into the country, and only 100 have succeeded [1]. That's a 2.7% success rate, which is the definition of a successful border wall.

You claim that Trumps wall isnotfor illegals? That's literally the primary reason he's going to implement it. Just because there aren't as many illegals hopping the border as there once was doesn't mean this isn't a problem. You say later in your argument that over three hundred thousand were caught last year, which is still quite a few people.

In regards to the tunnels, I have a few quick points there - There aren't that many (approximately 170 found and sealed up, estimated to be not very many more if at all), they're almost all in California and Arizona, the majority have been filled in on the US side already, and the human smuggling aspect of it is minimal, difficult, dangerous, and incredibly more likely to be caught when they leave through the other side [2][3]. If theonlymethod of sneaking into the country via foot is by tunnel, the numbers would still drastically decrease. It's a good idea if we were talking about five or ten illegals every now and then, but hundreds of thousands just won't make it through.

Of course there's no proof that the wall will save money in the long run, as it hasn't been implemented for us to find out yet, which is why we're having this debate. With that being said, the numbers all add up. It's estimated that border agents have a success rate of about 40% [4], so if your 310,000 is 40% of the total, that means it's estimated that 465,000 made it successfully. If we're able to stop hundreds of thousands of illegals from sneaking into the country, that's stillbillionsa year saved, as each illegal costs about $8,000 [5], so simple math says $8,000 x 465,000 illegals = $3,720,000,000. The wall will pay for itself in less than six years.

You seem to think that because the number of apprehensions are declining, it's irrelevant to bring it up. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. There are still hundreds of thousands of people sneaking into the country illegally. If the number had dropped from 415,000 down to 30, you'd have a point. But over three hundred thousand apprehensions and an estimated four hundred thousand + successful attempts just shows that there is still a significant problem. The only irrelevant thing is the number declining.

As far as hiring more border patrol, we just don't have the resources for that. For it to be successful, we'd need at least one border patrol guard per half mile at the very most, and even then it would be better if they worked in pairs. We would need 24/7 security, meaning at the very least six guards per position per day, assuming they work in pairs. We'd need to pay their salaries, supply them with more weapons and vehicles and so on. The border is just under 2,000 miles long, so that's 2guards x 4,000 positions (every half mile) = 8,000 guards per shift, x 3 shifts = 24,000 guards per day at the very least. It would even be more than that considering they'd most likely have weekend guards, so an additional 24,000 guards for the weekends, unless each guard worked seven days a week. That is well over the entirety of the current amount of guards the US has across the country [6], and therefore improbable and almost impossible to achieve.

To suggest the wall will do "absolutely nothing" is absurd.

Unfortunately your source doesn't work for your "three fifths" figure, but when people reference amount of taxes paid, they're referring to American citizens, not illegals. I gave you the stats for amount of taxes illegals pay, and you even showed that they pay a mere eleven and a half billion, compared to the two hundred and fifteen billion their demographic should be paying.

Billionaires not paying their "fair share" is irrelevant, that's a debate for another time. The average citizen pays $21,000 a year in taxes [8], whereas the average illegal immigrant would pay less than $1,000, given they are responsible for about $11.6billion total, divided by the approximately 12million illegals living in the country. So it just doesn't add up, and proves that illegals clearly do not contribute their fair share to the economy and taxes.

Demographic makeup
You must have missed my point where I mentioned Central and South Americans hop the US-Mexico border, to say the only demographic that hops the border are Mexicans is just false information. There are 8,425,000 illegals from Latin America living in the US [7], and the majority of them hopped the border. The remaining several million are from overseas or Canada. I can cut my tax number down to about $2,500,000,000 - a number that is still ridiculously high and if something is done (implementation of a border wall), this number will shrink with deportation and inaccessibility of illegal land crossings.

"The wall doesn't add up to any values"
Well, I did the math and explained in several different ways how it's inexpensive compared to the current national debt the US has, how it'll cut down on illegal immigration, costs of illegal immigration, and so on. So yeah, it "adds up to values."

The fact that one of your arguments is "we need illegals for cheap, near slave-level labour" is kind of sad. Advocating for slave wages isn't that great. That's also a completely separate argument to have, as I disagree that anyone should be paid less than minimum wage. Lots of American citizens work agriculture, construction and farming, but are paid minimum wage at the least, and refuse to work for less than such, which is fair. Saying "illegals will be our slaves and will work for pennies on the dollar" is a human rights violation, is illegal, and is just morally unjust. On top of that, allowing illegals to work at pennies to the dollar doesn't help American citizens get paid fair wages, and keeps jobs away from American citizens as employers can just hire illegals for significantly cheaper. As far as I'm concerned, the well-being of American citizens come before that of illegals.

That's a good story of your friend, however it seems like he's been doing significantly better since he came here legally. He was hiding from people and picking onions and tomatoes, but as soon as he got his green card and visa legally, he was able to attend college and get himself a steady job at a car company. Sounds like he would have been better off if he got a green card and visa to begin with.

However your one anecdotal experience is not representative of the entire illegal community of over ten million people. Like I said before, I'm sure many have good intentions and are good people, but we just can't afford to have so many people living in the country illegally.

The US is $20trillion in debt, if they wanted to repair roads and hire teachers, they could, as well as build a wall. It's easy to say "here's things we could spend the money on instead," but it's kind of irrelevant since we could just do that as well as build the wall. $40billion would be 2% of the debt.

So to summarize, since this is my last round already... :'(

-The cost of the wall is affordable. Our agreed upon number of $21billion is a fraction of the current national debt and won't make a huge impact in what the country owes.
-It seems as though life is significantly better for legal immigrants than illegal immigrants.
-Slave wages are a human rights violation and should not even be considered an argument in favour of illegal immigration.
-The average illegal pays less than 5% of what the average citizen pays in taxes.

-Illegals are responsible for a lost $205billion in taxes every year. Deportation and implementation of a wall would cut away at this number.
-There are still 310,000 apprehensions of illegals per year and an estimated 465,000 who get away. That's a number a border wall could put a huge dent in.
-There are multiple examples of walls implemented in other countries that have proved to be upwards of 99% effective against illegal immigration.
-Tunnels are a rarity nowadays and the amount of people who would come illegally through tunnels if a wall were to be built would be minuscule.
-A wall would push people to immigrate legally which means they would adapt to our culture and learn our language so there isn't such a huge cultural divide.
-Crime rates would drop significantly if a wall were implemented.

Anyway, thanks for a good debate! I'm glad you presented such good arguments and you really had me thinking and having to do a lot of research. I sure gained a lot of knowledge and am even more in favour of the wall now ;)



I wanted to thank you for this highly competitive debate. It been an honor debating you. It truly has help me learn a little more on this subject. I know this is my last round. So, i will give it one last go around.


Ok. So you were talking about The Israeli wall. Still it the same idea as i mention with Jerusalem. "Israel considers it a security barrier against terrorism" (23); Israeli wall is to protect them from a terrorism attack not from illegal immigrants. Another thing i mention, is this no one want to go in to Israeli because it so hard to get a citizenship there. Trump wall is very different, he want to build it on misguided information. Most walls are build during a time of war. And we are not at war are we? The answer is no. So, this isn't evidence, in support of a wall. They are reasons why this so called wall in Israeli work and that's because no one want to go over there. That's a big reason.

Spain fencing

"Very good operational cooperation, between Spain, Senegal, Mauritania and Morocco has significantly reduced the pressure on the route towards the Canary Islands and south of Spain"(24) Plus the Refugee Relocation Programme i mention earlier is what really helping with these lower numbers on the immigrants crossing the border. Not so much the fencing you talked about. "Irregular migrants using boats to reach Spain was 78% higher" (25) (Page11) there is more and more evidence the migrants are using other ways to enter the country. They entering more in the northern part of Africa too. "Walls are never the solution," said Federica Mogherini, the EU High Representative, Foreign Affairs." (26)
Trump wall will not work. I will go further in detail on it right now.

The tunnels

"Border tunnels left unfilled on Mexican side do not fill the tunnels with concrete once they have been discovered." (27) You said this "If theonlymethod of sneaking into the country via foot is by tunnel, the numbers would still drastically decrease" You have no proof on this matter. Because the fact is this. If the wall was build. More tunnels will drastically increase. Why? For one the cartels and illegal immigrants would make new tunnels. They already know how to dig these tunnels, so it no mystery. Another thing, they will still use the olds one because it wasn't adequately done right to fill these tunnels. One more thing, there are a lot of tunnels which haven't been found. If you really want to cross the border illegally you will found other ways to cross." You also mentioned "hundreds of thousands just won't make it through". Again showing no proof on how many would or wouldn't make it though these tunnels. Just assuming. If you really want to stop the illegal crossing then hire more patrol border. I will get to that part more in detail later on in this round.

The cost

You said this "If we're able to stop hundreds of thousands of illegals from sneaking into the country". Again you are assuming this part. Not ACTUAL FACTS. Like i mentioned before, there are other ways on crossing the border. Either though under, over, though, or around the wall.

You mentioned "As far as hiring more border patrol, we just don't have the resources for that." That sound like a cop out to me. Not enough resources. Okay already agreeing with the 21 and a half billion for the wall. A border patrol salary is "49,000 a year"(28) So, with the $49,000 we could hired at least another 10,000 new border patrol agents. And that would only cost four hundred ninety million dollars. That sound pretty reasonable to me. Trump Say in quote "says his wall will cover 1,000 miles and natural obstacles will take care of the". So, if we actually do a 1,000 miles on the ground, and doing your math it would be cut in half. Plus since we hire more border patrol there been a decline on border crossing. "The number of migrants apprehended while attempting to cross into the U.S. from Mexico has been dropping steadily over the past decade and a half." (29) There is proof that border patrol is working. Plus hiring more will help the local economy much more than the wall. The wall can't paid for anyone salary after it is build. So, i believe hiring more border patrol is totally more reasonable than building a wall. Which won't help do anything.

Another thing we didn't discuss, is the time line of the wall. "Once construction"which the DHS has stated will take two years"actually starts" they will be "delays and mistakes added up."(30) The timeline of this wall is important too. Because it will add to the costs no matter how you look at it. Another important factor is this. The repairs of this wall. Going to have to repair it every year to every 5 or 7 years. And don't forget people will try to damage it. "To give you an idea, homeowners spend an average of $664 per repair. Most projects will fall between $329 and $1,010". (31) So, how much do you think a hugh wall would cost for a crack or any type of repair? I'm guessing it would be a lot, wouldn't be cheap.


"Billionaires not paying their "fair share" is irrelevant" yes it is another debate topic. But it doesn't mean it not Irrelevant to this topic at hand. You want to blame illegal not paying there share on taxes. Well i pointed out billionaires don't either. And you just want to ignore that part. Then i should ignore this part of your argument too. But in reality the top 1% hurt the economy middle class and poor. Probably even more than the illegal immigrants. "The richest 1% pay an effective federal income tax rate of 24.7% in 2014; someone making an average of $75,000 is paying a 19.7% rate" (32) so, you picking on just the illegal immigrants doesn't sound fair at all. I will soon tell you why illegal immigrants will help the economy in the long term.

Now you said "illegals clearly do not contribute their fair share to the economy and taxes." That could be true in the old generation of immigrants. But in "Today"s immigrants have more education than earlier immigrants and, as a result, are more positive contributors to government finances." (33)Furthermore, we have more evidence on why illegal immigrants will bring a positive outlook on the economy.
"first generation adults and their dependents, averaged across 2011-2013, is a cost of $57.4 billion, while second and third-plus generation adults create a benefit of $30.5 billion and $223.8 billion, respectively."(33&34)

As for my friend you said "Sounds like he would have been better off if he got a green card and visa to begin with" yes that would be true. But in reality he would've had got them if he wasn't married to a U.S. citizen. Do you know why i even brought him up? It was to strengthen my argument. And here why it does this. I told his story because it was fascinating and it has a real impact on this debate. I told you his parents wasn't born here, they were born in Mexico. He was unfortunately born in Mexico too. But his siblings, were born here. His older sister has two children and a husband. She has a bachelors degree in marketing, and work at jewelry store. His other sister just graduated High School and now in a trade school. (I don't remember in what). His younger brother while he working in retail. And as i mention my friend is working at a car place and going to school. He actually studying in political science. Plus he was actually in those tunnels i was talking about, and said there could be thousands getting in on a daily. This is one of many reasons why the wall would not work. Now his parents are trying and doing there best. Sure they might had cost the taxpayers in the beginning. But now there kids are now helping the economy, by going to school and working. Which means there are paying taxes. And there are millions of story like this. My evidence support these finding.

"Many forget U.S. is a nation built by immigrants"(35)

You went on to say this"40billion would be 2% of the debt." This wall will not add much to the national debt. You right. But the wall doesn't help either. The wall is a waste of money. Like i said in my round 3 there are many ways we could use this 21 or 25 billions on more useful things. You didn't even attempt rebuttal this. Because you know you couldn't. That why you ignore it.

My summarize.

The cost doesn't add up for the wall in the short term nor long term.
The wall been proven it doesn't work in many countries. They build a wall for war, not for immigrants. The EU actually has relocation program that work not there fence.
Hiring more border patrol would be a much better idea, than building a wall which would fall. More border patrol money will go directly into the economy.
Immigrants actually help the economy long term.
There are other ways to cross the border, the wall does nothing to stop it. People will find another way to cross.
There are other things we could be spending this money on.

Pretty simple in my book. The wall doesn't pay for itself. It's a money pit.
Debate Round No. 4
36 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by zhaod1 2 years ago
fairus. Org is a hate group.
Posted by Mister_Man 3 years ago
@Comet - Do you think a wall is just going to be impenetrable? There will still be border crossings, the only difference is people will have a significantly harder time entering or leaving the country ILLEGALLY. You're right that people will still illegally immigrate via plane and overstay visas etc, the wall is to keep out illegal land crossing, which I stated in the debate would account for about half of all illegal immigration. However you're right that it will come from taxpayer's money, but that will hopefully be made up for by the amount saved when not nearly as many illegals pour into the country.
Posted by Comet76 3 years ago
tbh if America builds its wall, it stops americans from leaving rather than ppl coming. Plus a wall isn't going to do much if you cant stop flights. not to mention to cover the costs of the wall a lot of tax payer's money will be spent.
Posted by Mister_Man 3 years ago
Thanks for the vote Zanomi! Always good getting productive criticism.
Posted by Nd2400 3 years ago
I understood why you voted the way you did. because this debate really didn't have any sticking guidelines. We both didn't know it was going to go like it did.
Posted by Varrack 3 years ago
@nd2400 - you're free to PM me if you wanna further discuss my rfd. I'm not some rigid, close-minded person lol
Posted by Nd2400 3 years ago
Thanks, i though so too.

Most of my debates didn't have to go that far. But you were good... Anyways like i said it still two weeks left. and i will push this debate for another opinion. And then i will finally lay it to rest. lol
Posted by Mister_Man 3 years ago
Haha yeah I'm the same way when someone votes against me and I disagree with it, no harm in defending yourself!

I should have made the rules more clear though, I totally forgot one of the most common rules on this site - no new comments in the final round. It is quite unfair when you save all your important points for the final round and I can't address anything, but those were decent points you brought up.
Posted by Nd2400 3 years ago
Well, anyways. it just me ranting here. Still, I disapprove that vote. Just because that 4th RD was great by me, LoL I mentioned the most important things in that round.

I guess I will be better when and if I get a second option. lol
Posted by Mister_Man 3 years ago
I never dropped that, I even agreed with you, I just said we could do that AS WELL AS build a wall, as it would only be 2% of the debt.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Zanomi3 3 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: For the most part, both Conduct and Spelling and Grammar were similar between the two participants, which was quite refreshing from many debates. Sources were used throughout by both as well, sometimes not correctly but were pointed out and adjusted in future rounds. I do have to allocate the Argument points to Pro, on account of a few things. While it wasn't stated, Con did bring up new points in the final round which is often considered "unprofessional" or "against the rules" on this site. While this could be Conduct, it was not meant harmfully nor were rules stated, though I did take those arguments with a grain of salt as there was no chance at rebuttal. Pro offered arguments that were neglected or seemingly misunderstood. Both had decent arguments for economic sides of things. Con, at times, argued that the wall is not beneficial because we don't know if it's effective. Further, Pro had better uses of sources and the information from them. Great debate overall!
Vote Placed by Varrack 3 years ago
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate rested on 2 things: a wall's economic impact and its effectiveness. Pro argued that, since illegals hamper the economy, a wall that reduces crossings would be a fiscal benefit. Con contended a wall would be costly and that illegals do pay some taxes, but Pro pointed out how Con's source indicates they pay few taxes, and explains how the fiscal benefit of the wall would make up for its construction cost. Con dropped all of this in R3. Con alleges that a wall would be ineffective (e.g. tunnels). Pro shows examples of walls that have worked, and while Con stated that the Israeli wall was built for different purposes, he didn't dispute the effect it had on immigration. Pro didn't dispute the tunnels point until R4, however, so this arg didn't have much of an impact either way. Con, overall dropped 3 of Pro's arguments (reduced crime and reduced border deaths in R2, and the fiscal point in R3). Thus, with these impacts unanswered, I'm forced to vote Pro.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.