Should Illegal Immigrants Be Provided Amnesty in the United States?
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
vekoma123
| Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
| Started: | 3/29/2014 | Category: | Politics | ||
| Updated: | 7 years ago | Status: | Post Voting Period | ||
| Viewed: | 1,156 times | Debate No: | 51186 | ||
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)
 Con I will be taking the side that they should not be provided amnesty. R1: Acceptance R2: Opening Arguments R3: Rebuttals and Closing Arguments I look forward to a great debate! |
 |
|
Con I would like to thank my opponent for their involvement in this debate. I’ve already defined amnesty and I feel that ‘illegal immigrant’ is a pretty commonly defined and well-known term, so let’s get started. Key reasons why illegal immigrants shouldn't be provided amnesty in the United States: 1. Government benefits. In the United States, there are government-provided, taxpayer-funded services that illegal immigrants are welcome to acquire. Such services are not limited to welfare, education, and food stamps, which are meant for U.S. citizens. 'The report estimates that granting legal status to illegal immigrants would dramatically increase their cost, causing the net fiscal deficit to rise to nearly $29 billion because, the author argues, unskilled immigrants would have access to more government services while continuing to make modest tax payments.' (Mary Fitzgerald, 2004)[1] Basically, by breaking the law, they are expecting government benefits at taxpayers expense. This needs to be outlawed and they should not be allowed to enroll for these benefits that are for U.S. citizens, not undocumented illegals. 2. They take our jobs away Because of cheap labor demands by companies who want to save a buck, they take advantage of and exploit illegal workers instead of hiring a great amount unemployed legal citizens [2]. This breaks the opportunity for legal citizens to acquire work and employment status to financially contribute to the economy, since we tax the hell out of immigrant workers who don't have much money to purchase other things. [3] They can even get tax returns and scam us by doing so![4] By being here illegally and taking away jobs and getting tax returns, they are taking away money to give back to their home country instead of contributing to our economy. They should not be allowed to do so. 3. They contribute to our drug war Aside from the safety concerns we face from violent drug cartels and smugglers who transport drugs to the States since we don't regulate narcotics, they also contribute to the clogging up of drug-related offenders in prison, even the prison system is corrupted as well because they choose to house these criminals, not deport them. [5] They are criminal offenders, and should deserve the deportation method. ... I look forward to your opening arguments. Sources: [1]: http://www.washingtonpost.com... [2]: https://www.numbersusa.com...(2).pdf [3]: http://www.huffingtonpost.com... [4]: http://www.frontpagemag.com... [5]: http://cis.org...  Pro JacobAnderson forfeited this round. |
 |
|
Con It seems that my opponent has forfeited this round, considering that they never posted their argument by the 3 day deadline, which is plenty of time to make an argument. That being said, they have one more chance to provide their argument, since I cannot provide a rebuttal. It looks like I'm going to have to post another debate with the same topic then. Vote pro. Pro Sorry, I was away. To keep this fair, I will not formally give a rebuttal but give my single argument as to why they should be able to work and live in America. Simply, they provide for a higher GDP. The GDP is based on four variables- consumer spending, gross investments, government spending, and net exports. (http://www.infoplease.com...) Obviously, the more people we have, the more consumer spending we have, the higher the GDP we have. The more people we have on welfare, the more the government will spend, which will add to an even higher GDP. This may seem like a bad thing, but the more the government gives, the more the individuals will spend, and that will lead to more currency in the flow. We're all familiar with proportions, right? The more people there are, if the unemployed number remains constant, the unemployment rate will decrease to a hopefully stable number (around 5%). That is all, thanks and sorry again. |
 |
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Jevinigh 7 years ago
| vekoma123 | JacobAnderson | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - |  | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 3 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not provide a great argument against Con, even forgiving his 2nd round forfeiture.
Vote Placed by Hello83433 7 years ago
| vekoma123 | JacobAnderson | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | | - | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 5 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: Con brought up several great points that were sourced reliably(via not Wikipedia) that Pro never addressed simply because he forfeited his second round which led to no rebuttals in the end.
My mistake, haha.