Border Wall

“== Impact Calculus ==

Let's say the topic is "Resolved: North Korea is a greater threat to the US than Iran."

Pro runs that North Korea could attack South Korea at any time, and such a war would draw the US into it. Stratfor estimates show that such a war would cost 400,000 lives (that's the impact).

Con runs that Iran can cut off the Straight of Hormuz, a major oil route. Iran is building the military capabilities to do so and has threatened to do so in the past (the link). If Iran did so, it would cost the US approximately $250 million in lost trade and higher oil prices (the impact).

At the end of the debate, the judge is supposed to weigh: (a) the probability and (b) the magnitude of all the impacts.

Probably ties into (1) how persuasively it was argued and (2) how good the rebuttals are. The opponent can show that the impact is highly improbable by using good rebuttal responses.

The judges are also supposed to weigh the magnitude. Assuming the probabilities were about even as to North Korea provoking a war with South Korea and Iran cutting off the Straight of Hormuz using their navy, then the judge weighs which is more important: 400,000 lost lives in a war on the Korean Peninsula or $250 million.

In this case, Pro would probably win because 400,000 lives outweighs $250 million.

That's impacts and impact calculus in a nutshell.”

“ Wylted needs to be put in place”

“2 Rounds wanted 3. Oh well guess I would have to debunk your arguments in 1 Round. Easy enough”

" Double fencing has two steel walls 15 feet high and 100 yards apart. Sensors placed between the walls, including cameras, detect intruders. In the most secure design a barbed wire obstacle is included between the walls. An access road allows the Border Patrol to rush to an intrusion site before the intruders can traverse the second fence. Ground sensors detect tunneling. Guard stations are 10 miles apart, allowing any point to be reached in about 5 minutes." http://www.debate.org/debates/The-United-States-should-build-and-maintain-a-border-fence/2/

“Here comes the lady of the house, and she’s just barely wearing clothes. She opens the door and says, “Good morning, my beautifuls, my princesses!”

We just looked at her.

Right behind her come three men, and this guy is looking at me, and he goes, “I’ll pick her.” The other guy is like, “Yeah, I’ll pick her too.” And the other guy—I didn’t know what was going on, but my friend, she was hugging me, and she said, “No, not her, pick me. Let her go. She’s 15.

They took me downstairs, where there was this little room.

They raped me.

That went on for days, nights. And all I got to eat was a glass of milk with an egg in it, raw, mixed in. They say it will give me energy. For days I was locked in that room.”

“Our proposal is …….. pro-immigrant……....  It’s just common sense. It will help all of our people, including millions of devoted immigrants, to achieve the American Dream.”

“Our plan achieves two critical goals.  First, it stops illegal immigration and fully secures the border.  And, second, it establishes a new legal immigration system “

“Our proposal fulfills our sacred duty to those living here today, while ensuring America remains a welcoming country to immigrants joining us tomorrow.  And we want immigrants coming in. We cherish the open door that we want to create for our country”

"disease of the Third World, is readily evident along the U.S.-Mexico border and that dysentery is several times the U.S. rate".

"its eggs can cause[.] Cysts that form around the larvae usually lodge in the brain and destroy tissue, causing hallucinations, speech and vision problems, severe headaches, strokes, epileptic seizures, and in rare cases death."

"We're running an H.M.O. for illegal immigrants and if we keep it up, we're going to bankrupt the county.".

“What is unseen is their [illegal aliens’] free medical care that has degraded and closed some of America’s finest emergency medical facilities, and caused hospital bankruptcies: 84 California hospitals are closing their doors.” 

"At that rate, 700 miles of the fence would cost $16 B. Ineffective single fencing was built for $7 billion and that should be replaced with the secure double fencing. However, the costs of building the road and overcoming legal obstacles has already been borne. Governor Perry, a firm opponent of the fence about 20 years and would cost $6.7 billion to staff and maintain. He's an opponent so he's probably exaggerating the costs. Amortizing costs, that's a total of $1.1 billion per year. The 2013 budget for the Department of Homeland Security was $60.8 billion, so $1.1 billion would be is a small part of the budget. Costs would be repaid if it it reduced illegal immigration costs by even a half percent." http://www.debate.org/debates/The-United-States-should-build-and-maintain-a-border-fence/2/

"According to the most recent quarterly figures published by the Population, Immigration and Borders Authority, 36 people have been caught trying to enter the southern border since January.

It’s an incredible drop after 10,440 were caught in 2012" http://tinyurl.com/kadk4yx

"our government, according to the Border Patrol, did not have operational control of 43 percent — or approximately 826 miles — of our southern border."

“What was first being proposed was an entire wall across the US-Mexico border but as many people realised that is not feasible. There is a Rio Grande river and many mountains. Instead of delivering on a wall he has decided to make a concession.”

“the vague non-answer answer is a rhetorical trick he keeps reverting to. And while he's considerably less eloquent than Eisenhower in his responses, the effect is the same: the press is left unsure of what he meant, or even whether he meant anything at all.

"Did he just announce a new policy?" we ask ourselves. "Did he misspeak? Reverse himself? Has he ever considered this question before?" The result is that objective reporters, wary of editorializing, produce stories that are really just transcripts of what Trump just said. Trump's message, whatever it may be, is then transmitted to the larger public, and they can make of it what they will.” https://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-trump-confusing-everyone-on-purpose/

“The Wall is the Wall, it has never changed or evolved from the first day I conceived of it. Parts will be, of necessity, see through and it was never intended to be built in areas where there is natural protection such as mountains, wastelands or tough rivers or water.....”
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article195841649.html 

“Firstly, undocumented immigrants are reportedly travelling across the border in record lows. The source below states as of 2016 there are only 5.4 million unauthorized immigrants which fell from 2005 which had the number at 6.9 million. From that source we can see with the current use of the border wall there is less and less unauthorized immigration from Mexico to the United States which means the current use is effective so the burden is on the contender to provide how Trump’s wall would be more effective.”

“Secondly drugs are smuggled in using legal ports of entry. This is sourced by the National Drug Threat Assessment. If it wasn’t clear already Trump has made no mention of improving the legal ports and since it wouldn’t be intrinsic to a border wall therefore another problem a Trump proposed border wall will not fix.”

“Offense is an affirmative reason to vote for a particular side. If the topic were: Resolved: All schools should adopt merit pay, an "offensive" argument would be that merit pay would improve educational quality in our nation's schools.

“Defense is an argument that merely mitigates the reasons that you would vote for a particular side; it is not an independent reason to vote for your own side. On the same topic as above, an argument that "the test score gains in schools that implemented merit pay are due to other factors" would be defensive. Even if the argument is 100% true, at most is proves that Pro was not entirely correct in Pro's assertion that merit pay improves test scores. But it's not a reason that merit pay is *bad.* For Con, "offensive" arguments are reasons merit pay is bad, e.g. that it would discourage people from becoming teachers.”

“The problem of course is that the job opportunities number is higher than the number who are unemployed in the US which means even if every single unemployed American filled those jobs there will still be a need for more employees to fill gaps in the market. This would of course mean immigrants are required so that argument falls flat as well.”

“Case Farms has built its business by recruiting some of the world’s most vulnerable immigrants, who endure harsh and at times illegal conditions that few Americans would put up with. When these workers have fought for higher pay and better conditions, the company has used their immigration status to get rid of vocal workers, avoid paying for injuries, and quash dissent. Thirty years ago, Congress passed an immigration law mandating fines and even jail time for employers who hire unauthorized workers, but trivial penalties and weak enforcement have allowed employers to evade responsibility.”

Trump’s plan for a border wall seems to just be a “whatever works” approach. The amount of plans that would work under that type of attitude is monumental, but for the purposes of this debate, I will discuss one plan in particular I think would work. Almost any plan I could think of would fall under a type of plan Trump would accept. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/02/13/upshot/detailed-timeline-trumps-words-border-wall.html

While impacts are important, I have noticed that my opponent has a tendency to only use defensive arguments (See guide for more information on defensive arguments). The problem with making your arguments 100% defensive and 0% offensive is that you only minimize the impacts I show in my arguments. This means I will be the only one with positive impacts for my side of this debate. No matter how tiny of an impact my arguments have, if my opponent has no competing impact, than I will win. I could literally prove the United States would save $1 a year over all, and if my opponent has no competing impact, the judges will be morally obligated to vote in my favour

Which implies that my arguments will be terrible. A rude statement.  His conduct while it will most likely be meaningless to the outcome of this debate should be used to decide a winner by any voters who see our impacts as equal in this debate.

The wall I propose is one like we have seen elsewhere around the world. One that has been proven to be effective and affordable. The wall you see below is a rendering of what is on the Iraq-Saudi Arabia border. 

1. 80% of women and girls crossing the border are raped according to Amnesty international. With 700,000 people illegally crossing the border each year, this is a huge epidemic that a border fence could end. http://www.debate.org/debates/The-United-States-should-build-and-maintain-a-border-fence/2/ 

One young girl trying to cross into the United States illegally tells her story to “The Atlantic”

I just wish that Donald Trump’s plan to allow more legal immigrants like her while securing the border to prevent this sort of thing had been implemented. Trump’s plan in his own words.

2. Having no border wall makes it easier for terrorists to sneak into the country. 

http://dcgazette.com/2016/border-secure-cartels-manage-cut-hole-fence/%20http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/30/pakistanis-terrorist-connections-nabbed-us-border/?page=all

3. Illegal immigration poses a massive public health risk.

http://www.fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration-and-public-health

4.It's not just the diseases coming across the border that is a problem that is hurting our entire medical system. According to the Las Angelas county supervisor Michael Antonovich.

"We're running an H.M.O. for illegal immigrants and if we keep it up, we're going to bankrupt the county.".

He is not the only person saying this sort of thing Madeleine Peiner Cosman, Ph.D writing for The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons says

“What is unseen is their [illegal aliens’] free medical care that has degraded and closed some of America’s finest emergency medical facilities, and caused hospital bankruptcies: 84 California hospitals are closing their doors.”

" As a result, the costs of medical care for immigrants are staggering. The estimated cost of unreimbursed medical care in 2004 in California was about $1.4 billion per year. In Texas, the estimated cost was about $.85 billion, and in Arizona the comparable estimate was $.4 billion per year." 

https://www.fairus.org/issue/societal-impact/illegal-immigration-and-public-health

5. There is a lot of crime coming across the border straining our resources even further while also endangering our security. Human trafficking across the border is making the criminal underworld rich, worldwide human trafficking is a 32 billion dollar a year industry. http://tinyurl.com/ma6gr38

California spends close to a billion dollars housing illegal immigrants most of them from Mexico and Central America. http://tinyurl.com/amhdpz2%20Nation

wide the totals are close to 8 billion dollars. http://tinyurl.com/k57fa9q

We need a fence to stop the illegal smuggling of drugs as well as other illegal contraband. Products made from endangered species, bootleg CDs and DVDs, fake luxury products, and fake prescription drugs among other things. The Mexican drug cartels like to engage in kidnapping Americans, we should probably try to put a wall between us and them to make it harder. 

There are a ton of illegal guns crossing the border. Until we secure the border any gun laws we make a very likely to be completely ineffective. http://tinyurl.com/kkc8gzu

6. It's almost universally agreed on that the Mexican government is extremely corrupt.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/doliaestevez/2014/12/11/mexico-among-the-worlds-most-corrupt-nations-in-2014-new-report-says/#3c68ea6f3258

The 2013 budget for the Department of Homeland Security was $60.8 billion, so $1.1 billion would be is a small part of the budget. Costs would be repaid if it it reduced illegal immigration costs by even a half percent."

"According to the most recent quarterly figures published by the Population, Immigration and Borders Authority, 36 people have been caught trying to enter the southern border since January.
It’s an incredible drop after 10,440 were caught in 2012" http://tinyurl.com/kadk4yx

A border fence in the Yuma Arizona not even as close to being as secure to the one I propose has dropped immigration by a whopping 94%. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2008/0401/p01s05-usgn.html

The United States government has an ethical duty to enforce the law. If we are going to have borders and border laws we need to enforce them. Building a border wall is an effective and humane way to do that. If the country does not make laws it should pass them in a Democratic way, not subvert the law by having intentionally weak border security.Unjust laws do not belong on the books, but border laws are just for the reasons mentioned. If we don't want borders than we should vote to merge with Mexico, but I don't think many people would support that.

It is just unacceptable for that to occur. It makes no sense to have all this security at airports, when terrorists can pick any portion of the 43% of the unguarded border to just stroll right through. http://cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/border-walls-would-humanely-enforce-just-law

Trump has said that he would definitely be willing to use some natural barriers as my opponent’s own citations shows.

My opponent claims that Trump has never made any arguments that show what benefits a border wall has

It is still damaging to the country and to the immigrants themselves as you can see from my above arguments. 5.4 million is a staggering number and though the number is not exclusively from people crossing the border illegally, it still shows we need to take border security very seriously.

since drugs can get into the country illegally through other means that we should just give up on having secure borders

I gave my opponent’s economic arguments their own section because it is his only arguments that come close to being what is referred to in the voting guides I showed earlier in the round

I’m just going to completely mitigate this point right now by pointing out that we can just allow more legal immigrants into the United States

“Trump hasn’t even decided on the wall yet you are deciding for him”

“Trump’s plan for a border wall seems to just be a “whatever works” approach. The amount of plans that would work under that type of attitude is monumental, but for the purposes of this debate, I will discuss one plan in particular I think would work. Almost any plan I could think of would fall under a type of plan Trump would accept”

“ Instead of making this about the effectiveness of the border wall it was about his theoretical border wall.”

“Border Wall: Proposed plan by Trump for a wall between the US and Mexico.”

“The person who makes the best arguments without sufficient rebuttals will win”

“I just checked the link and either I take this as plagiarism or I take this as an unsubstantial point. Due to Roy Latham not even mentioning rape or how the border wall would prevent that Wylted does not have evidence that a border wall would stop rapes occurring.”

“Page not found. This can be dismissed because without evidence these are only claims which if were contested we wouldn’t have some sort of standard to decide who is more right than another. I can simply say the opposite of Wylted and what are the voters supposed to vote for? Claims? Evidence is required for a point to be supported. A supported point is better than a non-supported point which is a good reason to judge a debate on.”

"disease of the Third World, is readily evident along the U.S.-Mexico border and that dysentery is several times the U.S. rate". 

"its eggs can cause[.] Cysts that form around the larvae usually lodge in the brain and destroy tissue, causing hallucinations, speech and vision problems, severe headaches, strokes, epileptic seizures, and in rare cases death."”

“Just by reading I see the number 2004. I am repeating myself but there is a reason. These sources are outdated. You can easily find data like this that is more recent and fitting in line with current immigration yet you choose to use a source that speaks about what a state was like 15 years ago.”

“From the source: “November 2, 2006” 
“It might seem like my counter-argument are weak”

“Just to make he can’t have the excuse there isn’t more recent data. Here is more recent data than the link Wylted provided:
https://www.transparency.org/cpi2018 “

“You didn’t explain anything. You said the US government had an ethical duty but didn’t say why. You didn’t say why border wall is humane while also being an effective way of enforcing them. Have not defined what you call unjust laws then you speak about a position that is not important to the debate as in no borders. So basically these are a bunch of claims not supported with evidence or at the very least explained.”