TBHT: The US Government ought to increase the numbers of immigrants allowed into America
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 4 votes and with 21 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Ought to: "it is morally right to do a particular thing or that it is morally right for a particular situation to exist" [1]
Increase: "to (make something) become larger in amount or size:" [2]
Immigrants: "a person who has come to a different country in order to live there permanently:"
Allow: "to give permission for someone to do something, or to not prevent something from happening:"
[1]: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/ought
[2]: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/increase
[3]: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/immigrant?q=immigrants
[4]:https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/allow?q=allowed
General Rules:
1. No new arguments in the last round
2. Sources should be posted in the debate rounds, hyperlinked or otherwise
3. Burden of Proof is shared
"Between 1880 and 1920 America became the industrial and agricultural giant of the world. . . This couldnot have been done without the hard labor, the technical skills and entrepreneurial ability of the23.5 million people who came to America in this period.” (Kennedy, 1964, p. 34)" [1]
- The resolution clearly refers to the moral obligations of the US, arguments regarding the legal impacts are therefore not topical - as they fall outside of the resolution. (Topicality is a priori issue)
- Words such as "allow" within the resolution are distinct in clarifying that we are not discussing illegal immigrants allowed into the US, we are talking about legal permanent residents.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
- "Immigrants take jobs from Native-born Americans" - This is probably one of the most commonly cited arguments. The general logic is that immigrants will move into a new community with a diverse skill set, and are generally willing to work for lower wages than Native-born Americans, therefore, they would obviously steal jobs away from native workers. This is actually steel manning this argument, as it is typically asserted ad hoc, without any sort of justifications. However, even without refuting some of the logic used in the example, the data simply does not support that claim. In fact, Immigrants typically create more jobs than they take; see source [15]:
"Their analyses revealed that immigrants do start companies at higher levels than native-born Americans—and that this is true for both small companies and very large ones. This led the researchers to an intriguing conclusion. “Immigrants actually create more jobs than they take,” says Jones."
- "Immigrants use more benefits from the government than they ever give back" - The argument here is admittedly a little bit more complex than the one before it. Immigrants come here and (presumably-i.e-falsely) come in and take more jobs, while taking those jobs they only receive little income; however, as they typically have larger families they get huge incomes in benefits from the government, all while paying relatively low taxes due to their low-income wages. Again, I was giving the argument the benefit of the doubt here; moreso, the argument is not supported by the data; immigrants give back more to the economy than they take; [16]:
"Immigrants paid in 2014 an estimated $223.6 billion in federal taxes. This includes $123.7 billion in Social Security tax and $32.9 billion in Medicare tax. On the state and local level, immigrants paid $104.6 billion in taxes. The combined contribution of immigrants in 2014 was $328.2 billion in taxes. In California, immigrants pay 28 percent of the total taxes in the state."
- "Most empirical studies indicate long-term benefits for natives’ employment and wages from immigration, although some studies suggest that these gains come at the cost of short-term losses from lower wages and higher unemployment."
- "Immigrants also bring a wave of talent and ingenuity, accounting for a disproportionate share of workers in the fields most closely tied with innovation. A 2011 survey of the top fifty venture capital funded companies found that half had at least one immigrant founder and three quarters had immigrants in top management or research positions"
- "Immigrants in general — whether documented or undocumented — are net positive contributors to the federal budget. However, the fiscal impact varies widely at the state and local levels and is contingent on the characteristics of the immigrant population — age, education, and skill level — living within each state."
- "Economists generally agree that the effects of immigration on the U.S. economy are broadly positive. Immigrants, whether high- or low-skilled, legal or illegal, are unlikely to replace native-born workers or reduce their wages over the long-term, though they may cause some short-term dislocations in labor markets. Indeed, the experience of the last few decades suggests that immigration may actually have significant long-term benefits for the native-born, pushing them into higher-paying occupations and raising the overall pace of innovation and productivity growth. "
- Refugees seek LIberty and America ought to give them it - Extend
- Immigrants help the government take care of its population by stimulating the economy - Extend
- Refugees seek LIberty and America ought to give them it - Extend
- Immigrants help the government take care of its population by stimulating the economy - Extend
- Refugees seek LIberty and America ought to give them it - Extend
- Immigrants help the government take care of its population by stimulating the economy - Extend
Apologies
I'd like to apologise to my opponent for not publishing an argument in R1 - I thought I had another day left. I'll publish a full R1 debate with rebuttal of my opponent's R1 for R2
Thanks for the compliment, I'd be lying if I wasn't influenced by your style at all, I really just implemented my writing skills into a debate round, took some elements from Oromagi's and your debating style's because I think you two have the most optimal debating formats.
Very nicely done, and dare I say perhaps even better than my argument. Though I was thinking about aspects unique to US and the overall gain rather than trying to counter opposing arguments. I am very glad I didn’t accept this debate as devils advocates. Let’s hope he doesn’t forfeit all rounds.
(If con full forfeits and you don’t want to waste your arguments, we could try seldiora’s weird “argue the same side challenge” where we pit our arguments against each other and see who argued for increased immigration better. You might win, but I guarantee it will be good competition)
Illegal immigrants aren't necessarily unallowed. Are you referring to increasing legal immigration?
It's odd I think increasing legal immigration is apolitical. The left wants to do it through amnesty and the right wants to increase legal immigration while simultaneously making the border more secure.
You might have a hard time finding challengers since most republicans and democrats agree with this.
I never assumed that.
we dont amnesty for criminals, people who enter illegaly are criminals
Why are you assuming all immigrants are illegals
ALSO - why would we provide amnesty for people who never got to learn to read and can't get jobs, then are forced onto the streets, yup, we shouldn't, IDK help them or anything. No need for basic human decency or anything
why should we provide amnesty for illegals?
If you wanna believe that.... go right ahead.... have fun
Trump was wonderful on immigration policy
Biden is currently trying to undo the damage that Trump did, and I would still argue that its not nearly enough
dont they allow pretty much everybody at the moment?
that's fair enough. Fauxlaw definitely has some strong arguments with "why America specifically" and also with "America has no obligation, as immigrants do not have the right to work". I'll let someone else take this though, as my belief coincides with the pro side of this topic.
I think you're missing the point. I'm not arguing to make this a policy or offering any suggestions of how it would be done. I am simply arguing that it is preferable either by values of the us government or morally that the US Government allows more immigrants in, this is more of a moral ought argument if you hadn't read the resolution.
oho, supporting my big argument for the Open Border policy? Perhaps the strong man of Open Border would be trickier and have more people accepting. "Increasing number of immigrants" seems arbitrary and vague. The "how" is a big question, and loosening border control would inevitably lead to helping your case.