Instigator / Con
Points: 3

Border Wall

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 3 votes the winner is ...
TheRealNihilist
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Politics
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Winner selection
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Pro
Points: 0
Description
We will be arguing the effectiveness of the border wall. The person who makes the best arguments without sufficient rebuttals will win. I would like it to be based on that which is why there is only one criteria in this debate.
Border Wall: Proposed plan by Trump for a wall between the US and Mexico.
I am against the border wall if you wanted clarification on my position.
Round 1
Published:
This is copied from my argument here: https://www.debateart.com/debates/742 

The border wall is a proposed expansion of the current wall that is in between the border of United States and Mexico. Trump has yet to even pick the materials he would be using or allocate budgets or give an estimate of when it will be done. So to say it is in any position of getting done would be a lie.
 
Pragmatism
What was first being proposed was an entire wall across the US-Mexico border but as many people realized 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. Only wanting half of the US-Mexico border filled with a wall. The thing is that a fence already exists but for some reason Trump would like to build a wall. Let’s say the wall was built what would that actually do? Trump has failed to deliver evidence to provide what the border wall can help so since he hasn't it can be said that it would be impractical. My argument revolves around if evidence was given to how effective the wall was it would only help Trump provide a better position for his proposal but Trump cannot which means it is impractical and by extension not worth doing.  
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46824649


Effectiveness
Since Trump failed to deliver what the border wall would actually reduce. I will be assuming this and I think I am fair with these assumptions. I am guessing the border wall would help stop undocumented immigrants, drugs and are bad for the economy. 

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 instigator to provide how Trump’s wall would be more effective.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/12/03/what-we-know-about-illegal-immigration-from-mexico/

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.
http://time.com/5497260/donald-trump-border-wall-fact-check/
Click here if you don't want to find it in the article “National Drug Threat Assessment

Thirdly the bad for economy point. The labour market doesn't have a fixed number. This can be supported by the second source which states that in 8th of January 2019 there was 6.8 million job openings which increased in 12th of February which had 7.3 million. This number then increased to 7.5 million in 15th March which then decreased to 7.08 million. This clearly shows there is no fixed rate of jobs and with the demand for Jobs needing to be taken increasing it is only reasonable to accept immigrants in order to fill gaps in the market. A case could be made to say that have Americans take that job but by looking at the 3rd source below it states as of March 2019 there is 6.2 million Americans that can fill the job opportunities. 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.  
https://theconversation.com/is-immigration-bad-for-the-economy-4-essential-reads-99001
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/job-offers
https://www.deptofnumbers.com/unemployment/us/

Over to you


Published:
Wow. My opponent has actually changed my mind on the border wall!

This was unexpected, and I concede this debate. Vote Con please.
Round 2
Published:
Vote for me then I guess. All I wanted was a person to debate this to me. :(
At least I changed someones mind. :)

The least I can say is. Thank you for showing me that you have the ability to change your mind. I won't disrespect you for your beliefs or insult you personally because you have shown that you are willing to debate about the very things you hold dear or concede when the facts show otherwise. Thanks and may you find more things to change your mind on in your pursuit of what is right. 

Good luck
Published:
Debate's over, I guess.
Round 3
Published:
I guess too.
Published:
Vote Con.
Added:
Pretty cowardly ogf you to need an advantage instead of a fair debate but since my position is objectively correct and I am a better debater, I guess I can accept and still be confident I will win.
#57
Added:
--> @Wylted
You are accepting the debate I made.
I ain't accepting your terms.
Instigator
#56
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
How can anybody think I am awful LOL. Also I am also copy and pasting from previous debates. What is fair for you is fair for me. Resolution "The United States should build and mantain a border wall on it's southern border"
#55
Added:
--> @Wylted
Coming from an awful debater. This is an easy win. I'll challenge you. Don't p*ssy out and I'll put you in your place. Either way you are still losing.
Instigator
#54
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
Your argument sucked, and I would have easily crushed you in a policy debate on whether we should vuild a border wall. I don't mind you copy and pasting what you wrote in previous debates either to save time. In fact I prefer ypu dp because the arguments are weak.
#53
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
ok
#52
Added:
--> @Dr.Franklin
I'll debate you when I want more wins to the detriment of me learning something important.
Instigator
#51
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
ok suite yourself
#50
Added:
@RationalMadman
>>Type1 is evolving, Sparrow is afloat.
Is that to me?
Instigator
#49
Added:
--> @Dr.Franklin
I would debate you but since you use common sense as an argument it is very much doubtful it would be eventful. Entertaining but I don't care about having a laugh instead discussion that leads to new knowledge not different ways you can paint the same bad arguments. That can be considered new knowledge so I would like good new knowledge then.
Instigator
#48
Added:
OMG, are you kidding? The Border Wall is common sense
#47
Added:
--> @TheAtheist
Do you want to debate about anything then?
>>I don't hold any ideas dear, actually. Attaching emotion to an idea is always a bad thing to do.
This is not the case. When debating about an argument we should ought to value rationality but I am talking about ideas you hold dear outside rationality as in before you do make arguments for it or through rationality you have become more emotional about the results. So basically not emotional about the arguments but before and after the arguments.
Emotion is not bad. It is just bad about when used in replace of rational thought.
I guess attaching to your arguments can be a problem if you don't understand you are being emotional. If you understand you are you will be aware enough to avoid using that in your arguments while also using that as an incentive to carry on making rational arguments if you are capable that is.
Instigator
#46
Added:
--> @GuitarSlinger
>>Food for thought (and I admit I didn't read the full report), but is there any explanation for the reported decline in undocumented immigrants? Is it increased resources (i.e. more agents, etc). If so, then perhaps a wall would lessen our dependence on "human" security measures along the border? in other words, perhaps if there is a wall, between points A and B, then that will mean won't necessarily need as many agents stationed between A and B?
I wouldn't know. I mainly made it to see if someone can make legitimate arguments for the border wall but guess not. A maybe reducing undocumented immigrants is not something I take seriously but if someone does make an argument I think I can find data how undocumented immigrants arrive into the country and find out either they are right or wrong. If they are right I would say it still doesn't make the border wall effective for the other reasons I laid out but if they are wrong then they would have to find another point.
Instigator
#45
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
I don't hold any ideas dear, actually. Attaching emotion to an idea is always a bad thing to do.
Contender
#44
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
I don't hold Ben Shapiro dear. He's just a funny meme to me.
Contender
#43
#3
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Winner 1 point
Reason:
Concession
#2
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Winner 1 point
Reason:
Type1 is evolving, Sparrow is afloat.
Concession.
#1
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Winner 1 point
Reason:
Concession.