Instigator / Pro
28
1706
rating
33
debates
80.3%
won
Topic
#2819

TBHT: The US Government ought to increase the numbers of immigrants allowed into America

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
12
0
Better sources
8
4
Better legibility
4
3
Better conduct
4
0

After 4 votes and with 21 points ahead, the winner is...

Theweakeredge
Parameters
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
Contender / Con
7
1551
rating
26
debates
57.69%
won
Description

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

-->
@Theweakeredge

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

-->
@Undefeatable

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.

-->
@Theweakeredge

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.

-->
@Theweakeredge

I never assumed that.

we dont amnesty for criminals, people who enter illegaly are criminals

-->
@Dr.Franklin

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

-->
@Theweakeredge

why should we provide amnesty for illegals?

-->
@Dr.Franklin

If you wanna believe that.... go right ahead.... have fun

-->
@Theweakeredge

Trump was wonderful on immigration policy

-->
@Dr.Franklin

Biden is currently trying to undo the damage that Trump did, and I would still argue that its not nearly enough

-->
@Theweakeredge

dont they allow pretty much everybody at the moment?

-->
@Theweakeredge

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.

-->
@Undefeatable

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.

-->
@Theweakeredge

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.