Instigator / Pro

Canada Sucks


Waiting for the next argument from the contender.

Round will be automatically forfeited in:

Publication date
Last updated date
Number of rounds
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Contender / Con


sucks- be very bad, disagreeable, or disgusting.

Round 1
I'm sure we all can agree Hitler sucks, yet I can still point out a bunch of things that don't suck about him. Hitler was a vegetarian, he was good with animals, he was a great lover and let's not forget he had an awesome mustache, don't let con fool you if he says anything nice about Canada
It's not enough to point out good traits. My opponent has to figure out a way to quantify sucking or not sucking and show how Canada meets those quantifications. What I'm going to do to quantify sucking is explain some of the living conditions. 
**Frozen Waste Land** 
Canada is extremely cold. For half the year it's virtually a frozen wasteland. Canada is basically a big Alaska. []( 

**tyrannical Government**

Living in Canada is basically like living in Nazi Germany. If you disagree with the government there, they will steal your bank account.

say the wrong thing> Canada sends you to a reeducation camp like Hitler would.

They don't hide this their government recently honored a nazi
**Canadian Women** 
Canadian women are extremely ugly. They probably have the ugliest women on the planet. 
Part of this ugliness is probably caused by women being chain smokers at a high percentage. 
The women in Canada are basically the men of Canada. Studies done in Canada actually show they're the dominant sex.
So if you're into ugly chicks that smoke, drink and screw you with a strap on, than by all means move to Canada. 
**Canadians are idiots** 
Here is a personal account from a Joy Sinegar. I had a hard time choosing from millions of examples of Canadians being stupid. 
_"We went to a crowded pancake house there in Toronto and we were in a group of five. 
We were greeted by the waitress who then asked, "How many of ya?" I replied, "Five." 
She then proceeded to look around the restaurant and turned back to us and asked, "Do you all want to sit together?" 
I thought she was joking and burst into a hearty laugh only to become embarrassed once I found she was serious. 
"Ugh, preferably, we would like to sit together.", I sheepishly answered. 
My cheeks hurt from the forced smile I had fighting back more laughter. 
Seemingly pissed, the waitress sucked her teeth and found us a large enough table. 
After being seated, we overheard the same waitress asking a couple with 3 kids the same thing. 
Did you know these idiots put milk in bags? That's idiotic.
When going to Canada, you can get arrested for almost anything. Just look at this law: 
It is illegal to show public affection on Sunday. 
**Everyone Hates Canada** 
It's the 2nd biggest country on the planet. Yet it is only the 36th most populated.
If Canada didn't suck, more people would choose to live there. Not only that, the ones that do live there almost all live on the border waiting for any excuse to slip away.
They almost all have a P.o. Box just past the border because retailers hate Canada so bad they won't ship anything there.
If you move to Canada, be prepared to live in a frozen waste land for 6 months with an ugly woman who will dominate you, and prepare to be subjected to stupid, laws and people. 
Canada sucks.

While the description provides a broad definition of "sucking," in the introduction, pro focuses on a much narrower definition of having bad living conditions, so I too will take up that focus.  Pro does not outright specify burdens, so I will do so.  The prompt is "Canada sucks," not "Canada has more bad than good" or "Debate the suckiness of Canada," so the burden to prove Canada sucks is completely on the pro.  I win if pro cannot prove Canada sucks.  I will first provide my own contentions then go down the pro case.

Pro claims to "quantify" yet the only numbers provided are population statistics.  I'll actually quantify.  As of 2021, Canada had the 15th highest HDI in the world (0.936), notably placing it higher than powerful countries such as the US, UK, and France (a).  Even if you start out relatively poor in Canada, as of February 2020, Canada has the 14th highest social mobility of 82 countries surveyed (mostly first world countries), making it the most socially mobile country outside of Europe and placing it above numerous world powers (b).  Furthermore, the Legatum Prosperity Insitute, which takes into account health and safety as well as economic factors also ranks Canada highly: 13th, making it the highest country outside of Europe (c).

Not all of Canada is a "frozen wasteland."  Take Toronto, the most populous city, for instance, as it has a clear summer and four months above 60 degrees Fahrenheit (d).  While it still may be much colder than some are used to, this comes with its benefits.  Outdoor workers such as those working in construction or agriculture don't have to worry about heat related fatalities as much.  Further, having snow for the holidays is much more likely. 

Pro's first argument is bad faith, as his own source does not cite the theft of bank accounts, but simply the temporary freezing of bank accounts by banks.  Though this one temporary time-dependent move is questionable, it does not make Canada suck.  Overall, Canada has the 12th highest democracy index in the world, meaning that a Canadian vote is more likely to inspire change than those of several other countries (e).  Pro's point about re-education is misleading as well.  Using pro's own source, this applies to Jordan Peterson because he is a government recognized psychologist, so this "re-education" does not apply to all, or even most average Canadians.  Also, this is not the traditional authoritarian image of "re-education" as Peterson said he will be broadcasting it, and the government can't really do much about that.  The consequence for Peterson if he does not go to this training is not authoritarian imprisonment, but simply losing his psychology practicing license (f).  The College of Psychologists of Ontario has the right to do this in the same way an employer has the right to fire an employee who makes problematic statements.  As for honoring the nazi, that was a mistake and the (g).

This point is blatantly sexist by treating women as commodities and making generalizations that don't represent the entirety of Canada.  If you're trying to make a broader point about health, then it does not work as Canada is #19 in the world for life expectancy overall and #21 for women specifically (h).

One anecdote does not give pro the grounds to make such a broad generalization.  There are probably thousands of such anecdotes from every other country, and until pro provides actual evidence, this anecdote proves nothing.  I'll admit milk bag thing is bizarre, but it is only prevalent in the eastern parts of Canada, and it's not enough to suggest Canada as a whole sucks (i).

Area and Population:
This argument assumes that everyone has the opportunity to just up and move wherever they want.  Furthermore, current population is dependent on past population trends.  If we look at current population trends, then yes, a lot of people do voluntarily choose to move to Canada.  A massive portion of Canada's population is made up of immigrants-- people who voluntarily chose to move to Canada because of its incredible standard of living (j).  Furthermore, pro suggests that the amount of land in Canada should be a massive motivator for people to move there, yet pro provides no justification for this assumption.

Canada does not suck because it is an economically thriving and incredibly socially mobile country.  Even if that claim is rejected, con still wins this round because all of pro's arguments are easily refuted, subjective, flat out sexist, or misleading.  Pro's burden of proof requires they provide a convincing reason for why Canada (and by their own choice Canada's "living conditions") suck, and to do this in the next rounds pro has to convincingly refute my rebuttals and weigh them against the pro-Canada arguments I have laid out.
Round 2
Not published yet
Round 3
Not published yet
Not published yet
Round 4
Not published yet
Not published yet