Firstly, I would like to address that I said secession; this does not mean that I advocate a second civil war, but a peaceful separation of the southern states from the union.
I will use a few general points to begin this debate and my opponent, dark Kermit, can choose to add other points to the debate if he/she chooses.
Gun control-many southern states do not advocate gun control. This is true for the entire southern region. Now, other parts of the country seem to desire gun control. Southern Senators prevent the northern senators from passing their gun control and the northern senators try to put more gun control on the country which the south does not want. If we split from the union, both parties get what they want.
Taxes-the south generally supports lower taxes and less spending. I, personally, believe that this is the ideal philosophy for a government budget. Given that the southern states are predominantly republican, I trust that this same belief would be shared among the leaders of the southern states. Of course, other parts of the country eliminate the south's desire for low taxes and little spending due to their overwhelming population. I believe the low tax set up is what the south needs to be successful and it is currently being smothered by the needs of the rest of the country. If we split, we can meet our own needs.
Abortion-Many southern states do not support abortion while many other states do. Allow the south to secede, the south gets what it wants.
Overall culture-If you look at how people make their money in the north and compare it to the south, you will see a big difference. If you look at religious beliefs, the southern states are primarily protestant Christians which is different than most of the rest of the country. Look at geography. Look at climate. Everything is so different yet congress tries every day to pass a bill that will be positive for the entire country. The reality it, the country is so different that it will be terrible for one region and great for another region. If the south secedes, it only has to worry about itself, and thus, will be more successful.
Return To Top | Posted:
I accept PRO's scenario in which the southern states secede peacefully, however unlikely the scenario.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_US
My opponent has stated that the southern states will be more prosperous after ten to twenty years. If CON can show that the south will be more prosperous after 21 years, but not after 20 years, then PRO has lost the debate.
-less poverty
Return To Top | Posted:
Con has graciously given me a method to format my debate and I will do so. Con outlined criteria for increased prosperity and I will show how the South will meet these criteria. I will start with the ones the south will meet the most.
1. Less poverty and higher GDP per Capita. The best way to ensure this is done is to lower unemployment. The south will do this because many of its leaders, like Newt Gingrich, plan to bring industry back home. This increased industry will increase the number of jobs in the new country. Of course, my opponent will most likely bring up inflation because of increased labor costs, but with more jobs come an increased demand, thus, wages increase. So yes, we have to make that sacrifice but it decrease unemployment rate and increase wages anyway so I doubt that it will be a problem.
2. Lower crime rates-The southern states generally support gun owner ship. This is good since more guns USUALLY decrease crime and less guns USUALLY increase it. For example, the Chicago gun ban led to a skyrocketing violent crime rate. The same goes for D.C. However, when Kennasaw, GA required gun ownership, the crime rate dropped by seventy percent. The south would either encourage or require gun ownership which will most likely cause the crime rate to drop immensely. So yes, I would say that the South's crime rate will drop.
3. Life expectancy-The major health issue plaguing the South is obesity and heart disease. The south specifically can tailor its medical programs to facing this problem as opposed to relying the US to create a law that all the states agree on that will likely be uneffective. Thus, the life expectancy will likely begin to increase by the twenty year mark due to possible decreased obesity. This will not be a significant change but it will be more likely to occur than the current state.
4. A happier population-this is completely subjective and cannot be tested. Any argument under this is opinion so I will avoid this. I can say that lower crime and less poverty will possibly make the population happier but that depends on the criteria for this.
Return To Top | Posted:
Round Forfeited
Return To Top | Posted:
Like they would win, or they would just go farther than they did last time before losing again?Posted 2013-11-07 04:10:13