• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Public Health Assistance To Sub-Saharan Africa? I think not!

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Hypnotist

Smash Lord
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,435
Location
Pinole, California (The Bay Area)
Well, this is my first thread for the debate hall so here goes nothing. I've decided to take a resolution from the National Forensics League's policy debate form seeing that I am an honor's member.

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its public health assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa.

I will be arguing aganist the resolution for several reasons. First, the United States have too many things on their agenda, and this simply is not a priority. We are in trillions of dollars of debt as it is, we cannot afford to just omit funds without reciving something tangible in return. We already give countries within Sub-Saharan hundreds of millions of dollars, and a lot of that money is illegally moved towards corrupt dictators. Which is another reason we can't afford to substantially increase our assistance, it just doesn't help us at all, all it really does is hinders our economy. We need to invest in our economy. Our problems, our schools, out military, our roads, we come before others because it simply is none of out business. Seriously just to talk about college debt, the average graduate is in 10,000's of dollars of debt, if we wouldn't consider increaseing the assitance (possibly taking some away) we could pay for everyones college. As sad as Africa'a health crisis is, we cannot afford to help any more then we are now, which is very significant. If anything the United States should substantially decrease it's public health assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa. Imagine what we could do if we had hundereds of millions of additional dollars put into out public schools. The more we put into the United States the more we'll get out of it. When we our out of the War, out of debt, and our problems significantly decrease then possibly we can increase out health assistance towards Sub-Saharan but until then it simply is not a priority. In conclusion the United States should not increase its public health assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa because not only is it not a priority, it hinders our economy, and we already support Sub-Saharan Africa to a great extend by giving them millions and millions of dollars.

Raw Statistics:
Total FY 2006 U.S. Government (USG) Assistance to the Horn of Africa Complex Emergency $554,547,650

Numbers At A Glance (Amount Of People Effected)
Djibouti 88,0000 Horn of Africa CAP April 7, 2006
Ethiopia 2.8 million Government of Ethiopia's Food Security Coordination Bureau, September 2006
Kenya 2.95 million Kenya Food Security Steering Group, September 2006
Somalia 1.8 million U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization's (FAO) Food Security Analysis Unit – Somalia (FSAU), September 2006

United States National Debt = $7,782,816,546,352.29

Average college graduate is still in $18,000 dollars of debt.

Sources:
http://www.usaid.gov/locations/sub-saharan_africa/horn/

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/08/opinion/main686839.shtml

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.co...CollegeCosts/HowMuchCollegeDebtIsTooMuch.aspx
 

Falco&Victory

Smash Champion
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Messages
2,544
Location
South Hill, Washinton
I agree that the government should cut funding towards Africa, and all your points are solid. If Africa needs money simply allow private funding to occur. There are many organization that collect money from the public and spend it on food for those places where wild game is scarce. It i should not be America's responsibility to save other nations from disease and famine. I don't really trust the government with my education(no child left behind is simply cutting down education for those of us who can think), but I do agree that there are many other programs that tax dollars could go towards.

One thing to point out though. The government is not in as much financial trouble as some people believe. We may be trillions in debt, but other countries are in hundreds of billions of dollars in debt to us.
 

blazedaces

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
1,150
Location
philly, PA, aim: blazedaces, msg me and we'll play
We'll this is my first thread for the debate hall so here goes nothing. I've decided to take a resolution from the National Forensics League's policy debate form seeing that I am an honor's member.

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its public health assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa.

I will be arguing aganist the resolution for several reasons. First, the United States have too many things on their agenda, and this simply is not a priority. We are in trillions of dollars of debt as it is, we cannot afford to just omit funds without reciving something tangible in return. We already give countries within Sub-Saharan hundreds of millions of dollars, and a lot of that money is illegally moved towards corrupt dictators. Which is another reason we can't afford to substantially increase are assistance, it just doesn't do much. We need to invest in out economy. Our problems, our schools, out militar, our roads, we come before others because it simply is none of out business. As sad as Africa'a health crisis is, we cannot afford to help any more then we are now, which is very significant. If anything the United States should substantially decrease it's public health assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa. Imagine what we could do if we had hundereds of millions of additional dollars put into out public schools. The more we put into the United States the more we'll get out of it. When we our out of the War, out of debt, and our problems significantly decrease then possibly we can increase out health assistance towards Sub-Saharan but until then it simply is not a priority. In conclusion the United States should not increase its public health assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa because not only is it not a priority, it hinders our economy, and we already support Sub-Saharan Africa to a great extend by giving them millions and millions of dollars.
A couple of things: could you give a source for the "millions of dollars" we "already give" these countries. I know it happens, but I'd personally like to see some numbers.

Question: would you argue using this same logic that we should stop giving this money to these countries all together and only focus and contribute to our own country?
 

The Hypnotist

Smash Lord
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,435
Location
Pinole, California (The Bay Area)
I think we shouldn't substantially increase the assitances towards Sub-Sarahan countries or any other courties where we are not reciving something [tangiable] back. As far as sources, my mistake, I was at a performing arts school while doing this, I was about to come back and edit.

Also because I'm new to this... How do I know if I'm posting too much? What is too much?
 

blazedaces

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
1,150
Location
philly, PA, aim: blazedaces, msg me and we'll play
Also because I'm new to this... How do I know if I'm posting too much? What is too much?
Honestly the simplest answer is use reason.

I guess a few things to watch out for:

-Try not to double post.
-Try not to post one-liners.
-Think before you speak (type) and read what you are about to post before doing so...
-Check your spelling/grammar and try to be as clear as possible
-Avoid arguing for the sake of arguing...

Can't think of any more right now,

Good luck,

-blazed
 

blazedaces

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
1,150
Location
philly, PA, aim: blazedaces, msg me and we'll play
OK thanks, so no devil's advocate...:(
Well, one could try and argue that they really, REALLY need our help... but it can't get farther then that.

Though I still feel your argument is suggesting we don't help anybody else and only worry about ourselves, and I don't know if that's as good an idea. Just taking things to the extreme... What do you think?

-blazed
 

blazedaces

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
1,150
Location
philly, PA, aim: blazedaces, msg me and we'll play
Well, I was considering makeing a PS3 vs. Wii thread, and and taking the PS3's side, even though I ave a wii and not a PS3.
You could do that... I'm just warning you though, there's a good chance it'll turn into a fanboy vs. fanboy shout match, and that's not what we want. Maybe I give this room too little credit...

Go ahead, but make it a reasonable topic, like explain exactly what the debate is, even if that means writing "Which system is better, give reasons" and then give some valid points to your side. At least that way we start off on a good foot...

-blazed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom