Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to the last debate for the 2016 Presidential election! We have our last two candidates with us, Karl Marx and Herbert Spencer. During this debate, Marx and Spencer will be discussing illegal immigration and income inequality. There has been brief mention of these topics in previous debates, but tonight this debate will focus on only these two topics. Illegal immigration and income inequality are prevalent in our society and Marx and Spencer will be providing their thoughts on these issues today. There will be time given to both candidates to present their opinions and thoughts to the American people as well as time for the other candidate to refute the previous claim.
This debate is the final debate before the …show more content…
I prefer more of a survival of the fittest approach to the way people in societies interact with one another (Herbert Spencer, n.d). If societies are evolving from simple, homogeneous societies into complex, segregated societies then there will be people in charge and the people that work for them. Should we limit immigration, legal and illegal, to benefit one group more than the other? Should we pave the way for illegal immigration to become legal and then leave it up to the inevitable evolution of society to see who lasts and who does not? “Over time, the once homogeneous society [becomes] heterogeneous” and this is just a part of the evolution of society (Herbert Spencer, n.d). It is not so much about one group controlling another as it is the society functioning in the modern world. There are going to be differences in the people in society and immigration is another way to bring about differing views and opinions. Another point that I do not agree with is that employers hire illegal immigrant workers because the labor is cheaper. That may have been a factor at one point but recent policies have focused on the employers hiring the immigrants to make sure they are legally in the country and cleared to work (The Associated Press, 2009). By targeting the employers, the competition between the illegal immigrant and the American worker is resolved; because, the employer can be in trouble for hiring the illegal
This debate is the final debate before the …show more content…
I prefer more of a survival of the fittest approach to the way people in societies interact with one another (Herbert Spencer, n.d). If societies are evolving from simple, homogeneous societies into complex, segregated societies then there will be people in charge and the people that work for them. Should we limit immigration, legal and illegal, to benefit one group more than the other? Should we pave the way for illegal immigration to become legal and then leave it up to the inevitable evolution of society to see who lasts and who does not? “Over time, the once homogeneous society [becomes] heterogeneous” and this is just a part of the evolution of society (Herbert Spencer, n.d). It is not so much about one group controlling another as it is the society functioning in the modern world. There are going to be differences in the people in society and immigration is another way to bring about differing views and opinions. Another point that I do not agree with is that employers hire illegal immigrant workers because the labor is cheaper. That may have been a factor at one point but recent policies have focused on the employers hiring the immigrants to make sure they are legally in the country and cleared to work (The Associated Press, 2009). By targeting the employers, the competition between the illegal immigrant and the American worker is resolved; because, the employer can be in trouble for hiring the illegal